|
|
Enron Mail |
will be at both meetings and will have detailed proposals beforehand. we
continue to work on procurement piece and have reached teh same conclusion as you in your note---need something to implement now, as well as a "longer" term solution to IOU procurement. you'll be hearing from me. Evelyn Kahl Elsesser <eke@aelaw.com< 12/06/2000 03:44 PM To: Keith McCrea <kmccrea@sablaw.com<, "Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)" <jdasovic@enron.com<, Ralph Cavanagh <RCavanagh@nrdc.org<, Bill Booth <wbooth@booth-law.com<, Ann Cohn <cohnap@sce.com<, Jan Smutny-Jones <smutny@iepa.com<, Delaney Hunter <dhunter@smithandkempton.com<, "Aaron Thomas (E-mail)" <athomas@newenergy.com<, "Carolyn McIntyre (E-mail)" <cmcintyre@sempra.com<, "John Fielder (E-mail)" <fieldejr@sce.com<, "Tony Braun (E-mail)" <braun@cmua.org<, "jeflory@calpx.com" <jeflory@calpx.com<, Barbara Barkovich <brbarkovich@earthlink.net<, Dominic DiMare <dominic.dimare@calchamber.com< cc: Subject: Update on CESG Schedule We have scheduled a telephone conference of the CESG on Tuesday, December 12th at 12:00 noon. The call-in number will be 1.800.377.4827, confirmation number 7680189. I have scheduled 15 lines for 1.5 hours. We have also scheduled a meeting of the group in Sacramento on Friday, December 15th, at 10:00 at the Chamber of Commerce's office. In the interim, we should all be working toward building the strawpaper outlined in yesterday's agenda. I plan to complete an outline of what we did manage to agree to (or identify as proposals) yesterday by the end of Friday. Other responsibilities include: preparation by SCE, AES, Enron and the PX of proposals for a "benchmark" against which, if necessary, individual purchases by the utility could be measured for the next 1-2 years; proposals for longer term benchmarks for measuring the reasonableness of the utility portfolio would be helpful, but we need to focus on the short-run first. Also, throw out ideas on tolerance bands, including a way to expand/contract the band with changes in volatility, and risk/reward mechanisms for utility shareholders. proposals by SCE, AES and the PX (and any others with ideas) regarding how we can address in an overall solution the risk perceived by the utility of customer attrition from the utility portfolio (e.g., term commitments, two portfolios or a bifurcated single portfolio, etc.); a proposal from SCE and CLECA regarding how to commoditize the utility generating assets (assuming retention of the entitlement to the generation) and allocate those assets to small/large customers as the foundational supply component of two portfolios (overlaying longer term contracts in the small customer portfolio and potentially shorter and medium term contracts in the large customer portfolio). proposals for mechanisms to provide customers with some ability to understand the overall cost of utility procurement for comparison with ESP fixed price contracts (e.g., publication of "actual" to date on a monthly basis, forecast of fixed price, fixed price product offering). Obviously, any other ideas you have will be welcomed. We failed to make much progress on the design for any stabilized rate or TRA undercollections. Consider more carefully (1) whether a "residual" (SCE) or stand-alone (PG&E) calculation for procurement costs would best serve your interests and (2) what level of increase could be tolerated effective early 2001. Also consider structural proposals for addressing the TRA undercollections prior to the end of the rate freeze. Our goal should be to close on a structure, with as many details as possible, by Friday, December 15. Please call me for any reason that will help us move this along.
|