Enron Mail

From:drew.fossum@enron.com
To:susan.scott@enron.com
Subject:Re: ECS Gallup contract: Update
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:25:00 -0800 (PST)

Ex




Susan Scott
01/24/2001 10:24 AM
To: Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, James Centilli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew
Fossum@ENRON, Kim Kouri/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: ECS Gallup contract: Update

I spoke with the person who administers the Members Only website at
TriState. I explained to her that we had been a customer under Rate No. 21
since July but only obtained access recently. She processes the request
forms, and seemed to indicate that obtaining access is really a matter of
routine. She said we should have been able to get access as soon as we
became a customer. I told her we had signed a confidentiality agreement and
she confirmed this was routine also. I did not press her on the specifics of
how ECS/TW obtained access, as I felt she had already given me enough
information to tend to confirm our suspicions. She was helpful, and had we
known to contact her or someone in her department I feel certain we could
have talked our way thru the red tape (if any really existed).
---------------------- Forwarded by Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron on 01/24/2001
10:14 AM ---------------------------


Susan Scott
01/21/2001 12:45 PM
To: Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, James Centilli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew
Fossum@ENRON
cc: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: ECS Gallup contract

Here are some bullet points based on our conversation Friday morning
regarding the ECS Compression Service Agreement. These bullet points
summarize our position and are intended to be a starting point for a
conversation between persons at TW and at ECS (who are yet to be determined)
regarding the additional power costs incurred by Transwestern as a result of
the lack of a system for monitoring peak loads on CDEC. If you have
additional comments, please let me know.

We still need to decide who is going to call whom; I am going to leave that
up to you, but do let me know if I can help.

- ECS is under an obligation to work in good faith with CDEC to establish a
monitoring system that would automatically
alert TW to peak loading conditions on CDEC's system.

- Rate No. 21 became effective in July 2000. ECS did not obtain permission
for TW to access the "Members Only" portion of CDEC's website (which contains
load data) until January 2001. Access to the information required a
confidentiality agreement, which was executed in December.

- ECS blames the delay on Tri-State/CDEC, who allegedly would not work on
the confidentiality agreement until the merger was completed. "Good faith"
by ECS would reasonably include alerting TW to any such delay or any
difficulty in getting access to CDEC's information. TW was never contacted
in this regard.

- Since Rate No. 21 contains a rebate for customers that avoid peak load
times, we assume that CDEC is under an obligation to provide such customers
with access to peak load information (I have not been able to verify this,
but it makes sense). If this is true, we should have been able to have
access immediately upon the effectiveness of Rate No. 21.

- Most if not all of the $325,000 peak load costs incurred by TW since July
could have been avoided had TW had access to a monitoring system. Because it
did not alert TW to difficulties/delay in getting the necessary information
from CDEC, ECS did not act in good faith in obtaining such access and should
therefore take responsibility for its share of the consequences.

- ECS needs to act without further delay to build an automated monitoring
system to eliminate the need for someone to continuously monitor the
website. An estimated completion date should be provided.

I've left messages at CDEC to ask about access to the Members Only part of
the website; I'll follow up. The website states only that access is granted
"on a case-by-case basis." I hope to make contact on Monday and will let you
know what I'm able to learn from them.