Enron Mail

From:donna.fulton@enron.com
To:j..kean@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, linda.robertson@enron.com,d..steffes@enron.com, harry.kingerski@enron.com, l..nicolay@enron.com, sarah.novosel@enron.com
Subject:Meeting with Dan Larcamp/ Marketing Affiliate Rulemaking
Cc:ray.alvarez@enron.com, tom.briggs@enron.com, leslie.lawner@enron.com,w..cantrell@enron.com, paul.kaufman@enron.com, janine.migden@enron.com, steve.montovano@enron.com, jean.ryall@enron.com
Bcc:ray.alvarez@enron.com, tom.briggs@enron.com, leslie.lawner@enron.com,w..cantrell@enron.com, paul.kaufman@enron.com, janine.migden@enron.com, steve.montovano@enron.com, jean.ryall@enron.com
Date:Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:36:30 -0700 (PDT)


Leslie Lawner, Becky Cantrell and I met with Dan Larcamp at FERC yesterday =
to discuss the marketing affiliate issue. He agreed with the latest press =
reports that the upcoming rulemaking NOPR, expected to be voted out in Sept=
ember, would not make major structural changes to the industry. The curren=
t document is up to the Commission level and the Commissioners are clearly =
considering the alternatives now. Larcamp said he expected a broadening of=
the current market affiliate rules structure to include all corporate enti=
ties. He did specifically mention that the Commission is not comfortable w=
ith the link between financial and physical transactions and the possibilit=
y for manipulation of market prices in one market (financial) to affect pri=
ces in the other market (physical). He also expects the Commission to blen=
d the gas and power rules, using the best practices of each. Any NOPR that=
is issued will of course have comment dates to allow Enron and all industr=
y participants to comment on any proposed rule changes.

Larcamp indicated that he did not think there were pervasive afilliate disc=
rimination issues in the industry, but said that the Commission needed to a=
ct due to the political pressures they got from the Hill, etc. The El Paso=
case is top on everyone's mind and is of special concern because it affect=
s the California market, both gas and power.=20

Larcamp indicated that he is just now learning what a "Pat Wood" Commission=
is going to want. He indicated that Wood has closer ties to the producer =
community than either of the two former Chairmen. He therefore expects th=
at the Commission will be responsive to that sector in taking a relook at t=
he affiliate rules. However, Larcamp did mention that the only meeting tha=
t he had previously had on the affiliate issue was with the INGAA group (Jo=
e Hartsoe went with them). It is not clear whether the producer community =
has lobbied this issue at the Commissioner level.

We discussed strategy with Dan, how to let the Commission feel more comfort=
able with the marketing affiliate issue. He suggested that he had gained a=
lot by visiting the trading floors (including Enron's). He thought the Co=
mmissioners and their immediate staffs would benefit from similar visits. =
=20

We specifically raised the issue of market prices, and talked about tranpor=
tation costs not equalling basis differentials. We stated that our markete=
rs believed that the prices in the market were determined by market factors=
in the specific areas of delivery rather than basin costs plus transport c=
osts. Dan did indicate some agreement with this concept and thought that m=
ore education at the Commissioner level would be very worthwhile.

If you have any questions, call Leslie, Becky or me.