Message-ID: <10524813.1075852396309.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 16:02:02 -0700 (PDT) From: m..forney@enron.com To: joe.capasso@enron.com, joe.errigo@enron.com, alexander.mcelreath@enron.com, jeffrey.miller@enron.com, steve.olinde@enron.com, eric.saibi@enron.com Subject: Interzonal Trading Cc: doug.gilbert-smith@enron.com, l..day@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: doug.gilbert-smith@enron.com, l..day@enron.com X-From: Forney, John M. X-To: Capasso, Joe , Errigo, Joe , McElreath, Alexander , Miller, Jeffrey , Olinde Jr., Steve , Saibi, Eric X-cc: Gilbert-smith, Doug , Day, Smith L. X-bcc: X-Folder: \JFORNEY (Non-Privileged)\Forney, John M.\Sent Items X-Origin: FORNEY-J X-FileName: JFORNEY (Non-Privileged).pst Attention: The Ercot ISO has been settling our trades scheduled to the North by giving us the West or South Balancing Energy price. We have officially disputed this allocation, as we believe that we would, at most, incur a load deviation imbalance in the North zone (to be settled in the North). Again, a purchase in the South scheduled to our load in the North is receiving the South or West prices. We are awaiting Ercot's explanation. Until further notice, do not schedule energy from the South or West to the North. You may still engage in intrazonal, or same zone, trades (QSE to QSE ). What IS permitted is imported from outside Ercot into the North zone. The DC tie is in the North and we should stay aggressive, working with the SPP team to secure transmission to and from Ercot. When in doubt, wake me up. Update: At 6 pm, our Rep from Ercot agreed that the schedule mentioned above should have load imbalance assessed at the NORTH price. However, I still cannot accept his answer as the gospel, as any written interpretation of their tariff will always overrule our guy. I will advise when it is safe to re-enter the water, but for now: EVERYBODY OUT OF THE POOL! JMF