Subject: Re: Cal ISO Not Filing CM Proposal at FERC - EPMI Response?
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:44:00 -0800 (PST)

Here's my solution.  FERC should tell the Cal ISO to file the stakeholder 
developed congestion management proposal arguing that it has been agreed to 
in the stakeholder process and that the ISO Board has no authority to do 
something else because they are not properly constituted.  We could also 
argue that the FERC should order the ISO executives to hire a consulting firm 
that will propose a slate of candidates and argue for a government similar to 
what has been proposed for RTO West.  This will help us in ultimately putting 
the West RTOs together.

From: James D Steffes@ENRON on 02/01/2001 04:59 PM CST
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J 
Mara/NA/Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve 
Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron 
Subject: Cal ISO Not Filing CM Proposal at FERC - EPMI Response?

Mary informs me that the Cal ISO has filed (1-30-01) with FERC that it will 
not be filing a new Congestion Management proposal at FERC as required in 
previous Orders.

She thinks now is an opportune time to challenge the legitimacy of the new 
Cal ISO Board (Gov Davis' actions).   I also think that we need to put 
forward our own solution (if we have one).

I would appreciate everyone's opinion as to the (a) likelihood that FERC 
would finally address the matter, (b) end result if FERC does deal with the 
issue, (c) and the politics in Sacramento / CPUC of taking this position.  
Also, who else is going to weigh in on our proposal?

Jim