Subject: Re: Information Requirements
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:55:00 -0800 (PST)

Let's promote it in all these groups, just to be on the safe side.

Steve Walton
02/20/2001 09:06 AM
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: [email-masked] 
Subject: Re: Information Requirements  

Alan,
 I agree that we need to raise this issue in scheduling, ancillary services 
and congestion management content groups.  In those groups we would be 
selling the concept.  Actual implementation of the provisions would be in the 
tariff content group, where the actual requirements would be codified.  This 
way it will be blessed by FERC and built into all operating protocols.

Steve

	Alan Comnes
	02/18/2001 01:17 PM
		 
		 To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Information Requirements

Steve, Mary,

Where in the RTO West process should Enron make its pitch for information 
transparency?  To me, it would be part of the scheduling / ancillary services 
work group and part of congestion managment.  I am assuming we do not want to 
leave it to Makret Monitoring because to get information release in real-time 
or near-real-time requires that information release systems get built into 
the actual RTO operational systems.

At some point, we need to weigh in and try to get information release built 
into the Stage 2 filings.

Thanks,

Alan