Message-ID: <10844315.1075852819428.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 14:42:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: l..nicolay@enron.com
To: m..presto@enron.com
Subject: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Nicolay, Christi L. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=CNICOLA>
X-To: Presto, Kevin M. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Kpresto>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \KPRESTO (Non-Privileged)\Deleted Items
X-Origin: Presto-K
X-FileName: KPRESTO (Non-Privileged).pst

Kevin --

In the Dynegy v. ComEd complaint, Dynegy states:

"Dynegy typically only sells capacity on an annual or seasonal basis for $1MM to $2 MM per 50 MW.  Dynegy does not typically sell capacity on a daily basis."

Enron's argument against Dynegy will be that the FERC network transmission agreement does not give Dynegy a right to "capacity payments."  Aside from that, maybe Enron can make a daily capacity market, since Dynegy clearly isn't making one.  (And in the meantime, we of course continue to try killing "icap")