Message-ID: <6960.1075857184650.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 07:20:00 -0800 (PST)
From: jinsung.myung@enron.com
To: donald.black@enron.com
Subject: Retail Shorts
Cc: benjamin.rogers@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: benjamin.rogers@enron.com
X-From: Jinsung Myung
X-To: Donald M- ECT Origination Black
X-cc: Benjamin Rogers
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Benjamin_Rogers_Dec2000_2\Notes Folders\Discussion threads
X-Origin: Rogers-B
X-FileName: brogers.nsf

Don,

As we discussed last Friday, I prepared some analyses as follows:

If I correctly read your idea, ENA would sell to an IPP a combination of EES 
short position and peaking turbines.
ENA would make money from;
 1. spread between buying power from the IPP and selling it to EES at premium
 2. fees from EES or/and IPP for providing/arranging capacity/off-taker
 3. better project financing by leveraging up more and having lower debt 
cost, which would be possible by having off-taker (EES)

Regarding our starting point of NY East, EES has short position ranging from 
0 MW to 126 MW in NY East region for next 11 years. I attached Excel file 
which shows an analysis of NY East including load graph.
To read EES data correctly, see the below definition.
 - WD: weekdays, WE: weekends.
 - Each 4 hour block number shows average load for 4 hour block, so actual 
peak load is higher than that.

Please correct me, if I am wrong. See you at 4:00. Thank you.

Jinsung
(Ext: 37330)