Message-ID: <5157715.1075846701534.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2000 01:28:00 -0800 (PST) From: jeffery.fawcett@enron.com To: steven.harris@enron.com, kevin.hyatt@enron.com Subject: R.99-11-022 - ALJ Cooke's Draft Decision, Ruling, All-Party Notice - Section 390 Cc: susan.scott@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: susan.scott@enron.com X-From: Jeffery Fawcett X-To: Steven Harris, Kevin Hyatt X-cc: Susan Scott X-bcc: X-Folder: \Susan_Scott_Dec2000_June2001_1\Notes Folders\Discussion threads X-Origin: SCOTT-S X-FileName: sscott3.nsf Mark's synopsis pretty well says it all. Once again, the CPUC is in a panic and is attempting to change the rules in the middle of the game. I'm not sure I can make as clear a connection as Mark has between the actions of interstate pipelines, particularly Transwestern, who, basically, are allowed to charge just a tariff rate for upstream transport, and the huge dislocation of basis spread between producing area and California border. Therefore, I don't necessarily see us being sullied by the El Paso issue. I think our biggest PR problem is probably our affiliation with Enron Online. We'll continue to monitor this situation. One thing is clear... fireworks will certainly be forthcoming when the QF's are being paid on a formula weighted predominantly with basin pricing, rather than border prices. Not to be be too esoteric here, but remember, there are a number of factors at play. QF's by contract are obligated to produce electricity when called on. They are paid capacity payments by the utilities for that purpose. It will be interesting to see how many of the QF's tell Edison, PG&E, SDG&E, et al. to go "fly a kite" when they know that if they produce a MW of electricity, their commodity payments will put them under water. ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron on 12/05/2000 09:11 AM --------------------------- mbaldwin@igservice.com on 12/04/2000 05:48:56 PM To: "Jeff Fawcett" , "Susan Scott" cc: "Michael McGowan" Subject: FW: R.99-11-022 - ALJ Cooke's Draft Decision, Ruling, All-Party Notice - Section 390 Team, thought you would find this somewhat interesting and?explanatory?of?California's near? term panic . Our California Commission? is predisposed to do almost anything to stem the tide of higher energy prices. Their latest manifestation of complete melt-down comes in the form of attempting to modify electric QF payments by abandoning the current gas index methodology utilized by all three utilities. Essentially, the proposed decision would?immediately (effective 12/1) abandon the old California border gas indexes in favor of adopting a "proxy gas price".? This new proxy gas price would apply to all three utilities, PG&E, SCE and SDG&E. On a temporary basis, the gas index used for eventual electric QF payments will be an gas index consisting of? ( i ) 10 % of the simple average of three border indices at Topock ( Btu Daily, NGI, Natural Gas Week) and? (ii ) 90% of the SoCal Gas Core Wacog published monthly in Schedule G-CS or (in the case of PG&E) 90 % of their core published WACOG .? The resultant reduction in electric QF payments is several hundreds of Millions of dollars just for? December alone. ? So what if anything does this mean to TW ?? Clearly, TW's short term desk maybe be affected. If Cal border numbers run 14 - 20 dollars and power payments are based upon PG&E Wacog of $7.50 gas demand for electric generation will? moderate. Next, the heat level on the cause of why basin to border price spreads are over $10 is not longer just a Commission vs.. EPNG issue. The entire California QF population becomes a huge stakeholder. The never ending search for a "bad Guy" escalates. TW needs to be careful?from becoming painted with a broad brush. TW is not one of the Southwest bad Guys. TW's pipe is not oversold, is point to point firm, widely held, useful to California's utilities etc. ? If any of this is useful and you want to further explore to potential ramifications, please call .? Mark, IGS ? -----Original Message----- From: Gwen Soong [mailto:igsinc@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 8:23 AM To: Mark Baldwin Subject: FW: R.99-11-022 - ALJ Cooke's Draft Decision, Ruling, All-Party Notice - Section 390 ? -----Original Message----- From: Gallardo, Teresita C. [mailto:tcg@cpuc.ca.gov] Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 2:58 PM To: 'jweisgall@aol.com'; 'rcsstl@cdmnet.com'; 'dnorris@sppc.com'; 'mcmannes@aol.com'; 'lgurick@calpx.com'; 'woodrujb@sce.com'; 'gbarnes@sempra.com'; 'bfinkelstein@turn.org'; Ramos, Julio J.; 'dgrueneich@gralegal.com'; 'ktilton@gralegal.com'; 'alr4@pge.com'; 'bcragg@gmssr.com'; 'eke@aelaw.com'; 'jsqueri@gmssr.com'; 'bloomje@la.whitecase.com'; 'jkarp@whitecase.com'; 'lys@aelaw.com'; 'edoneill@dwt.com'; 'lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com'; 'ssmyers@hooked.net'; 'tomb@crossborderenergy.com'; 'pmcdonne@wenet.net'; 'jcrossen@apx.com'; 'tridam@mlode.com'; 'plenv01@northcoast.com'; 'dkk@eslawfirm.com'; 'bellery@spi-ind.com'; 'mpa@aelaw.com'; 'dws@keywaycorp.com'; 'vwatkins@pira.com'; 'crochlin@socalgas.com'; 'ewheless@lascd.org'; 'douglass@arterhadden.com'; 'robinsc@sce.com'; 'jleslie@luce.com'; 'edward.c.ryan@monsanto.com'; 'robert.turner@engageenergy.com'; 'ewills@globalfrontiers.com'; 'daipm@daioildale.com'; 'rboyd@enron.com'; 'ed@apx.com'; 'rschmidt@bartlewells.com'; 'aod@newsdata.com'; 'maclean@sf.whitecase.com'; 'alexm@calpine.com'; 'billw@calpine.com'; 'rjszymanski@powerworksinc.com'; 'steve.huhman@southernenergy.com'; 'rbw@mrwassoc.com'; 'difellman@energy-law-group.com'; 'rmccann@cal.net'; 'blaising@braunlegal.com'; 'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'etiedemann@kmtg.com'; 'steve_ponder@fpl.com'; 'dbranchcomb@hesinet.com'; Stevens, Maria E.; Quan, Edwin; Wilson, Gregory A.; Loewen, James; Cooke, Michelle; Sabino, Pearlie Z.; 'jhoffsis@energy.state.ca.us'; 'jmathis@edisonmission.com'; 'fspasaro@socalgas.com'; 'napedersen@jonesday.com'; 'cread@omm.com'; 'dfollett@sempra.com'; 'bjeider@earthlink.net'; 'millerja@sce.com'; 'jleslie@luce.com'; 'mshames@ucan.org'; 'mtierney@sdge.com'; 'dhmaynor@worldnet.att.net'; 'furutanj@efawest.navfac.navy.mil'; 'mflorio@turn.org'; Scarff, James E.; 'imoosen@gralegal.com'; 'phanschen@mofo.com'; 'rschmidt@bartlewells.com'; 'aod@newsdata.com'; 'david@mbvlaw.com'; 'jsqueri@gmssr.com'; 'bloomje@la.whitecase.com'; 'chilen@llgm.com'; 'edwardoneill@dwt.com'; 'lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com'; 'ssmyers@hooked.net'; 'rumla@earthlink.net'; 'igsinc@ix.netcom.com'; 'gtbl@dynegy.com'; 'wbooth@booth-law.com'; 'rbw@mrwassoc.com'; 'difellman@energy-law-group.com'; 'askaff@energy-law-group.com'; 'tomb@crossborderenergy.com'; 'brbarkovich@earthlink.net'; 'rmccann@cal.net'; 'cmkehrein@ems-ca.com'; 'bob@sierracc.com'; 'lwhouse@el-dorado.ca.us'; 'bradylaw@pacbell.net'; 'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'pstohr@dbsr.com'; 'njohnson@ciwmb.ca.gov'; 'dbranchcomb@hesinet.com'; 'scohn@smud.org'; 'malcantar@aandellp.com'; 'wgibson@nwppc.org'; 'dws@keywaycorp.com'; 'mbrubaker@consultbai.com'; 'rboyd@enron.com'; 'foothill@lmi.net'; 'fosterbc@sce.com'; 'frl3@pge.com'; 'wbyrne@forenergy.com.'; 'jmeith@minasianlaw.com'; Stevens, Maria E.; Minkin, Angela K.; Schumacher, Brian D.; Danforth, Christopher; Lafrenz, Donald J.; Ghazzagh, Farzad; Walker, Glen; Econome, Janet A.; Ajello, Julian E.; Halligan, Julie; Tan, Lee-Whei; Ziering, Mark; Cooke, Michelle; Kinosian, Robert; Sarvate, Sarita; Linsey, Steve; Thompson, Thomas W.; Meyer, William; 'kgriffin@energy.state.ca.us' Cc: Gallardo, Teresita C. Subject: R.99-11-022 - ALJ Cooke's Draft Decision, Ruling, All-Party Notice - Section 390 <> <> <> - CPUC01-#84763-v1-I8907004_R9911022_Cooke_Ruling.DOC - CPUC01-#84823-v1-R9911022_Cooke__All-Party_Notice.DOC - CPUC01-#84805-v1-R9911022_Cooke_Comment_Dec_.DOC