|
|
Enron Mail |
Please get copies to me asap of the Edison motion and the CPUC FERC
complaint. Has someone, maybe someone at ENA, already looked at any allegations about Enron or TW? Please forward these to Kathy Ringblom also and I'll have her itemize any allegations we might want to repond to. Thanks DF ET & S Business Intelligence Department From: Lorna Brennan on 09/05/2000 09:30 AM To: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michelle Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: So Cal Edison Claims Withholding of Pipeline Capacity Edison Charges Gas Market Manipulation Southern California Edison filed a motion late last week with the California Public Utility Commission seeking emergency relief from high spot gas prices on which its power purchase rates are based. The company told the CPUC that Southern California Border (Topock, AZ) prices in the last month have risen by $2.50/MMBtu possibly because of market manipulation, in particular the withholding off of the market of pipeline transportation capacity between the supply basins and the California border. "[T]here is substantial and compelling evidence that the basis differential has been and continues to be grossly distorted by market power abuse, collusion and affiliate self dealing of out-of-state gas suppliers and merchants," Edison told the CPUC. The company noted the CPUC already has filed a Section 5 complaint with FERC regarding this issue and is seeking a recision of "certain allegedly collusive contracts which it contends have permitted out-of-state natural gas suppliers and their affiliates to drive up artificially California border gas prices by wrongfully withholding capacity." It notes the complaint "conservatively estimates that the anti-competitive manipulation of the basis differential has already damaged California gas and electricity users by $100 million annually since the beginning of 1998." Edison seeks an expedited order authorizing it to use the posted gas price of $4.5133/MMBtu, which was applied to SCE's August 2000 avoided cost posting, to calculate its payment obligations to qualified power producers for the month of October and every month going forward. It estimated September bidweek border prices would average $7/MMBtu. If such prices were used in Edison's September avoided costs posting, its Transition Formula payments to certain independent power producers will be $29 million more than the month prior, the company told the CPUC. "No mechanism exists to recapture the increase in such payments if it is later determined by this commission or in another forum that the Topock border indices are unreliable at this time." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --
|