|
|
Enron Mail |
Cc: tim.belden@enron.com, lysa.akin@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: tim.belden@enron.com, lysa.akin@enron.com X-From: Mary Hain X-To: dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Susan J Mara, Richard B Sanders, James D Steffes, Christian Yoder, Jeff Dasovich, mday@gmssr.com, gfergus@brobeck.com, rcarroll@bracepatt.com, Alan Comnes, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Sarah Novosel X-cc: Tim Belden, Lysa Akin X-bcc: X-Folder: \Richard_Sanders_Oct2001\Notes Folders\All documents X-Origin: Sanders-R X-FileName: rsanders.nsf As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for "government eyes only" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to "share" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h©. 16 USC 824g© requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h© does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's "unfettered access" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices.
|