|
|
Enron Mail |
This is an ENA issue.
Robert C Williams@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 01/08/2001 08:31 AM To: Richard Sanders cc: Subject: Re: FW: Strategy & End Game for FERC Proceeding Richard? ---------------------- Forwarded by Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 01/08/2001 08:38 AM --------------------------- Vicki Sharp@EES 01/07/2001 12:15 PM To: Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Re: FW: Strategy & End Game for FERC Proceeding Can you confirm with Richard Sanders that this is an ENA issue? Robert C Williams@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 01/05/2001 12:36 PM To: Vicki Sharp@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: FW: Strategy & End Game for FERC Proceeding fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Robert C Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 01/05/2001 12:42 PM --------------------------- "Fergus, Gary S." <GFergus@brobeck.com< on 01/05/2001 11:38:28 AM To: "Andy Pickens (E-mail)" <apickens@gibbs-bruns.com<, "Conner, Randall" <RConner@brobeck.com<, "David J. Noonan (E-mail)" <djn@pkns.com<, "Jean Frizzell (E-mail)" <jfrizzell@gibbs-bruns.com<, "Meringolo, Peter" <PMeringolo@brobeck.com<, "Michael L. Kirby (E-mail)" <dcastro@pkns.com<, "Mike D. Smith (E-mail)" <msmith1@enron.com<, "Molland, Michael" <MMolland@brobeck.com<, "Richard B. Sanders Esq. (E-mail)" <richard.b.sanders@enron.com<, "Robert C. Williams (E-mail)" <Robert.C.Williams@enron.com<, "Susan Bisop (E-mail)" <sbishop@gibbs-bruns.com< cc: Subject: FW: Strategy & End Game for FERC Proceeding FYI Thanks Gary -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Watkiss [mailto:dwatkiss@bracepatt.com] Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 9:24 AM To: gfergus@brobeck.com; rsander@enron.com; sbishop@gibbs-bruns.com Cc: jsteffe@enron.com; rshapiro@enron.com; smara@enron.com Subject: Strategy & End Game for FERC Proceeding As you are aware, FERC's chief ALJ is presiding over administrative proceedings, ordered by FERC, that ostensibly are intended to provide the Cal. utilities with reasonable forward power supply contracts, but, in fact, are being used equally to force sellers to the ISO and PX during the 3d and 4th Q 2000 to refund some of their profits from those sales. The refund will take the form of deeply discounted forward sales commitments to the utilities. The impetus for marketers or independent generators to play ball is the threat that FERC may revoke their authorization to make power wholesales at market-based as opposed to regulated cost-based rates or take some other punitive step. My concern is that this is a terribly one-sided negotiation. Marketers and generators are being asked to put their profits on the table - profits that FERC's general counsel's office and FERC itself have concluded they have no power to touch - and proceed to negotiate against themselves. Enron has good people representing them in these FERC proceedings - Sue Mara, Donna Fulton, Sarah Novosel and, when needed, my colleague Ron Carroll. What I am concerned about is that they do not have a concrete strategy or end game to pursue. Among other things, Enron 's strategy should include requiring the utilities, FERC and the CPUC to put some value on the table together with the marketers' and generators' profits. As these values may implicate strategy in the California civil actions, I thought I should run my thioughts by you. Specifically, I think Enron (and its allies) should insist that as precondition of even considering discounted forward sales: 1. FERC and the CPUC must commit to file in the District Ct. action pleadings in support of a motion ito dismiss the complaints on the ground of exclusive FERC jurisdiciton. 2. FERC agree to vacate on rehearing as unsupported by substantial evidence its December 15 finding that rates had been unjust and unreasonable. 3. The utilities and CPUC commit to auctioning off all or some large percentage of the utilities' retail customer base. There may be other quid pro quo considerations. I think it is imperative that Enron decide now what they should be. Politically (and quite likely commercially) it is not an option for Enron to pull out of the FERC proceedings. Therefore, we need to start changing what is at stake in the FERC proceeding and directing it toward our end game. Please let me know if you wish to discuss this further. ======================================================= This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP http://www.brobeck.com
|