Enron Mail

From:mary.hain@enron.com
To:phillip.allen@enron.com, robert.badeer@enron.com, tim.belden@enron.com,shelia.benke@enron.com, donald.black@enron.com, william.bradford@enron.com, rick.buy@enron.com, andre.cangucu@enron.com, alan.comnes@enron.com, wanda.curry@enron.com, jeff.dasovi
Subject:SoCal Edison files cease and desist re PX at FERC
Cc:carrrn@bracepatt.com, chris.foster@enron.com
Bcc:carrrn@bracepatt.com, chris.foster@enron.com
Date:Tue, 20 Feb 2001 07:41:00 -0800 (PST)

Attached find a SoCal Edison filing asking the FERC to require the Cal PX to
cease and desist from liquidating or disposing its block forward contracts
until FERC does an audit. It opposes the auction mechanism the PX has
proposed for its block forward contracts because it would offer the contracts
back to the generators first. It also claims that the PX could not suspend
its day ahead (DA) and day of markets (DO) without a tariff filing. It asks
the FERC to set the day ahead and day of market clearing price at zero.

I think we should intervene and challenge the right of first refusal part of
the auction and perhaps support the cease and desist until the Commission
ensures: (1) that we get a fair opportunity to participate in the auction and
(2) that at least fair market value is received in the event we don't succeed
in the auction.

Concerning suspending the PX DA and DO markets, I know EES was unhappy about
it when it happended but, now that EES has the utilities scheduling for its
retail customers, is it too late to do anything about it?

What is the significance of setting the market clearing price at zero?