|
|
Enron Mail |
Thanks for the clarification Frank.
Could you please ask Steve Hawke to contact Jim or Rick when he gets back? From: Frank Afranji/ENRON@enronxgate on 05/14/2001 12:26 PM To: Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: STEVE HAWKE/ENRON@enronxgate Subject: Re: Enron and PGE Representation at NERC Charles...I am sorry I was not able to respond to your e-mail prior to the this. I was in airports for 13 hours on Friday ( because of airline delays) and this is the first chance I had to read your E-mail. I have one correction. Steve Hawke to the best of my knowledge has not agreed to this change yet. What I informed you in Tampa was my preference that "if it came down to the choice for one of us to step down " I will be ready to so considering that ENRON has nation wide issues that it is dealing with in this Forum. However, I needed to clear this with Steve Hawke since he has the ultimate decision on this and he may have different views. You were going to request that James or Richard get in contact with Steve to resolve the representation question. I informed you that Steve will be out of the office through the 14th and that he will be back on the 15th and that hope was that some communication will take place then to discuss the issue. Unless there has been some form communication between the ENRON folks and Steve since the last MIC meeting that I am not aware of, it is important that we follow the discussion that we had in Tampa. I look forward to the results of the discussion between Steve and either Rick or James. <<< Yeung, Charles 05/11/01 06:20AM <<< I have referred Steve Hawke from Portland General to you and Jim concerning a conflict of representation at the NERC Market Interface Committee. The current NERC rules on committee membership disallows one corporate entity from populating a single committee with more than one member. I have one seat of 33 on the MIC (1 of 2 power marketer seats) and Frank Afranji from PGE has a WSCC representative seat. This conflict was known but accepted in the recent past because of the publicly known fact surrounding the sale of PGE. In addition, it is generally understood that PGE's positions at the MIC are not closely aligned with EPMI's. Frank also must vote as a WSCC rep, not a PGE rep. Nontheless, wiith the recent news of the demise of the PGE sale, the Enron dual membership conflict on the MIC is being forced to be resolved. Steve Hawke has agreed to pull his PGE person off the committee - but wanted Enron to raise a need to revise these rules for the future so that Frank could possibly be reappointed. Paul Barber, Chair of the MIC believes this membership rule needs to be updated because of the dynamic nature of corporate affiliations today - this has recently prevented good, knowledgable persons from participating on a NERC committee (e.g.- Illinova/Dynegy, PECO/ComEd) I agree with the need to revisit this rule - but believe there still is a need to limit corporate representation on NERC committees due to the structure and approval processes NERC employs - there are limited seats, The one member limit was intended to curb large incumbant utilities from dominating the committees since they had such extensive business interests and could be over-represented under several industry segments.
|