|
|
Enron Mail |
FYI, the ESC Voting and Bylaws task force I have been working on is planning to attend. I think they are also going to try to bring up their work as an example if they are given the chance to speak. Attached is the latest bylaws I have been working on with them.
Mark Scheel and I managed to convince everyone a six-sector voting model was more appropriate: Generation Merchants Marketers Load Serving Entities and TDUs End-Use Customers Transmission Providers RTOs, ISOs, and RROs This will hopefully provide a better balance than the 9-sector model proposed by NERC. Andy Rodriquez Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp. andy.rodriquez@enron.com 713-345-3771 -----Original Message----- From: Bestard, Jose Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:55 AM To: Yeung, Charles; Steffes, James; Bestard, Jose; Rodriquez, Andy; Novosel, Sarah; Nicolay, Christi Subject: RE: DOE Meeting Dec 7th I am planning to attend this meeting and maintain the dialog with the organizations- EPSA, NERC, EISB, Jose -----Original Message----- From: Yeung, Charles Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 8:38 PM To: Steffes, James; Bestard, Jose; Rodriquez, Andy; Novosel, Sarah; Nicolay, Christi Subject: DOE Meeting Dec 7th Before I took on the ERCOT responsibilities, I was working with other EPSA members in preparation for the upcoming DOE sponsored forum to develop a wholesale electric standards setting organanization. Since my move, it is likely that I will not be attending this workshop. I have been an instrumental part in pushing for the formation of the wholesale electric quadrant of EISB. Although I have not committed to making a presentation at this workshop, there was a possibility that I would be speaking on behalf of EPSA. The meeting is a critical juncture for the EISB vs NERC showdown. NERC will likely present its latest restructuring proposal which includes a 9 sector model. I and other EPSA members have been advocating much fewer sectors for EISB. A key point of the NERC proposal is that it may be able to accomodate an EISB approval process for standards. This is imporatant in that it may be able to resolve the dichotomy between NERC expertise/infrastructure and EISB's reknowned (including FERC) consensus building process. NERC could retain its standards development expertise, however, lose its biased voting process. I think it is important to have coverage for this meeting, either, by someone on the NERC team or someone close to NERC in Washington. The likely outcome of this meeting is a solidifying of industry support for either the NERC approach, or a clean slate EISB approach. Jim would like for us to have a conference call to discuss. I am available Monday, Wed, and Fri. Charles X30348
|