|
|
Enron Mail |
It makes a lot of sense
LM -----Original Message----- From: Nicolay, Christi L. Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:55 PM To: Maurer, Luiz; Steffes, James D. Cc: Ryall, Jean; Roan, Michael Subject: RE: Texas Comission supports prompt implementation of SPP SPP is joining MISO and today MISO said that the merger should be filed at FERC 1Q02. MISO also told FERC that the same congestion management systems would be used in SPP/MISO, so no seams. Since MISO is moving toward the market design we want, then really it seems that SPP should be implementing the MISO system for Day1 (which may well be up 12/15/01) and should be right in line with MISO on Day 2 issues (that we like). However, FERC should not approve SPP as an RTO until it is in with MISO. I don't see that FERC needs to approve SPP as an RTO in order to allow SPP to finish work on a wholesale energy system because presumably SPP will be using MISO's system. This summer FERC told SPP to not spend more $ since it was not an RTO yet and it was going off on its own merry way. Therefore, FERC could say "use MISO's system and specify exactly the minimum that needs to be done on systems in order to have the TX retail settlements done. This should be done consistent with the no seams, as represented by MISO." That should satisfy Texas PUC concerns. -----Original Message----- From: Maurer, Luiz Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:39 PM To: Steffes, James D. Cc: Nicolay, Christi L.; Ryall, Jean Subject: RE: Texas Comission supports prompt implementation of SPP Jim My feeling is that FERC is not going to change its RTO plans because of this possible interference from the Texas PUC A possible scenario is SPP to ask permission to continue the implemantation of a new settlement and congestion management system. A good point for internal discussion is: To what extent we want to oppose to those changes ? (which seem to be aligned to our recommendations, but those may imply additional SPP resources) Christi - What do you think? -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:04 PM To: Maurer, Luiz; Nicolay, Christi L.; Ryall, Jean Subject: RE: Texas Comission supports prompt implementation of SPP Luiz - I would like to schedule a phone call with Nick and the PUCT staff to understand the implication of this... Maybe he isn't asking for too much, but let's get some clarity before we say anything at FERC. Can you please set something up with you, Christi, Jean and me for Friday pm and then we'll go outside next week?? Jim -----Original Message----- From: Maurer, Luiz Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:00 PM To: Steffes, James D. Subject: Texas Comission supports prompt implementation of SPP Jim You were right. SPP is going to use this episode as a lever to be "promoted" to an RTO. Texas is recommending three steps to introduce competition at Texas-SPP. One is described as follows: * Support the SPP's efforts to begin wholesale market operations: Mr. Brown, Vice President of SPP, testified that SPP can begin wholesale market operations and complete systems testing by April 1, 2002. He has requested that the SPP Board approve his recommendation to start to wholesale market operations. This Commission should support that process by: - Requesting in writing that the SPP Board begin wholesale operations as soon as possible with a target date of completing systems testing by April 1, 2002. - Advising FERC of the need to support SPP wholesale market operations. While Mr. Brown testified that the recent July and September Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) orders regarding SPP's start up expenditures will not impede SPP from implementing wholesale market operations, this Commission should advise FERC that the findings from our hearing show the need for FERC to fully support SPP wholesale operations startup.
|