|
|
Enron Mail |
ok
-----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:23 AM To: Steffes, James D.; Alvarez, Ray; Novosel, Sarah Subject: RE: Draft Comments- West-wide Mitigation- Winter Jim, Ray and I talked. DETM's proposal is reasonably clear: a new cap would be set whenever the proxy index exceeds 110% (or goest below 90%) of the current cap. At that time, it is reset. This is about as good as you can get with a gas proxy, and the traders can live with it Ray and I recommend that we not explain this in our pleading since it dilutes our message: make it the "hightest of" the 3 proxies. In terms of no refund if below the cap: Ray may add something but everyone seems to be in a agreement that transactions below the cap are final. Even TFG did not raise that issue in its comments. GAC -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 7:45 AM To: Alvarez, Ray; Comnes, Alan; Novosel, Sarah Subject: RE: Draft Comments- West-wide Mitigation- Winter Importance: High In our discussion of the Duke model, we don't outline when the cap would be set? Would the Duke model give our traders certainty before the fact and certainty that no refund is due if we don't exceed. Maybe make this point stronger. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:21 AM To: Comnes, Alan; Novosel, Sarah; Steffes, James D. Subject: Draft Comments- West-wide Mitigation- Winter We plan to finalize and file today. Comments? << File: EPMI West Wide Price Mitigation Written Comments.doc << << File: EPMI West Wide Price Mitigation Cmts Charts.ppt <<
|