Please see the following articles:

Sac Bee, Tues, 6/5:  Ose electricity bill buffeted by political storms

Sac Bee, Tues, 6/5: Bush vs. price caps: Economists correct a faulty power
lecture (Editorial)

SD Union, Tues, 6/5: A game of victims and villains

SD Union, Tues, 6/5: Idled plants coming back on line

SD Union, Mon, 6/4: Planned plant shutdowns easing, boosting state's power
supply

SF Chron, Tues, 6/5: Chevron threatens to cut gas supply in state

SF Chron, Tues, 6/5: PG&E creditors approve bonuses
Utility must file reorganization plan by end of year, or CEO only gets
$600,000 extra

SF Chron, Tues, 6/5: 56% favor limits on electricity prices, poll finds

SF Chron, Tues, 6/5: Developments in California's energy crisis

SF Chron, Tues, 6/5: PG&E sues to challenge reimbursement to state

Mercury News, Tues, 6/5: Critics say Calpine plan too generous

Mercury News, Mon, 6/4:  PBS documentary shines light on energy crisis
(Enron mentioned)

Mercury News, Tues, 6/5: California's big turnoff  (Editorial)

Mercury News, Tues, 6/5: FERC shirk  (Editorial)

OC Register, Tues, 6/5: Edison plugging shareholders into Capitol

OC Register, Tues, 6/5:  SDG&E to seek rate hike to cover $915 million tab

OC Regiser, Tues, 6/5:  Energy notebook
AES power plant repairs might not meet target date

Individual.com (Businesswire), Tues, 6/5:  GWF Signs Long-Term Contract to
Provide 430 MW
of Power to California

WSJ, Tues, 6/5:  Electricity prices (Chart)

NY Times, Tues, 6/5:  Surplus of Finger-Pointing In California Energy Crisis

LA Times, Tues, 6/5:  California PSEG Signs 10-Year Contract to Supply
Electricity to State

LA Times, Tues, 6/5:  Panel OKs Subpoenas for Energy Companies Electricity :
Special state Senate committee will demand pricing information in inquiry
into whether
California has been gouged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
 Ose electricity bill buffeted by political storms
By David Whitney
Bee Washington Bureau
(Published June 5, 2001)
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Doug Ose's legislation to bring order to skyrocketing
wholesale electricity prices is helping House Republicans rescue an emergency
electricity bill, but it hasn't quelled Democrats' increasingly strident call
for more extensive price controls.
Utility sources, meanwhile, said the Sacramento Republican's legislation
won't do enough to stop the rapid escalation in wholesale power rates in
California and the West Coast.
And Mark Cooper, director of research for the Consumer Federation of America,
charged that the bill would lead to even higher power rates for most
Californians. "Ose's bill simply legalizes the transfer of billions of
dollars from California to Texas and Oklahoma," Cooper said.
Ose, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee's energy policy panel,
introduced his bill last month. The measure was promptly referred to the
House Energy and Commerce Committee, whose Republican leaders saw it as a way
out of a politically sticky mess.
With Democrats demanding that federal regulators set wholesale rates based on
generators' actual cost of producing power and the Bush administration
opposing anything that looks like price caps, Ose's idea contained the seeds
of compromise.
Ose expanded on what the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission already had
endorsed in a controversial "price mitigation" order for the California
market that took effect last week.
That order states that during a power emergency, the wholesale price on the
spot market will be pegged to the cost of production at the highest-cost,
least-efficient plant selling into the market at the time.
Ose's bill defuses some of the Democratic criticism of that action by making
the order apply at all times and throughout the 13-state Western region.
"It is not a cap," Ose said. "It is market driven. It rewards those who are
most efficient, and it rewards those who are most environmentally sensitive
and responsible."
House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders hope to use the bill this week as
the framework to jump-start a package of emergency electricity provisions,
including authorization of a $200 million fix of a critical Central
California transmission line bottleneck.
California Democrats, heartened by the leadership change in the Senate that
strengthens Sen. Dianne Feinstein's hand on her price-control legislation,
are working to derail the Ose compromise.
"By allowing the least-efficient generator to set the price, this proposal
creates a system that will encourage massive market manipulation, raising
prices even further," they said in a statement. "This amendment will do
nothing to help stop the economic bleeding."

The Bee's David Whitney can be reached at (202) 383-0004 or
dwhitney@mcclatchydc.com.

Bush vs. price caps: Economists correct a faulty power lecture

(Published June 5, 2001)

In his recent commencement address at Yale University, President Bush saluted
the C students in the graduating class: "I say you, too, can be president of
the United States." But when he lectured California last week on the evils of
electricity price controls, the joke seemed less funny. What America's most
famous C student didn't learn in economics class is costing the state dearly.
"Price caps do nothing to reduce demand, and they do nothing to increase
supply," Bush said in his Los Angeles address, repeating a standard lesson
out of introductory economics textbooks. Unfortunately, as 10 energy
economists from universities around the nation made clear last week in an
open letter on the state's electricity crisis, Bush must have missed the
later chapters.
The textbooks' admonitions against price controls apply to competitive
markets. When competition breaks down, giving one or a few producers the
ability to control prices, the textbooks are equally firm that regulation is
needed to keep them from exploiting consumers.
That's the situation confronting California -- and federal regulators.
Electricity markets here long ago ceased to be competitive. Because of a
flawed market structure and a temporary imbalance between supply and demand,
generators learned last year that they had market power: By withholding
supply at key times and places, they drove up the price of power beyond the
level that would otherwise prevail in a competitive market.
"We cannot expect a market to operate to benefit consumers ... if effective
competition does not exist," the economists said in their letter. "In this
case, cost-of-service prices are an obvious remedy."
They noted that several useful proposals have been submitted to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for temporary price restraints on
wholesale prices. These would last only until new plants now being built come
online to alleviate the shortage.
Such restraints could meet the federal legal requirement that prices be "just
and reasonable" without discouraging construction of new power plants or
generation from existing plants, which is needed to keep the lights on this
summer. In fact, as some economists have pointed out, the right kind of price
controls could actually increase supply by removing any incentive for
generators to withhold electricity to game the market.
Bush's regulatory inaction is producing an unprecedented transfer of wealth
from California households and businesses to the generating firms, a shift
that endangers the health of the state's economy. Unless FERC or Congress
steps in, that wealth transfer likely will yield a political backlash not
only against electricity deregulation, but also against market-based policies
in general. Even a C student should know enough history to understand that's
not a risk an incumbent politician wants to court.

A game of victims and villains

Stereotypes cloud the complexity of energy issue
By Dana Wilkie
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
June 5, 2001
WASHINGTON -- When Gov. Gray Davis refers to those Texans taking Californians
to the cleaners with electricity prices, the impression he apparently wants
to leave is one of greedy and unscrupulous Republicans who probably look like
oil baron J.R. Ewing.
And when Bush administration officials sniff that Californians got themselves
into this energy mess, they seem to be conjuring up the image of
short-sighted, tree-hugging Democrats who care more about Alaskan caribou
than about people.
Even if Davis and Bush shook hands and appeared civil in California last
Tuesday, the previous weeks of discord between the two left an indelible
impression on the public, experts said -- one colored by stereotypes that
easily strike a chord with voters but that also cloud the complexity of the
energy issue.
Those stereotypes pit the languid, Birkenstock-wearing Californian against
the respectable Texas corporate man; the gluttonous executive against the
rabid environmentalist; John Wayne against out-of-towners in black hats. Just
as when many in this country maligned Arabs during the 1970s oil embargo,
attempts to create victims and villains in the current energy crisis easily
appeal to public emotion.
Davis, a Democrat, recently invoked the image of hand-to-hand combat with a
fearsome foreigner: "We are literally in a war with energy companies, many of
which reside in Texas," Davis said after Bush, a Texan, released his energy
plan.
The image is straight from an old western.
"Gray Davis is playing John Wayne against the guy with the black hat," said
Mark Petracca, chairman of the political science department at the University
of California Irvine. "You sound like a socialist if you demonize middle-aged
white guys in suits who own capital. You sound like a cowboy with a white hat
when you demonize oil barons."
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, another Democrat, plopped a black hat on Vice
President Dick Cheney, architect of Bush's energy plan: "You have the vice
president sounding like an oil man."
Said Petracca: "Of all the possible images that one could pick, the oil baron
is the easiest to manufacture. It has the deepest cultural resonance, because
people have been exposed to this imagery on TV stations for years and years."
Helping to bolster that image, of course, is the fact that both Bush and
Cheney worked in companies involved with oil.
While Bush professes no part in the blame game -- "He's not interested in
finger-pointing," said White House press secretary Ari Fleischer -- Cheney
raised the stereotype of the superficial, mollycoddled, air-headed
Californian. On a national news program, he called California's electricity
deregulation scheme "harebrained" and Davis' suggestion that Bush allowed
price-gouging "goofy."
"You have a war of two biases," said Jack Pitney, a government professor at
Claremont McKenna College. "The bias of Texas as greedy and money-grubbing,
and the bias of California as shallow and narcissistic."
No matter how unrepresentative, these stereotypes are a way for the Davis and
Bush administrations, and the national political parties, to convince voters
whom to blame for the energy mess. That one of the parties should be a
"culprit" is itself somewhat disingenuous, since the crisis has roots that
run across Republican and Democratic administrations.
Davis' once-stellar public approval ratings have withered, as Californians
increasingly disapprove of how he has handled the crisis. Facing re-
election next year and a considered a presidential prospect in 2004, the
governor often reminds Californians that the crisis grew out of a Republican
deregulation scheme, and that he is working around the clock to build new
power plants.
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, also a Democrat, recently portrayed
power-company executives as criminals: "I would love to personally escort
(Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth) Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share
with a tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey,'
" Lockyer said.
Meanwhile, national Democrats have aired a TV ad in the Long Beach district
of GOP Rep. Stephen Horn that says the congressman teamed with Bush to oppose
price caps that might have offered relief from summer blackouts.
"It's a short-term effort by Davis to blame (others) for his difficulties,
but it's also part of a longer-term national Democratic Party effort to make
a case that the administration is rather friendly to the big-energy
interests, and less friendly to conservationists," said Bruce Buchanan, a
University of Texas expert on the presidency.
If gasoline prices stay high, or if California's electricity problems spill
over into other states, it may be Bush -- and Republicans running in next
year's elections -- who land in trouble with the public. The GOP fears that
voters may perceive Republicans as the monopolistic and environmentally
unfriendly tools of oil companies.
In the 1970s, politicians found an easy culprit for long lines at gas
stations and high fuel prices: They preyed on stereotypes of Arabs.
"All you had to do was show a bunch of Arab sheiks -- who already look to us
sort of exotic -- meeting in some country that makes people think of
international terrorism," said UC Irvine's Petracca. "Bingo -- you have some
people to blame."
Now, as then, the images have little to do with reality.
Ben Paulos, who promotes alternative power with the Energy Foundation, said
"it's a simplification" to paint the culprits in California's energy crisis
as Texas oil companies.
"These are international companies that own things all over the place," he
said.
In fact, most of the privately owned power generators in California are owned
by companies that are not from Texas.
And while conservationists get mileage out of associating these companies
with J.R. Ewing -- the Larry Hagman character who ran an oil company on TV's
"Dallas" -- "these (Texas) companies we're talking about are not oil
companies," Petracca said. "They're energy companies, natural gas companies.
But people lump it all together."
Said Pitney: "When you're trying to get on (with news anchor) Dan Rather,
detailed matters about energy policy just don't make the cut."

Idled plants coming back on line

By Don Thompson
ASSOCIATED PRESS
June 5, 2001
SACRAMENTO -- California's electricity production should improve in the next
few weeks weeks as more power plants come back on line after spring
maintenance shutdowns, the state's grid operator said yesterday.
That, coupled with conservation efforts detailed by state officials Sunday,
could help during this summer's high temperatures, independent observers said
-- but not enough to stave off blackouts.
"We still find blackouts are inevitable," said Michael Zenker of Cambridge
Energy Research Associates, an energy research and consulting organization.
"There just isn't enough generation available."

By the middle of this month, every existing plant is scheduled to be
producing power. That contrasts with a historic high this spring when about a
third of the state's power generation was unavailable due to scheduled or
emergency shutdowns.
The high number of shuttered plants prompted state officials to suggest power
generators were deliberately withholding electricity to drive up prices, and
Gov. Gray Davis ordered inspectors into plants to make sure generators
weren't cheating.
Generators objected, saying they have run their plants so hard since last
year that routine maintenance was overdue, which caused more unplanned
breakdowns.
The Independent System Operator, which runs the power grid, says equipment
breakdowns typically account for about 2,500 megawatts being off-line on any
given day. Forced outages stripped the power grid of 2,673 megawatts
yesterday.
The power grid was short 4,144 megawatts due to planned shutdowns yesterday,
beating the Independent System Operator's projections that 5,800 megawatts
would be unavailable. That was down from 9,800 megawatts off-line for
scheduled maintenance when the state narrowly avoided rolling blackouts
Thursday.
The ISO projects that in a week, about 3,000 megawatts should be down for
maintenance, said ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle. "It looks like we're on
target with our goal of getting the planned maintenance down to zero by
mid-June."
More generation, however, "doesn't mean consumers can cut back on their
conservation, because at the same time more plants come on line, temperatures
continue to rise," McCorkle said. By summer's peak in August and September,
California can be using more than 45,000 megawatts.
Californians cut their electricity use by 11 percent overall, and by about 10
percent during peak demand hours last month compared to the same month last
year, the California Energy Commission said Sunday. In addition, the Davis
administration has signed more power contracts, and the price of that power
is falling.
"All that's good news. We're moving in the right direction," said Severin
Borenstein, director of the University of California Berkeley's energy
institute. However, "the amount of conservation we're going to need in the
late summer is even greater than we have now. We've got a long stretch ahead
of us."

Planned plant shutdowns easing, boosting state's power supply

By Don Thompson
ASSOCIATED PRESS
June 4, 2001
SACRAMENTO ) California's electricity production should improve in the coming
weeks as more power plants come back on line after spring maintenance
shutdowns, the state's grid operator said Monday.
That, coupled with conservation efforts detailed by state officials Sunday,
could help during this summer's high temperatures, independent observers said
) but not enough to stave off blackouts.
"We still find blackouts are inevitable," said Michael Zenker of Cambridge
Energy Research Associates, an energy research and consulting organization.
"There just isn't enough generation available."
By mid-June, every existing plant is scheduled to be producing power. That
contrasts with a historic high this spring when about a third of the state's
power generation was unavailable due to scheduled or emergency shutdowns.
The high number of shuttered plants prompted state officials to suggest power
generators were deliberately withholding electricity to drive up prices, and
Gov. Gray Davis to order inspectors into plants to make sure generators
weren't cheating.
Generators objected, saying they have run their plants so hard since last
year that routine maintenance was overdue, which caused more unplanned
breakdowns.
Last Thursday, for instance, when California came within a hair of a seventh
day of statewide blackouts, one of Duke Energy's 750-megawatt Moss Landing
units began springing boiler leaks.
"We almost lost it that day because we'd been putting off scheduled
maintenance for so long," said company spokesman Tom Williams. "You can nurse
those along for a while, but after a while they'll trip (off-line) and
they'll do it during the peak of the summer."
The Independent System Operator, which runs the power grid, says equipment
breakdowns typically account for about 2,500 megawatts being off-line on any
given day. Forced outages stripped the power grid of 2,673 megawatts Monday.
The power grid was short 4,144 megawatts due to planned shutdowns Monday,
beating the Independent System Operator's projections that 5,800 megawatts
would be unavailable. That was down from 9,800 megawatts off-line for
scheduled maintenance when the state narrowly avoided rolling blackouts
Thursday.
By comparison, California was expected to use about 31,000 megawatts of power
during its afternoon peak period Monday, and top out at about 31,800
megawatts Tuesday afternoon. The 4,144 megawatts unavailable due to planned
shutdowns Monday would have powered about 3.1 million homes.
The ISO projects that in a week, about 3,000 megawatts should be down for
maintenance, said ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle. "It looks like we're on
target with our goal of getting the planned maintenance down to zero by
mid-June."
More generation, however, "doesn't mean consumers can cut back on their
conservation, because at the same time more plants come on line, temperatures
continue to rise," McCorkle said. By summer's peak in August and September,
California can be using more than 45,000 megawatts.
Californians cut their electricity use by 11 percent overall, and by about 10
percent during peak demand hours last month compared to the same month last
year, the California Energy Commission said Sunday. In addition, the Davis
administration said has signed more power contracts, and the price of that
power is falling.
"All that's good news. We're moving in the right direction," said Severin
Borenstein, director of the University of California, Berkeley's energy
institute. However, "the amount of conservation we're going to need in the
late summer is even greater than we have now. We've got a long stretch ahead
of us."
Planned maintenance shutdowns this winter and spring helped prompt six days
of rolling blackouts, said ISO spokesman Gregg Fishman. The ISO recently
delayed installation of pollution control equipment at five plants until
winter so those plants can operate through the hot summer months.
"The idea is the plants go down mainly in the springtime, because usually
there's the hydro(electricity) there to replace them," Fishman said. But not
with this year's water and snowfall shortage: "We got squeezed a couple of
times because of the hydro shortage either here (in California) or in the
Northwest."

Chevron threatens to cut gas supply in state
Bernadette Tansey, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 5, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/06/05/MN159275.DTL
Chevron Corp. will reduce gasoline production at its two California
refineries unless they are exempted from rolling blackouts, the company's
chief executive warned Gov. Gray Davis.
In a move that could raise California gas prices, Chevron's Richmond and El
Segundo plants will scale back output and rely solely on the power provided
by their own electrical generators, Chevron Chairman David O'Reilly said in a
letter Friday obtained by The Chronicle.
Chevron would not say how much less gas it would supply from its refineries,
which have a combined capacity of 485,000 barrels per day. But a spokesman
for the California Energy Commission said motorists could feel it at the
pump.
"Any reduction in production has an impact in the marketplace," said senior
fuel specialist Gordon Schremp. "Prices are going to go up."
Chevron's gasoline sales account for more than 18 percent of the California
market, company spokesman Fred Gorell said.
While other California refiners met yesterday's deadline to apply to state
regulators for exemptions from temporary outages, O'Reilly said Chevron would
not submit an application.
To qualify for one of the exemptions being considered by the state Public
Utilities Commission, Chevron would have had to assert that its vulnerability
to blackouts would present "imminent danger to public health or safety" --
something O'Reilly said Chevron could not do.
"Chevron will never operate its facilities in a manner that jeopardizes the
health or safety of its employees or its neighbors," O'Reilly wrote. Unless
the PUC or the Legislature shields Chevron from blackouts, it will rely on
its cogeneration plants.
Chevron set no time line for cutting production, but Gorell said the company
is looking for state action "as soon as possible."
Industry groups, backed by the California Energy Commission, have been
pressing state officials to overturn a PUC decision that stripped refineries
of a former exemption from blackouts. Legislation that would create a blanket
exemption for refineries is stalled in the state Senate.
Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said the governor has not yet responded to
Chevron's letter and has not taken a position on the refinery exemption law
proposed by Assemblyman John Dutra, D-Fremont.
Industry officials have warned that a refinery blacked out for just a few
hours could take as much as a week to bring back online.
State regulators could not be reached for comment on Chevron's letter.
Gorell said O'Reilly's letter should not be read as saying that conditions at
Chevron could be dangerous if the refineries suddenly lost power. At the
Valero refinery in Benicia, however, spokesman Scott Folwarkow said his
company did not hesitate to warn in its exemption application that sudden
shutdowns can pose a risk.
He said refineries were designed under the assumption that they would have a
reliable supply of power. "If you start flipping the switch on and off,
unpredictable things can happen," he said.
E-mail Bernadette Tansey at btansey@sfchronicle.com.
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4

PG&E creditors approve bonuses
Utility must file reorganization plan by end of year, or CEO only gets
$600,000 extra David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 5, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/06/05/MN159696.DTL
PG&E's creditors have agreed to management's plan to shower top executives
with $17.5 million in bonuses but balked at the bankrupt utility's initial
demand that the cash come with no strings attached, The Chronicle has
learned.
Instead, the creditors say they forced Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to link
the bonuses -- in some cases doubling the pay of senior managers -- to
quickly filing a Chapter 11 reorganization plan, no later than January.
However, PG&E spokesman Ron Low insisted yesterday that the utility had
always intended for the bonuses to be tied to submitting a reorganization
plan.
"Our original proposal closely resembled what was filed with the court," he
said.
The bonuses are expected to figure prominently when PG&E's management holds a
court-mandated meeting with creditors on Thursday in San Francisco.
Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali, who has the final say on all compensation
questions, is scheduled to issue a ruling June 18.
Critics have slammed the utility's "management retention program" as an
unwarranted payout to the same executive team responsible for steering PG&E
into its worst-ever financial crisis.
But the company insists that without extra incentives, corporate leaders
would depart and thus slow PG&E's return to creditworthiness.
"It's a question of efficiency," said Allan Marks, a lawyer representing the
11 companies comprising the creditors' committee in PG&E's bankruptcy
proceedings.
"It's not a question of whether these people are good or bad managers," he
said. "It's simply more efficient to keep these people in place."
Marks said that when PG&E first proposed the bonuses last month, the
creditors' committee quickly noted that the cash was a virtual handout to
about 226 top executives.
PG&E Chairman Robert Glynn and nearly two dozen other senior managers would
receive 100 percent of their salaries to stay on, while hundreds of other
employees would receive bonuses of between 25 and 75 percent of their
salaries.
After what Marks described as candid negotiations, he said PG&E had agreed to
link the bonuses to a commitment that its reorganization plan be on the table
by the beginning of 2002.
"This is one way that we can assure efficiency in the process," he said. "Our
goal is to make sure the company operates as quickly as possible."
But PG&E's Low said that the creditors had actually requested only minor
changes in wording and that the timing of a reorganization plan had never
really been in dispute.
A reorganization plan is the blueprint for a company's eventual recovery from
bankruptcy.
Glynn would receive a bonus of 100 percent of his $900,000 annual salary if
PG&E's plan is submitted on time. If he misses the deadline, he would have to
make do with just two-thirds of that amount.
While there is no reason to believe that PG&E's managers would have dragged
their heels without piles of extra cash, Marks said it was common in
bankruptcy cases for corporate leaders to receive an incentive to remain in
their jobs and seek a resolution to the company's difficulties.
"We ended up with something that we think is fair," he said.
The creditors' committee includes financial heavyweights Bank of America and
Merrill Lynch, as well as power giants Enron Corp. and Dynegy Inc. The
committee's actions set the tone for PG&E's dealings with its thousands of
other creditors, who are owed more than $9 billion.
Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in
Santa Monica, said that by accepting the bonus plan for PG&E's top brass, the
creditors' committee had signaled that it would agree to almost anything that
would help them recover outstanding costs.
"The creditors are in this to get reimbursed fully," he said. "Their idea is
to ultimately soak ratepayers for the entire cost of the bankruptcy."
Marks said the creditors would seek nothing less than full payment of PG&E's
obligations. "We're very firm on this," he said.
Full payment will only come if the bankruptcy court sells off some of PG&E's
assets, such as the utility's power lines or dams, or if consumers end up
paying surcharges on their monthly bills.
To date, PG&E has insisted that none of its assets are for sale.
E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4

56% favor limits on electricity prices, poll finds
Washington Post
Tuesday, June 5, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/06/05/M
N212214.DTL
Washington -- Most respondents to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released
yesterday agree with California Gov. Gray Davis that the federal government
should set limits on the wholesale price of electricity, which President Bush
has said he opposes amid the likelihood of rolling blackouts this summer in
the largest state.
Of those polled, 56 percent said they favored price limits, even though it
was pointed out that such a measure could discourage development of new
supplies. Forty percent said they opposed price caps, which Davis said he
would seek in federal court after Bush ruled out the idea during a face-to-
face meeting last week.
Bush's energy plan, which he announced last month and has been promoting with
a series of road trips, is weighted toward increasing production of oil, coal
and natural gas, as well as nuclear power. Democrats contend the plan would
benefit the energy industry without lowering prices for consumers.
The poll of 1,004 adults was taken May 31 through Sunday and has an error
margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4

Developments in California's energy crisis

Tuesday, June 5, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/06/05/state1
022EDT0151.DTL
(06-05) 00:03 PDT (AP) --
Developments in California's energy crisis:
TUESDAY:
* A leading advocacy group for the poor tells state leaders to use the
economic power of the state's huge pension funds to leverage power companies.
The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the two pension funds
own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of the firms that sell
electricity to California.
MONDAY:
* A special Senate committee investigating whether out-of-state power
companies are illegally profiteering the state's power crisis gets permission
from the Senate Rules Committee to subpoena documents from the companies
detailing bidding, pricing and other aspects of their electricity sales to
the state. The committee plans to subpoena Mirant, Dynegy, Williams, AES,
Duke, Enron, NRG and Reliant, and could also issue subpoenas to the Los
Angeles Department of Water and Power and the state Department of Water
Resources to access details of their power selling and buying processes,
respectively.
* The state's grid operator says California's electricity production should
improve in the coming weeks as more power plants come back on line after
spring maintenance shutdowns. That, coupled with conservation efforts, could
help during this summer's high temperatures, independent observers say -- but
not enough to stave off blackouts.
* The state's expanded Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
program begins with $120 million in state money. It is aimed at helping
working poor households, senior citizens, disabled persons, migrant seasonal
farm workers, limited-English-speaking persons and households with very young
children whose incomes fall at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty
level.
That includes households with four members having an annual gross income of
$44,125 or less; three-member households earning $36,575 or less; two-member
families earning $29,025 or less; and individuals earning under $21,475.
Further information is available at www.csd.ca.gov or at 1-800-433-4327
(HEAP).
* Ten schools in three Southern California districts cut their electricity
waste up to 18 percent through the Alliance to Save Energy's Green Schools
Program. Together, the schools saved more than $51,000 over about eight
months by changing their usage habits, according to Southern California
Edison, which sponsored the program. More information is available at
www.ase.org/greenschools.
* Critics tell the San Jose Mercury News that the federal agency overseeing
California's electricity market needs to add resources and become more
aggressive in watching for energy price gouging, issuing subpoenas for
company documents if necessary. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has
been accused of backing off investigations after energy generators have
resisted, prompting some FERC officials to say their own system is flawed.
* The FERC issues a statement saying it won't act on a request from small
power generators to block a March 27 decision from the state Public Utilities
Commission that has lowered the price they can charge for electricity. FERC
says it won't step in because the matter is still pending at the PUC.
* No power alerts Monday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.
* Shares of Edison International closed at $10.58, down 42 cents. PG&E Corp.
closed at $11.40, down 25 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San
Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $27.34, up 20 cents.
WHAT'S NEXT:
* Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company
of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.
* In federal bankruptcy court Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric will ask U.S.
Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to stop the manager of the state's power grid
from buying electricity for utility or charging it for any electricity bought
after the utility filed for bankruptcy on April 6.
THE PROBLEM:
High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight
supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and
maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's
electricity crisis.
Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high
wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from
passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs
from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection
April 6.
Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor
credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to
start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and
business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned
utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than
much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power
costs.
The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37
percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercial
customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15
percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state's
multibillion-dollar power buys.
,2001 Associated Press ?

PG&E sues to challenge reimbursement to state
Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief
Tuesday, June 5, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/06/05/M
N52029.DTL
Sacramento -- Saying it is being shortchanged, Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
filed suit yesterday challenging the amount of money California will get from
consumers as reimbursement for buying electricity.
The suit filed with the state appellate court in San Francisco claims that
the California Public Utilities Commission is giving the state too big a
share of the monthly revenue collected from consumers -- all at PG&E's
expense.
The suit by PG&E was expected. If the utility wins, it could make it harder
and longer for the state to recoup its power purchases.
The state stepped in to purchase wholesale electricity for the utilities
after their credit soured as power costs skyrocketed. The state has spent
more than $7 billion so far with reimbursement expected from consumers.
Earlier, Southern California Edison filed a similar legal challenge.
At issue is the amount of money the utilities receive from consumers and the
amount given to the state to cover electricity purchases.
PG&E contends that the PUC's calculation puts the utility $2.2 billion in the
hole because state regulators underestimated the cost of running the nuclear
power plant at Diablo Canyon and the cost of contracts with alternative
energy producers, like solar and wind generators.
The utility wants its share of consumer revenue increased, leaving less for
the state.
Under a bill lawmakers passed in January, it was the calculation of how much
of consumer money was needed to reimburse the state for energy purchases that
would dictate how many bonds the state could sell to repay itself.
The limit on bond sales was four times that calculation, totaling about $13
billion.
But both utilities challenged the PUC's initial decision, saying it was too
generous to the state.
Fearing legal action from the utilities, lawmakers passed a second bill in
May that delinked the authorization to sell up to $13.4 billion in bonds from
the calculation of how much consumer money the utilities receive.
That bill allows the bond sale to happen as early as Aug. 14.
As a result, yesterday the Davis administration and State Treasurer Phil
Angelides said the utilities' move did not affect the bond sale, scheduled
for late summer.
"This doesn't create chaos, it just means we can't sell the bond until the
middle of August," said Joseph Fichera, CEO of Saber Partners and one of Gov.
Gray Davis' energy advisers.
Had the utilities not appealed, the PUC's ruling would have allowed the bond
sale to occur sooner, Fichera said.
In its initial ruling in March, the PUC said its allocation of ratepayer
money would send $1.8 billion to help pay off the state's bond sale.
Fichera said a utility court victory could potentially lead to more rate
increases to cover the lost income to the state but added he was "not
certain."
E-mail Greg Lucas at glucas@sfchronicle.com.
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 5

Critics say Calpine plan too generous
Posted at 10:35 p.m. PDT Monday, June 4, 2001
BY MIKE ZAPLER

Mercury News

In what would be a highly unusual break for a local business, San Jose
officials are proposing to rewrite city law and spend tens of millions in
taxpayer funds to ease construction of Calpine's controversial power plant in
Coyote Valley.
The provisions highlight just how far the city has come on Calpine's proposed
600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center. Just months ago, city leaders stood in
solid opposition to the $400 million project, threatening lawsuits and other
tactics to block it. Now, those same officials appear ready to go to
extraordinary lengths to make Metcalf happen.
Part of an agreement reached last week by Mayor Ron Gonzales and the company
would require the city to pay $50 million upfront to extend a recycled-water
pipeline needed to cool the power plant. Calpine will reimburse San Jose for
just $10 million of that cost, far less than the city had sought, and will
make its payments over 30 years.
Another clause would allow Calpine, which reported an increase in
first-quarter profits of more than 400 percent, to spread over 10 years a
$3.9 million sewer connection fee. That would be a first for the city.
Typically those levies are collected upfront; the city council would have to
amend a law that set a five-year limit on sewer connection payments.
``I'm not comfortable with that,'' said Councilman and Metcalf opponent
Forrest Williams, whose District 2 would be home to Metcalf. ``They're a very
profitable company .?.?. they should pay the connection fee.''
Councilwoman Pat Dando said the overall agreement, set to be considered by
the council this afternoon, is probably the best the city could do under the
circumstances. But she added: ``I believe Calpine's payment should be the
same as other businesses that develop in San Jose.''
The money for the pipeline would come from a fund to expand and increase the
reliability of the entire recycled-water system. Projects the city had
planned to build sooner would have to be delayed, but the water pollution
control plant would not raise rates to pay for the Metcalf extension,
environmental services director Carl Mosher said.
Company at advantage
The criticized provisions are part of a larger package settled on after
roughly five weeks of negotiations. The talks occurred in a political
atmosphere that heavily favored the power company: Gov. Gray Davis endorsed
Metcalf in April, and the California Energy Commission is widely expected
this month to override the city's November denial of the plant.
Mayor Ron Gonzales and Calpine executives defended the deal, saying its
unusual terms were tailored to a unique project.
Metcalf, they said, would become the city's biggest customer of recycled
water, consuming an average of 3 million gallons daily -- or nearly one-third
of the current total usage -- to cool the plant. That would help the city
achieve its goal of reducing freshwater usage and diverting more water from
the San Francisco Bay for ecological reasons.
And the city would receive other concessions from Calpine, supporters say,
including two extra air-monitoring stations and $6.5 million mostly for parks
and open space.
``The energy crisis requires us to do business differently than we have in
the past,'' Gonzales said. ``When you take the entire package it's a win-win
for the city.''
Critics, while acknowledging that Calpine had a commanding position at the
bargaining table, say the city still is giving up too much. They questioned
why Calpine is paying only $10 million -- one-fifth of the total cost -- to
extend the water pipeline, when Metcalf will be its sole customer, at least
in the near future.
The city entered negotiations with Calpine wanting the company to cover the
entire $50 million cost of the pipeline extension, a senior city official
said. Others involved in the negotiations say that was never officially
broached by the city, although Calpine development manager Ken Abreu
acknowledged that ``obviously the city would have been happy for us to pay
for as much of the pipeline as possible.''
That's what the city should be demanding, said Issa Ajlouny, a resident of
the Santa Teresa neighborhood adjacent to Metcalf and leading opponent of the
plant.
``This agreement is giving away millions of dollars of our money,'' he said.
``The city should be outraged.''
Early last year, according to city officials and transcripts of a California
Energy Commission hearing, the city and Calpine had an understanding that the
power company would pay at least $25 million to $30 million for the
recycled-water line if the power plant were built. If San Jose decided to
construct a larger pipeline to serve more customers, the city would make up
the difference.
Deal fell apart
But that informal arrangement fell apart when Metcalf emerged as a major
political battle. Gonzales came out against the plant in June 2000, and the
council went on to vote against it in November.
By the time the negotiations began, Calpine didn't really need the city's
help. All indications were that the California Energy Commission would
override the city and approve the plant anyway.
What emerged from the talks was a $10 million payment, spread over 30 years,
from Calpine for the recycled-water line. Company officials say that 20
percent is roughly the same share of the pipeline capacity Metcalf would use.
The other 80 percent has yet to be allocated, but officials said they hope to
sign up other recycled-water users, such as golf courses.
``Our perspective is we're doing what's fair,'' Calpine's Abreu said.
As the agreement heads to the council this afternoon, some neighborhood
activists are accusing the council of trying to suppress public debate.
Often, controversial neighborhood issues are heard at evening sessions to
give working residents a chance to be heard.
``This certainly creates an appearance that they're trying to stifle public
input,'' said Elizabeth Cord of the Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group. She
said consideration should be delayed until the next evening council meeting
June 18 to give residents time to review the document.
But Gonzales said he's not inclined to defer the item. He said today's
meeting is already filled with difficult land-use decisions.
``We have already heard from the neighborhood,'' he said. ``It was their
concerns we negotiated.''

Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.

PBS documentary shines light on energy crisis
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- As California's energy crisis casts a widening shadow,
PBS' ``Frontline'' helps illuminate the issue with a high-wattage
documentary.
``Blackout'' is both a comprehensive report and a warning: California's power
deregulation woes represent a national problem not destined for a quick or
painless solution.
The hourlong film, with reporting by ``Frontline'' correspondent Lowell
Bergman done in conjunction with The New York Times, airs 10 p.m. EDT Tuesday
on PBS stations (check local listings).
If you're a consumer frustrated by price hikes or concerned about what might
happen in your state, ``Blackout'' should be considered required viewing.
Major players, ranging from power company chiefs to consumer advocates to
Vice President Dick Cheney, make their case on energy policy.
Gov. Gray Davis and others grappling with California's flawed new system,
which has inspired many states to put their own deregulation efforts on hold,
are interviewed.
``Blackout'' also touches on alleged machinations involving the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission that could affect how much, if at all, the
federal government will weigh in on power prices, and renews questions about
corporate influence on the Bush administration.
What ultimately emerges is a classic debate, framed in 2001 political
realities, over whether an unfettered market is invariably the best approach
or whether capitalism sometimes must bend to regulation.
Bergman is adamant about the importance of understanding a power industry
that has undergone massive change.
``We've launched ourselves into a great economic and social experiment in the
free market with a commodity that 65 years ago the country decided to put
under heavy regulation because it was so vital,'' he said in an interview.
``We've gone into this experiment without having a full national debate about
what the consequences could be,'' Bergman said. ``It may all work out, but
it's clear that we're at least in a transition period where a lot of people
are going to pay the price.''
In New York, for instance, blackouts are a possibility this summer and rate
hikes of up to 40 percent a likelihood, Bergman said.
There are those striking it rich in this bold new world. ``Blackout'' opens
on Houston's ``energy alley,'' home to new-breed power companies including
what the documentary calls the 800-pound gorilla, Enron Corp.
Enron, which has drawn attention because of chairman Kenneth Lay's close ties
to President Bush, generates profits by serving as middleman between
electricity makers and consumers.
The world's largest energy trader, Enron sees from $2.5 billion to $3 billion
in purchases and sales a day, according to its chief executive officer, Jeff
Skilling.
``We are doing the right thing,'' Skilling tells ``Blackout.'' ``We are
working to create open, competitive, fair markets. ... We are the good guys.
We are on the side of angels.''
If that's true, Bergman says in the film, the good guys have been winning:
The past year saw a ``vast transfer'' of wealth from energy consumers to
power sellers and traders like Enron.
They are taking advantage of the end of an era: the federal regulatory system
implemented by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s to limit abuses
by utility monopolies.
In the 1980s, ``Blackout'' tells us, free-market proponents began pushing for
an end to regulation. In 1992, a federal law was passed that allowed for
states to deregulate electricity.
There was broad but not unanimous support for such change.
``It's OK for the price of fur coats to go up and down. ... It's not OK for
the oxygen of life in this high-energy civilization,'' David Freeman, the
former Los Angeles Department of Water and Power head and now state energy
czar, tells ``Blackout.''
Mark Cooper, director of research at the Consumer Federation of America, who
notes there have already been price spikes in electricity in the Midwest and
New England, says the outcome speaks for itself.
``How do we go from $40 a megawatt for capacity in a regulated system to
$1,000 in a deregulated system, and you're telling me I'm better off?''
Cooper asks in the documentary.
Enron's Lay weighs in on the other side.
``I've yet to see any system in the world ... that over time does a better
job of setting prices and allocating supplies than a competitive market,''
Lay says in ``Blackout.''
He has a key philosophical ally in the Bush administration, which says
increased supply and not federal intervention is the logical answer.
``We're doing everything we can to help California on a short-term basis,''
Cheney says. ``There's not a lot you can do. You can't manufacture kilowatts
in the West Wing of the White House.''
Bergman, the former ''60 Minutes'' producer who was portrayed in the movie
``The Insider,'' believes there is one certainty about the power crisis: The
media generally has given it short shrift.
``Unfortunately this story has been covered, particularly on television, in
much the same way a car crash is covered. You never learn whether the car was
safe or the highway was safe. You just see the blood and guts.''
``Nobody's spent the air time to explain to people how this all happened and
why this may be coming to a neighborhood near you.''

California's big turnoff
Published Tuesday, June 5, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News
IF you ask us, we will cut back.
California's residents and businesses used 11 percent less electricity in May
2001 than they did in May 2000.
Keeping up this level of conservation throughout the summer won't necessarily
insulate the state from blackouts, but it's a big deal all the same. State
power officials have said May and June could be the most difficult months
this year. Additional power is expected to come on line later in the summer.
The most important time to cut back is at the peak of demand, usually hot
afternoons, when blackouts are most likely and the cost of buying electricity
can shoot up stupefyingly.
With Californians having cut peak usage by 10.4 percent, the price for the
power that the state is buying on the daily market is coming down.
June marks the beginning of the state's 20/20 rebate plan, under which
customers who reduce their use at least 20 percent from last year will get a
20 percent rebate. It also marks the introduction of new, higher rates for
businesses and for many households.
All the more reason for Californians to keep up the good work.

FERC shirk
Published Tuesday, June 5, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News
THE introduction of a free market in electricity is not cause for federal
energy regulators to start working half days. Instead, their jobs could well
become harder and more vital.
As of now, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does not seem up to the
task.
In a pair of stories Sunday and Monday, Mercury News reporters Eric Nalder
and Mark Gladstone described how FERC is unprepared to undertake the
extensive data-gathering and sophisticated number-crunching necessary to
detect market manipulation in the complicated wholesale electricity market.
Market manipulation, or gaming, encompasses many activities that are entirely
legal. But a market easily gamed is one that does not provide electricity at
the best prices to consumers. It is a market in need of reform.
Moreover, it is one that does not conform to federal law requiring
electricity prices to be ``just and reasonable,'' which FERC is supposed to
enforce.
Economists inside and outside FERC say the agency lacks the staff and the
attitude to be a vigorous supervisor of the market.
This is not entirely surprising. FERC is hardly the electricity industry's
only player, public or private, to be caught unprepared by the way a
restructured market evolved in California and other states.
FERC's investigation of price spikes in California early last summer
demonstrated its shortcomings. Its report correctly fingered the usual
suspects of weather, rising demand, stagnant supply and a badly constructed
market. It failed to decide whether power producers had taken advantage of
the circumstances to push prices skyward.
The economist who directed the probe found it weak in analysis and in
aggressiveness. FERC, for instance, is reluctant to use its subpoena
authority to compel power generators to turn over records.
The deficiencies must be remedied. A free market in electricity should not be
an unsupervised market, just as the free market for stocks is not
unsupervised. The Securities and Exchange Commission aggressively enforces
rules for accounting, stock sales, disclosure of information. It doesn't
hesitate to issue subpoenas.
Only FERC can monitor the wholesale market in electricity.
If only it would do it.

Edison plugging shareholders into Capitol
A telephone lobbying effort for Davis' bailout has earned the wrath of
legislators.
June 5, 2001
By HANH KIM QUACH
The Orange County Register
SACRAMENTO - Southern California Edison has launched an aggressive lobbying
campaign in which it telephones its shareholders, describes the dire
consequences for them if the utility goes bankrupt, and then transfers the
call directly to the Capitol so they can personally implore lawmakers to vote
for a controversial financial bailout plan.
The members of the Senate and Assembly and their staffers say that often the
shareholders - many of whom appear to be senior citizens - are confused, and
scared at the prospect of their investments in the utility being permanently
degraded or wiped out.
The tactic has raised the ire of legislators in both parties, although the
cash-strapped utility says it is simply practicing honest, effective
lobbying.
"The fact that they're targeting them is distressing because it brings a
threatening situation to their lives," said Assemblywoman Pat Bates, R-Laguna
Niguel. "You have a very vulnerable population and I think it's extremely
insensitive.''
But Edison International's vice president of public affairs, Brian Bennett,
said keeping shareholders informed and asking for their help is part of the
company's obligation to them.
Calling shareholders, many of whom happen to be older, is part of a very
above-board $3 million campaign that includes letters, financial reports and
television commercials to tell them about what's happening in Sacramento, he
said. The thrust of the message is that if the Legislature continues to try
to craft its own plan, rather than quickly endorse one that Gov. Gray Davis
and Edison favor, the utility could be forced into bankruptcy by its
creditors.
"We would feel less inclined to spend money if the Legislature would act
faster. Then, we wouldn't have to run to commercials and remind the public we
are in dire straits,'' Bennett said. "Legislators need to hear from their
constituents back home, particularly the retirees because of the drop in
stock income.''
The lobbying effort comes at a critical juncture. The Davis-Edison plan calls
for the state's taxpayers to come to Edison's rescue by purchasing the
company's transmission lines for $2.7 billion, thus providing it with enough
money to hold off creditors who threaten to push the utility into bankruptcy.
Meanwhile, the legislative leadership has been looking at several versions of
that same plan. The latest would force the state's 3,600 largest businesses -
those that pushed for deregulation - to pay for most of the bailout.
Lawmakers don't think the Edison lobbying campaign is that effective.
Often, the callers don't know that the Davis-Edison plan would have the state
buy the transmission lines. And once they do, they often change their minds,
lawmakers said.
The last thing many shareholders want is for the state to be in charge of
transporting electricity, particularly after many believe it bungled the
deregulation of the market in the first place.
But Bennett said it's unfair for lawmakers to assume the callers are not
well-informed.
"Our shareholders are average people. But if you're a shareholder and you've
seen the dramatic decline of the company, do you think they don't know what
they're talking about or feeling?'' he said.
Three Orange County shareholders contacted by Edison representatives said
they did not mind being asked to lobby for the bailout bill. However, one
said he did not know some of its key points and the another said he didn't
realize it was Edison who had called him.
Roberto Chica of Laguna Niguel didn't know the state would acquire
transmission lines for $2.7 billion - and is against it.
"The state should own nothing. They don't have any business in any of this,''
said Chica, 59, who owns 1,000 shares of Edison. At one point, he said, his
stock was worth $30,000 - three times what it is now.
Even though Chica doesn't agree fully with the deal, he agrees with Edison's
larger goal: avoiding bankruptcy.
"It's a mess. You rely on this investment for the long term and the
politicians screw it up and you get scared,'' Chica said.
San Clemente's Fred Beck, 74, said he didn't know who called him, but he
agreed to be patched through to a Bates aide, to whom he expressed his anger
about the energy crisis in general.
Beck said he bought his stock in 1993 for the dividends it would pay out
during retirement. He paid about $23 a share; they now trade around $10.

SDG&E to seek rate hike to cover $915 million tab
That amount was needed to pay another agency for electricity.
June 5, 2001
By ANNE C. MULKERN
The Orange County Register
The power company that serves 100,000 south Orange County residents wants to
hike electricity rates to pay back the state for power purchases.
San Diego Gas & Electric Co. proposes raising rates in a five-tiered plan
similar to one approved in May for Southern California Edison customers.
The utility needs to collect $915 million to pay the Department of Water
Resources, which is buying power for cash-strapped utilities.
The hike would be greatest for those using the most power.
Low-income customers and those using 130 percent or less of their baseline
allocation would not see any rate hike. Baseline is the amount of power
considered necessary for essential uses. About 60 percent of customers
wouldn't pay higher rates, said SDG&E spokesman Ed van Herick.
Customers who use the most - 300 percent of their baseline or more - would
pay 26.67 cents per kilowatt hour for that extra power, more than twice the
lowest rate.
State regulators will vote on the proposal June 28 and, if approved, it would
take effect July 1. The proposed increase is in addition to another hike
SDG&E applied for earlier this year. Regulators will vote on that hike this
summer.
Consumer activist Michael Shames, of the Utility Consumers Action Network,
expressed concern that DWR's need for additional funds could lead to a rate
increase without consideration for what is fair and reasonable.
"There is no apparent check on DWR's appetite," Shames said. "The law is not
clear as to whether (regulators) review DWR's purchases for reasonableness,
whether they are legitimate and justified. Absent that, there's a clear
unbalance."
The Public Utilities Commission will hold hearings to take comments on the
plan. The Orange County hearing will begin at 1 p.m. June 12 at the Country
Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.
Register staff writer Mary Ann Milbourn contibuted to this report.

Energy notebook
AES power plant repairs might not meet target date.
June 5, 2001
From staff and news service reports
HUNTINGTON BEACH - AES Corp.'s Huntington Beach power plant is struggling to
get two of its generating units online by a June 17 target, but might be
delayed by a few days.
The two units, which generate 430 megawatts of electricity, were taken
offline in April for a turbine overhaul and installation of catalytic
converters to reduce smog emissions. But power plant workers found more
damage than expected to the turbines, and parts to repair the equipment are
hard to find.
"We're still shooting for the deadline," said Ed Blackford, the plant's
president, referring to units 1 and 2. The plant's units 3 and 4, which have
been shut down for several years, are being retooled and are expected to be
online by mid-August.
State says Edison rescue deadline goes past Friday
ROSEMEAD - California power regulators don't have to act on Gov. Gray Davis'
rescue plan for Southern California Edison by Friday, as provided in the
agreement, a state energy official said.
That statement by California Public Utilities Commissioner Carl Woods
surprised Edison's investors and officials. Under Davis' "memorandum of
understanding" with Edison, the regulators had 60 days to act on six elements
of the rescue. That deadline is Friday.
PUC officials think it would be "acceptable" for the agency to act by August,
Wood said. If the PUC doesn't meet the Friday deadline, the utility's
creditors may decide the agreement will die and file to put it into
bankruptcy.
San Onofre Unit 3 back in full operation over weekend
SAN CLEMENTE - Workers at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Plant
successfully brought Unit 3 into full operation over the weekend, providing
an additional 1,120 megawatts of electricity.
Operators began to bring the unit online gradually beginning Friday. Ray
Golden, Southern California Edison spokesman, said it became fully
operational Sunday.
The unit had been closed since Jan. 2, first for refueling then after a fire
Feb. 3 forced repair of the turbines. Combined with Unit 2, the plant now
provides 2,240 megawatts - enough to power 1.68 million homes.
Unit 1 is in the process of being decommissioned.
9,000 blackout-exemption applications flood the PUC
SAN FRANCISCO - The state Public Utilities Commission had received more than
9,000 applications from businesses seeking exemptions from blackouts by the 5
p.m. deadline Monday.
The commission is expected to make a final decision by Aug. 2 on who will get
the relatively few additional exemptions available. To get an exemption, a
company must show that there would be a threat to public health and safety if
it were to lose power.
Power production expected to improve in weeks ahead
SACRAMENTO - California's electricity production should improve in the coming
weeks as more power plants come back online after spring maintenance
shutdowns, the state's grid operator said Monday.
That, coupled with conservation efforts detailed by state officials Sunday,
could help during the summer, independent observers said - but not enough to
stave off blackouts. By mid-June, every existing plant is scheduled to be
producing power in some or all units.
Federal regulator says California's ills a priority
WASHINGTON - New federal energy regulator Patrick Henry Wood III says
California's electricity crisis is a national emergency requiring a federal
solution.
Only a month ago, Vice President Dick Cheney opposed further federal action
to help California with chronic power blackouts and price shocks this summer.
But Wood, the outgoing chairman of the Texas Public Utility Commission, said
fixing California's electricity market was his top priority in his new job
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Register staff writers Kate Berry and Mary Ann Milbourn and Bloomberg News,
Knight Ridder Newspapers and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

GWF Signs Long-Term Contract to Provide 430 MW of Power to California

June 5, 2001

PITTSBURG, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 4, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation -
California-based GWF Energy LLC has signed a 10-year contract with the
California Department of Water Resources (CDWR) to provide up to 430
megawatts of electricity to California.
According to the contract, initial energy deliveries are planned to begin in
September 2001, when GWF's 90 megawatt Hanford Energy Park Peaker plant goes
on line. The Hanford project, which was permitted under Governor Davis'
Executive Order to expedite peaker plant permitting, was approved by the
California Energy Commission on May 10. GWF also expects to build and operate
two additional plants in California by 2002 -- in Kings and San Joaquin
counties.
"GWF and its employees appreciate the opportunity to work with CDWR in
providing much-needed electricity supply along North Path 15," said Duane
Nelsen, President of GWF Energy LLC. "All of the agencies involved in this
process have been working around the clock to expedite the construction of
this facility -- so California can get the additional energy it needs. We're
proud to be part of the solution."
GWF began operations in the 1980s and currently owns and/or operates seven
small power generating facilities in Central and Northern California --
generating more than 1,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity annually for
Pacific Gas & Electric. GWF is owned by a partnership of PSEG Global located
in Parsippany, New Jersey; and Harbert Cogen located in Birmingham, Alabama.
CONTACT: GWF Power Systems | Kelli Norton, 916/447-8186

Electricity Prices (Chart)
?
06/05/2001
The Wall Street Journal
Page A1
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
  The Mirant National Power Index, a demand-weighted average price for
peak-period electricity in the continental U.S., in dollars per
megawatt-hour; daily close

Business/Financial Desk; Section A
Surplus of Finger-Pointing In California Energy Crisis
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
?
06/05/2001
The New York Times
Page 1, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company
Natural gas prices have plunged in the last few months -- everywhere, that
is, but Southern California. While gas in New York costs about $4 per
thousand cubic feet, gas delivered to Southern California still costs more
than $11 wholesale.
That such numbers demand an explanation was about the only thing President
Bush and Gov. Gray Davis could agree on when they met in Los Angeles a few
days ago to discuss California's energy crisis. Mr. Bush assigned Patrick H.
Wood III, a fellow Texan confirmed last month as a member of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, to investigate.
To many experts, the woes of California's natural gas market are as profound
as those of its electricity market: the state is short on pipelines, and the
rules of the gas market, critics say, encourage sellers and traders --
including the biggest local gas utility -- to drive prices higher.
At peak times, half of California's electricity is generated by gas-fired
power plants, a higher proportion than in most parts of the country. And
because 85 percent of the gas consumed in California comes from outside the
state, the shortage of pipelines both into California and within the state
has become a big handicap in fueling those plants. The strain has become
especially acute as drought in the Pacific Northwest has curtailed imports of
hydropower and gas-fired power plants have worked overtime to meet the
demands of a booming state economy.
Vice President Dick Cheney's energy policy report last month proposed
initiatives to speed approval and construction of new pipelines, noting that
New England and other regions faced capacity squeezes, too. The report says
that the United States needs 38,000 miles of new gas transmission pipelines,
almost a 20 percent increase.
In the meantime, some industry executives and public officials take the
argument one step further than the Bush administration, contending that
today's shortage of capacity has made it possible for energy companies,
intent on maximizing profits, to manipulate prices.
''It really strains credulity to say this is a functioning market,'' said
Representative Joe Barton, Republican of Texas, who as chairman of the House
energy subcommittee has been leaning on the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission to scrutinize the California gas market. ''Reasonable people could
conclude people have gamed the system.''
In one significant case, California utility regulators and Southern
California Edison, one of the state's struggling electric utilities, have
accused the El Paso Corporation of using its control of a major pipeline into
the state to inflate prices artificially. El Paso officials deny wrongdoing
and accuse California officials of making the company a scapegoat for the
state's failure to build more pipelines. A judge at the federal energy
commission is hearing the case in Washington.
But fingers are pointing in other directions, too.
For example, the Southern California Gas Company, the state's largest gas
utility, has reaped huge profits buying and selling gas in the last year --
activity encouraged by state regulations intended to lower gas prices for
consumers. But some gas marketers and electricity generators contend that the
trading has contributed to price spikes, by tying up valuable pipeline space
during peak times with gas shipments driven by financial deals, not power
demands.
At the same time, Edison says that Southern California Gas failed to put
enough gas into storage last fall for residential and small-business
customers. If so, that would have driven the gas company back into the market
in the winter, when demand from power plant operators was high, helping push
gas -- and hence electricity -- prices yet higher, Edison complains.
Between them, El Paso and Southern California Gas were responsible for $3.7
billion in excess prices for energy in the last year, Edison contends.
Southern California Gas, a unit of Sempra Energy, denies that its trading has
harmed the market. Rather, its executives note that electricity generators
and industrial gas consumers -- which under state rules are responsible for
managing their own gas supplies -- put very little gas into storage last
year. By one estimate, large gas consumers in Southern California had only 11
percent as much gas in storage at the end of November as they did at the same
time during the prior two years.
Another problem may emerge this summer, according to William L. Massey, a
member of the federal energy commission. Mr. Massey said new commission rules
intended to limit electricity price spikes in California will almost
certainly prompt energy-trading companies -- which deal in both gas and
electricity -- to manipulate gas prices. That is because the rules allow
electricity generators to charge more if gas prices move higher.
Similarly, growing attention is being paid to the role played by financial
trading tied to the price of electricity and natural gas. Industry critics
question whether huge trading volumes in these financial derivatives gives
energy marketing companies the incentive to manipulate prices in tight
markets.
Federal regulators ''don't seem to understand that firms are really trying to
make as much money as they can,'' said Severin Borenstein, director of the
University of California Energy Institute, a research organization on the
Berkeley campus. ''That's what they do for a living.''
Fixing the problem is simple, Mr. Borenstein said. ''If you build more
capacity,'' he said, ''you reduce both the scarcity issue and you reduce the
ability of people who currently own capacity to exercise market power.''
Regardless of whether companies are manipulating prices, the California
natural gas market is fattening bottom lines. In the El Paso case, testimony
has shown that pipeline capacity acquired by the company's marketing
affiliate in March 2000 for $38.5 million produced profits of almost $900
million over the next 13 months.
El Paso said its share of those profits was $184 million, the rest going to
other companies with which it entered into hedging transactions intended to
limit El Paso's exposure if gas prices fell. About half of those transactions
were with the biggest energy trader, the Enron Corporation, according to
people present at briefings El Paso officials have given to California
officials.
An Enron spokesman, Mark Palmer, said it was possible that Enron took the
other side of the trades, but he said that Enron would have resold the
pipeline capacity almost immediately, thus profiting little from the rise of
gas prices in California.
Federal regulators, concerned that the high gas prices in California may not
be legitimate, have proposed requiring companies selling gas in the state to
disclose extensive data about their transactions. They are also considering
whether to reimpose price caps on short-term sales of pipeline capacity that
were eliminated early last year.
Further, regulators are scrutinizing the so-called gray market in which
energy marketers bundle gas and transmission capacity and sell it to large
customers, like electricity generators, for one price. Federal regulators
have oversight responsibility for the interstate portion of gas shipments,
but they have not looked closely at these bundled transactions, Mr. Massey
said.
''The whole thing has fallen through the cracks,'' he said.
Nearly all of California's gas comes from the Southwest, the Rocky Mountain
states and Canada through a few huge, highly pressurized pipelines. In
California, the gas is shunted onto intrastate pipelines that deliver it to
consumers and to underground storage fields for later use.
Those pipelines are now largely running full, and their capacity is about 300
million cubic feet a day less than what interstate pipelines can deliver. The
difference is the amount of gas it takes to continuously fuel a 1,300
megawatt power plant -- enough to light more than a million homes.
''It's not resources, it's straws -- the straws needed to suck this gas where
it needs to go,'' said Thom Kelly, assistant executive director of the
California Energy Commission. ''If the straws are full, that's a problem.''
Operators of interstate pipelines have proposed new construction that could
double delivery to the state. Indeed, odd as it seems now, some in the
industry worry that California could be ''overpiped'' later this decade, just
as it was in the mid-1990's.
Likewise, Southern California Gas plans only limited expansion of its
in-state pipelines, partly because it expects demand to fall as hydroelectric
power supplies return to normal levels and older, less efficient gas-fired
power plants are phased out.
But the gas company's intentions are regarded with skepticism by others in
the industry. Some executives contend that Southern California Gas has
damaged the marketplace through its enthusiastic embrace of a state program
that allows it to split with customers the profits from buying, selling and
lending gas.
A coalition of power generators, including Reliant Energy, the Williams
Companies and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, has complained
to state officials that the program ''creates perverse incentives'' for the
gas company. The generators say it results in extra demand for pipeline space
when capacity already is at a premium, making prices more volatile.
The consequences of the gas company's low storage inventories were evident in
early December, according to John Stout, a senior Reliant executive. He
recalled listening in on a conference call as a Southern California Gas
official talked about injecting gas into storage. ''I was floored,'' Mr.
Stout said. ''Prices were sky high, and they were putting more upward
pressure on prices.''
Lee M. Stewart, president of energy transportation services for Southern
California Gas, called the criticism ''bogus.'' The utility's storage and
trading practices have neither hurt the market nor curtailed gas sales to
customers, he said.
''To say gas prices drive electricity prices is a falsehood,'' Mr. Stewart
added.
But to many regulators, it is clear that gas prices play an increasingly
important role in electricity prices.
Problems in the California natural gas markets ''haven't been given the
prominence they deserve for the detrimental role they are playing in high
electricity prices,'' said Linda K. Breathitt, another member of the federal
energy commission. ''Natural gas prices have been the stepchild of this
California crisis.''
This article is part of a joint reporting project with the PBS series
''Frontline,'' which will broadcast a documentary about California's energy
crisis tonight.

Photo: This Redondo Beach, Calif., power plant, owned by the AES Corporation,
uses natural gas, as do almost half of the state's electric plants. About 85
percent of the gas consumed in California comes from outside the state.
(Agence France-Presse)(pg. C12) Chart/Map: ''A Vital Network Under Pressure''
Though California is crisscrossed by natural gas pipelines, capacity is
limited, magnifying the state's energy woes. Half of California's electricity
is generated by gas-fired power plants, and the shortage of highly
pressurized pipelines both into California and within the state has become a
big handicap in fueling those plants. (Source: California Energy
Commission)(pg. C12)

Business; Financial Desk
California PSEG Signs 10-Year Contract to Supply Electricity to State
?
06/05/2001
Los Angeles Times
Home Edition
Page C-2
Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company
A California unit of Public Service Enterprise Group agreed to sell up to 430
megawatts of electricity to the state's Department of Water Resources under a
10-year contract, the company said Monday.
GWF Energy said power deliveries are expected to begin in September when its
90-megawatt "peaker" plant goes online in Hanford in California 's Central
Valley.
The company owns or operates seven small power units in the state and plans
to build two more in the Central Valley. A peaker unit typically generates
less than 300 megawatts of electricity --enough for about 300,000 homes--and
runs during the hours of the highest demand for energy.
The value of the contract with the water agency was not disclosed.
Gov. Gray Davis ordered the agency to step in as California 's principal
electricity buyer in January after PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric unit
and Edison International's Southern California Edison subsidiary amassed
about $14 billion in power purchase costs that they could not pass to
customers under the state's flawed deregulation law.
PSEG shares rose 29 cents to close at $51.34 on the New York Stock Exchange.

California ; Metro Desk
Panel OKs Subpoenas for Energy Companies Electricity : Special state Senate
committee will demand pricing information in inquiry into whether California
has been gouged.
CARL INGRAM; MIGUEL BUSTILLO
?
06/05/2001
Los Angeles Times
Home Edition
Page B-1
Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company
SACRAMENTO -- The Senate Rules Committee agreed Monday to issue subpoenas to
eight out-of-state power generating companies demanding documents on pricing,
bidding and other aspects of electricity sales in the state.
Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana), chairman of the special Senate committee that is
investigating whether power wholesalers are illegally profiteering from
California 's energy crisis, said he expects the companies to resist. That
would set the stage for a court fight, he said.
In addition to subpoenas aimed at the private generating companies, the
committee also put the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power on notice
that unless it voluntarily provides information on its power sales to the
state, the data will be subpoenaed as well. And the panel threatened to
subpoena records of the state Department of Water Resources unless it turns
over information on how it has spent more than $7 billion to keep electricity
flowing in California .
Under Senate regulations, Dunn's panel needed approval of the Rules Committee
to issue the subpoenas.
Industry executives deny that they have broken any laws in selling
electricity at premium prices to California 's financially strapped utilities
and the state water department.
The subpoenas will be issued to Reliant Energy, which Gov. Gray Davis has
publicly accused of price gouging, Dynegy Energy Services Inc., Williams
Energy, Enron Corp., NRG Energy Inc., Duke Energy, Mirant Inc., and AES Corp.
Dunn said executives of the generators seemed cooperative when the
investigation was launched two months ago. Since then, he said, they have
raised barriers, including demands that the confidentiality of their
documents be protected.
The demand for information from the Los Angeles DWP and the state's water
resources department were pushed by Sen. Ross Johnson (R-Irvine), vice
chairman of the rules panel.
"Why are we not attempting to subpoena the Los Angeles Department of Water
and Power? There certainly have been suggestions that they have profited,"
Johnson said, referring to reports from the California Independent System
Operator about large profits that DWP made by selling power to the rest of
the state.
Reflecting the views of many lawmakers, Johnson said the Legislature also
needs information on power purchases that the state water department makes
from wholesalers and the bidding strategies used to make the bids.
Davis has refused to make details of the purchases public. He contends that
if generators knew how much the state was spending on power, they might raise
their prices. Several news organizations and a legislator are suing to make
the information public.
Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco), chairman of the Rules
Committee, opposed issuing subpoenas to the city and state departments, at
least temporarily, leading to the agreement for a one-week delay before
subpoenas would be issued to the agencies.
The big energy companies also took a hit Monday from a leading advocacy group
for the poor.
The Pacific Institute for Community Organization, a coalition of faith-based
groups that has pressed for California to cover more of the millions of
working citizens without any health insurance, voiced concern that the energy
crisis is hitting the poor hardest.
The group, which scheduled a Capitol rally today, plans to urge political
leaders to use the economic power of the state's huge pension funds to
leverage the companies.
The two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most
of the major firms involved in the state energy crisis, from Enron of Texas
to Duke of North Carolina, the advocates said.
"They could bring the voice of stockholders into the debate, as a major
stockholder, and take a more enlightened view of what is happening to
California ," said activist Jim Keddy. "We really have no voice inside those
companies right now."


Welcome to s+b's enews, an exclusive added-value from strategy+business.

This week: Governments Go Digital: Citizens Get a Direct Connection

New York, April 18, 2001 - Think of public agencies, and stereotypical images include long lines at offices and inattentive bureaucrats. Think again: Governments are using digital technologies to reinvent how they operate, complete with New Economy acronyms like G2G, G2C, and G2B.

Already e-Government initiatives are shaking up public agencies globally, dramatically changing the quality of services in both developed and developing countries. In the U.K., for instance, a single portal connects citizens with services dealing with life transitions, such as having a baby, finding a job, and retiring. In Egypt, the government is teaming up with multinationals to create home-grown high-tech industries and e-skilled college graduates. "Governments need to be built on the principles of quickness, lightness, exactitude, multiplicity, and transparency - the opposite qualities to those we traditionally associate with governments, which have tended to be slow, heavy, vague about their goals, and secretive," said Geoffrey Mulgan, director of the U.K. Cabinet Office's Performance and Innovation Unit. "E-Government plays into the new model."

To read the full analysis:

http://www.strategy-business.com/enews/041601/041601.html
-------------------------------

s+b's enews is an exclusive platform for e-business analysis, insights, commentary, and other intellectual capital from the authors, strategists, and editors at strategy+business.

Randall Rothenberg
Editor-in-Chief
strategy+business

-------------------------------
To have your address removed from the enews e-mail list, go to:

http://www.sbsubscriber.com/services/welcome.cfm?ref=newsletter_register.cfm&D=20010326153807&N=5429693.0&R=1.0&frame=N


Shelley, I would appreciate any comments or feedback on the attached.  I am trying to formulate
	my thoughts to be positive and get our message across.  Donna helped me put some info together.
	Now I need your thoughts.  Thanks. Lynn


At the request of Bill Bradford in our Credit Department, I am attaching our
proposed amendment to the ISDA Master Agreement between HS Resources, Inc.
and Enron North America.  Please let me know if the amendment meets with your
approval.  My phone number is (713) 853-3399.

Tana L. Jones
Sr. Legal Specialist


This Friday is my last day at Enron.  I don't have my new address in Boston, but my email address is bthoskins@hotmail.com.  You can also reach me at this address for most of the summer:

5200 Boulder Ct.
Louisville, KY 40207
502-895-0980

Keep in touch!

Brian


John, I read Phil's statements concerning the Redrock air permit issue and
would like to make sure everyone has the facts why  Transwestern was unaware
of the delay in the agencies issance of the air permits.  I had met with each
agency prior to submitting each application (February of this year) to ensure
that each application contained the correct and proper information required
by the EPA and State of Arizona.  When I told them that we would need the
permits by the end of September, each agency indicated that a September
permit issuance would not be a problem, in light of the fact that energy
issues related to California were to be given top priority.   On a monthly
baiss I phoned the  permit engineer assigned to each application to be kept
aware of possible conflicts and resolve any concerns.  In all monthly calls,
both agencies assured me that the permits were progressing on schedule.  As
we approached the anticipated September issuance calls to the agencies were
conducted weekly and this was when I was first informed of the 1-4 month
additional time beyond the September issuance which would be required for the
permit issuance.


Hi Jeff,

I've been asked by the Mayor's office (see email below) to confirm interest
in a news conference on the search committee with the Mayor, yourself and
possibly other committee members present. I'm happy to take the lead on
organizing this - I just need some idea of timing on your end as well as your
preference on participants.

Lisa
X54840
713-569-9563 (cell)
713-524-5189 (home)

"Thompson, Dennis" <DThompson@pwe.ci.houston.tx.us> on 01/10/2001 05:00:28 PM
To: "'Lisa Connolly @ Enron'" <lisa.connolly@enron.com>, "'Monette Goodrich'"
<mgoodric@myr.ci.houston.tx.us>
cc: "'Don Hollingsworth'" <donh@myr.ci.houston.tx.us>

Subject: HFD Search Committee - News Conference

Mr. Hollingsworth asked me to confirm that we were keeping the idea of a
news conference about the Search Committee in site.  He would like us to
begin negotiating for a spot on the Mayors calendar.  You mentioned that
January 19 was the goal to have the committee in place.  We need to
determine a date certain for selection of the members to schedule a press
release/conference.

Additionally, what has been the discussion regarding having Mr. Skilling or
other members of the Committee present at the news conference? What are the
scheduling issues with this aspect?

I have included Monette Goodrich in this conversation.  She is the Mayors
Communication Director and will be handling the press release and news
conference.

Regards,

Dennis Thompson
Office of Public Safety & Drug Policy
Special Projects
713-437-6481


----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 05/31/2001 04:08 PM -----

	Brad Richter@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
	05/31/2001 03:55 PM

		 To:
		 cc: (bcc: Sue Nord/NA/Enron)
		 Subject: Project Raven

To the due diligence teams of Project Raven--

As you may have already heard, EBS decided this week not to pursue continued
discussions with Raven.  I wanted to take the time to thank each of you for
the many hours you put into the transaction.  I firmly believe that we did
the most thorough due diligence possible given our time constraints and the
relative disarray of Raven's organization.  Each diligence team pitched in
with helpful suggestions and worked toward a common goal, and we should be
proud of the manner in which we arrived at our conclusions.  But as is the
rule in business, you win some and you lose some.  Regardless of the outcome,
I sincerely appreciate your efforts and hope that we can meet up again on the
next deal.  In the meantime, if you have any questions about the process or
would like to tie up loose ends please fell free to stop by.

Thanks again,

Brad Richter
EBS Corporate Development


I could not open up the attachment but I could view it.

The locations I need are:

ANR SE
ANR HIOS
ANR transmission
ANR Gathered
ANR Offshore
ANR Gathering
HIOS LA offshore
HIOS TX offshore
NGPL LA supply
NGPL Louisiana
NGPL South Texas
TRKL East LA
TRKL TAB1
TRKL TAB2

Thanks,

Tom Donohoe


Great--I'd be happy to testify if the consensus is that it would help.  Go
ahead and draft something up and we can talk soon.  Thanks.  DF

	From:  Tim Aron                           01/21/2000 05:05 PM

To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Re: Tri-State/Plains Electric Merger

Drew - I visited with the Senate sponsor (it is now officially SB159) in New
Mexico and he would probably like to have some comments from Enron at the
hearing, whenever that is (nothing set yet).  I think that you or Mary Kay
(since Mike will likely be gone) would be the appropriate officer to
testify.  I will try and draft some comments since there may be little notice
for the hearing.  If you disagree, please let me know.

On another matter I asked Rob to find out who Tri-States Gov't Affairs person
was and it turns out he is an old friend of mine (Dave Mazour) from my water
resources days.  I spoke to him today and he was pleased to hear of our
efforts to help.  He also reiterated that his Board is adament they will not
be regulated by the PRC and will walk from the deal.  I'm sure I will have
more conversations with him.

I appreciated your taking time to call Carpenter.  All of this helps our
cause.


Here's TURN's reply.

At 04:39 PM 07/31/2000 -0700, Louie, Stephanie wrote:
>   Attached is the Reply Brief of Pacific Gas  and Electric Company filed
>today in I.99-07-003.   Stephanie Louie Secretary to EDWARD  KURZ
>Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\reply-f.doc"
 - TURN GIR Reply Brief.doc


RIGZONE DAILY NEWS -- THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2002
------------------------------------------------------------
Daily News from the worldwide upstream oil & gas industry
   to view the complete version, please go to:
   http://www.rigzone.com/newsletter_show.asp?n_id=222
------------------------------------------------------------


Scott,

I'll give you what we got from FCE when we meet at 300.  Remind me if I
forget!

Kay

	From:  Scott Healy @ ECT                           09/15/2000 09:48 AM

To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT, Heather Kroll/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Fuel Cells

1.  Can I get a copy of the FuelCell Energy purchase order form.  Jeff said
that you would have a copy.
2.  I forwarded to you a memo from Bingham that discusses the permitting
requirements for the proposed projects.  FYI--I plan to call Bingham today
with some follow up questions.
3. I forwarded to you a memo by ENSR on the air permit requirements for fuel
cells.
4.  Please let me know when you can meet today to discuss the MOU.


I have also done some useful, more technical but straightforward things in
as background for work for a client (I used it to aid my comfort levels in
making certain statements) for testing whether changes in power and gas
prices are related on a day or between days.

Best regards,

JHHerbert
703-532-4544

 - gd010502rev.pdf


Can you make this change and forward to  Phil?

C
---------------------- Forwarded by Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT on 12/12/2000
04:12 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  ptuohy@wm.com                           12/12/2000 03:56 PM

To: mofriel@wm.com
cc: Chris.H.Foster@enron.com, wcarlson@wm.com
Subject: Waste Management Draft Swap

Please note the fixed price payor and the floating price payor are reversed in
this draft.  Enron will send us a corrected copy.
---------------------- Forwarded by Phil Tuohy on 12/12/2000 07:04 PM
---------------------------

From: Chris.H.Foster@enron.com on 12/04/2000 04:18 PM CST

To:   Phil Tuohy@WMI, George Woodward@WMI
cc:
Subject:  Waste Management Draft Swap

---------------------- Forwarded by Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT on 12/04/2000
02:17 PM ---------------------------

Melissa Ann Murphy
12/04/2000 02:16 PM

To:   Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:   Tracy Ngo/PDX/ECT@ECT
Subject:  Waste Management Draft Swap

(See attached file: waste management draft swap.doc)

Hi Chris,  Let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks,
Melissa
(713) 853-1886
(See attached file: waste management draft swap.doc)

 - waste management draft swap.doc


Dan,

Sorry to inform you that we have some delay in Algeciras caused by
late arrival of vital spare parts.  We have had some problems with
one of the feed water pumps lately.  Needed spare parts for this type
of feed water pump are difficult to get and the delivery time is very
long.   In order to solve this problem, we decided to buy a new
pump(a more common type) and the pump was promised to be in Algeciras
in due time before the vessel arrived.  Unfortunately we learned this
morning that the transporter has made some mistakes and the pump will
not arrive Algeciras before tomorrow at 1100.

As this pumps are so important for the boiler plant, we are
hesitating to cross the Atlantic knowing that only one of two are
working properly and therefore decided to delay the vessel until
tomorrow.  The vessel will depart as soon as the pump is onboard.

If etd 28th 1500lt eta Lake Charles 8th 1200lt gives abt 18,5 knots.
If same etd, eta Lake Charles 9th 0600lt gives abt 17,3 knots.

Reverting,

Best regards

Kjell
Hoegh LNG