Datasets:

neelblabla

/

enron_labeled_emails_with_subjects-llama2-7b_finetuning

like 3

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Trip to California Body:: Liz Greg: Frank Wolak from Stanford will be back in the office on Tuesday August 7. I hope to set up a meeting with him and then to finalize the meeting with Prediction Co. I shall be shooting for August 23 - 24 in view of Greg's trip on the 15th and 16th. I left a message for Norman Packard telling him that I should be able to get back to him regarding the trip to Santa Fe by Tuesday this week. The first draft of the non-disclosure agreement will be ready by Tuesday or Wednesday. Have a good trip. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Meeting with Bill Hogan, Mr. Lay, and Mr. Skilling, Irwin Stelzer and Richard Tabors will sit in as well, in 50M03 Body:: (Connie Burns in Bill Hogan's office 617-495-1318) Lunch will be served. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib Wed 3/7: Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E Bakersfield Californian Wed 3/7: El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity SF Chron Wed 3/7: State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal Sac Bee Wed 3/7: Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes Orange Co. Register Wed 3/7: Power plan called wrong LA Times - Wed 3/7: Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls Sac Bee Wed 3/7: PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts SF Chron Wed 3/7: PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands cutting service San Jose Mercury Wed 3/7: Power prices could soar during the summer SF Chron Wed 3/7: Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: Supervisors set search for power plant sites Sac Bee Wed 3/7: Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: PG&E power plan debated at hearing SF Chron Thurs. 3/8: State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50000 homes by August WSJ Thurs. 3/8: Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals ------------------------ Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E State ready to pay $7 billion for lines By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU SACRAMENTO -- Signaling a breakthrough in secret energy crisis talks the Davis administration disclosed Tuesday it may announce the framework of a pact to rescue the teetering Pacific Gas and Electric Co. next week. Things are going very well said Steve Maviglio a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. The state appears to be poised to pay at least $7 billion -- and possibly billions more -- for PG&E's high-voltage transmission lines as part of a deal to financially renovate the north-state utility according to sources familiar with the negotiations. But consumer advocates insisted that even the $7 billion price is too much to pay. And experts warned that a deal with PG&E will be more complex than with other utilities. PG&E representatives declined comment in keeping with their policy on the talks even though the Davis administration said an announcement could come as early as next week or the following week. The new timetable for an announcement was substantially sooner than in Davis' original forecast. Until late last week PG&E was still resisting the sale of its power grid despite the fact that Davis had announced the framework of an agreement with Southern California Edison. Davis expects to soon announce a similar deal with the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. However any such deal still would need federal approval. The investor-owned utilities trapped between high wholesale costs and lower regulated retail rates amassed nearly $13 billion in debts and were unable to buy electricity this winter. With the onset of rolling blackouts the state began brokering billions of dollars in emergency short- and long-term power purchases. Davis' strategy to ease the energy price and supply crisis includes bolstering both conservation and generation while fiscally refurbishing the nearly bankrupt utilities. As part of the rescue deal the utilities would have to drop legal actions seeking dramatically higher electricity bills environmentally shield wildlands they own sell power from their generators to Californians for the next decade and secure help with their debts from their parent companies. Together with the cash infusion from the sale of their power 26000-mile power grids the utilities would be allowed to sell bonds to raise funds and use customer money to pay them off. The state would upgrade the high-voltage lines and lease them back to the utilities for operation. In a reflection of the negotiations with the three utilities a Davis administration official said the deal with PG&E is proving to be more complex than with the other firms. Though PG&E finally agreed late last week to sell its transmission grid the utility apparently wants more than the $7 billion that Davis has offered according to sources. The figure is more than twice the book amount or the value placed on the system for purposes of accounting. And that's the markup that lured Edison into an agreement to sell its smaller portion of the transmission grid for $2.8 billion. But PG&E which fears an erosion of its economic base may be asking as much as $10 billion. Due to complexities in the state's 1996 deregulation of the industry PG&E is more likely to lose revenue than Edison as a result of selling its transmission lines according to experts. Big customers might be able to bypass the utility's remaining local distribution lines thereby eroding its customer base. Therefore the utility may view bankruptcy and sale of its transmission lines to the highest bidder as a potentially attractive alternative to selling its share of the grid to the state at too low a price. ---- El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants Filed: 03/07/2001 By CHIP POWER Californian staff writer e-mail: [email protected] El Paso Energy citing non-payment from Pacific Gas & Electric Co. said it has shut down six cogeneration plants this week. The smaller plants produced about 175 megawatts of electricity and are located primarily in the San Joaquin Valley said company spokesman Mel Scott. A megawatt can supply power to 1000 homes. At least 10 plants have closed in the past two weeks as a result of non-payment according to the state Independent System Operator which manages most of the state's electrical distribution. The El Paso Energy plants are operated with various partners and had not been compensated for December January and February deliveries said Scott. He said he did not know the total amount due but said the plants would be closed until PG&E's credit worthiness is improved. A cogeneration plant common in oil fields simultaneously produces heat energy and electrical or mechanical power from the same fuel in the same facility. Typically it produces electricity and steam which can be deployed to enhance oil recovery. Kern County is the state's leading oil-producing county. El Paso owns or has interests in more than 40000 miles of interstate and intrastate pipeline connecting the nation's principal natural gas supply regions to the five largest consuming regions in the United States namely the Gulf Coast California the Northeast the Midwest and the Southeast. El Paso closed up 99 cents on Tuesday or 1.4 percent at $71.49. The Houston-based company's stock price has ranged between $36.31 and $75.30 in the last 52 weeks. ---- Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN FRANCISCO -- The price tag is $3.2 billion and counting for electricity bought by the state Department of Water Resources for the customers of two nearly bankrupt utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Southern California Edison and the state disagree over how the DWR eventually will be reimbursed for its purchases on the expensive last-minute power market. So do the state power regulators who have the final call over who gets the money when. Under a recent law the DWR went into the electricity-buying business to help keep the two utilities from sinking further into their $13 billion debt. The state plans to retrieve the money by selling $10 billion in revenue bonds. The utilities continue to collect ratepayer dollars on that electricity which the bill's author Assemblyman Fred Keeley D-Boulder Creek says is meant to help them begin paying down their debt. In a recent letter however DWR officials requested that the state Public Utilities Commission order that a portion of that money be diverted to the state. But after the utilities subtract the costs of generating electricity payments to environmentally friendly power plants and other expenses there is no money left from ratepayer dollars to give to the DWR without sinking further into debt PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Tuesday. If it passed along money to the DWR our undercollection would grow by about $2.4 billion by the end of the year Low said. The commission unable to agree on the best course of action left the issue untouched at its last meeting but expects to revisit the issue when it meets this morning. Commissioner Richard Bilas is proposing an alternate plan that would have the DWR set its own revenue requirements that would be passed on to ratepayers. The PUC also is expected to respond to complaints from laid-off workers and customers that layoffs by utilities to cut costs have been hurting service. Commissioner Carl Wood warned at the last meeting that failure to provide safe and reliable service could mean fines for the utilities. Representatives from electrical workers unions the PUC and the utilities were to discuss the issue Tuesday afternoon. I don't think we believe that utilities can find a way out of their problems by laying off workers said Mindy Spatt a spokeswoman with the Utility Reform Network. We think consumers deserve safe and reliable service and we think they deserve it at a reasonable price. ---- State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal David Lazarus Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday March 7 2001 2001 San Francisco Chronicle Few people would purchase a car simply because the dealer said ''Trust me it's a great deal.'' Yet Gov. Gray Davis essentially is telling Californians just that about dozens of long-term power contracts. Because of confidentiality agreements with power companies the governor has revealed only scant details about the state's multibillion-dollar contracts for electricity over the next 10 years. Gov. Davis has our money and we can't see how he's spending it said Doug Heller a spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. We've been locked out of the room. Neither Davis nor power companies would divulge specific details about the price duration or scope of individual contracts. Each cited secrecy clauses that the governor's office said had been desired by both sides. What consumers do know is this: -- California has signed 40 contracts and tentative accords valued at about $40 billion to secure enough power to light 9 million homes over the next decade. -- The average purchase price of each deal is $69 per megawatt hour -- well above the $30 to $40 charged by power generators before California's energy market went haywire last summer. -- If as is widely expected wholesale power prices fall in years ahead the state nevertheless will be locked into paying above-market rates for electricity. But it is not known which generator agreed to part with the most power at the cheapest level or the full range of the prices in concocting the $69 average. Moreover it is unclear how shrewdly the state negotiated with taxpayer money in securing power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities. These agreements are the bedrock of our long-term energy policy Davis said Monday in announcing the deals. The governor's office defended the murky nature of the contracts yesterday. It's a business transaction in which private corporate information is included said Steve Maviglio a spokesman for Davis. That's the kind of information that never gets revealed. While additional elements of the contracts will be publicized in coming months he said the contracts themselves will remain a secret. You'll never see all the details Maviglio said. This did not sit well with many observers. It's a breach of public trust said Daniel Bacon a San Francisco attorney specializing in business law. A public servant spending public money shouldn't be able to keep the spending secret. But Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum an energy-industry association in Menlo Park called confidentiality agreements a necessary evil in transactions like this. He explained that no power company would agree to a long-term contract if rival firms could learn the terms of the accord. The company would be losing too much of its competitive edge in the marketplace Ackerman said. At the same time he noted that secrecy allowed the buyer -- in this case California taxpayers -- to secure more favorable terms with individual sellers. A high price with one generator would not necessarily be sought by all power providers. Still the fact that public funds are being used makes confidentiality in this case a different matter than say Cisco Systems' quietly negotiating to take over yet another tech rival. The public is in a very awkward position said Michael Shames executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. It has to rely on the good word and expertise of the governor and he has yet to demonstrate that he has expertise or good word in this field. Shames likened consumers to passengers in a plane being flown by a pilot without a license to fly. But what choice do we have? he asked. I don't see many other options available right now. There's the rub. No matter how bad a deal California may have cut to help meet its energy demands the alternative -- blackouts disruptions economic catastrophe -- is far far worse. On the other hand it already appears that the new contracts will not shield Californians from the threat of daily outages this summer when demand surges. Davis said only about 60 percent of the state's summertime electricity needs so far had been met. Part of the reason is that many power companies already have contracted for their output this year. Duke Energy said this was why it would not begin its nine-year contract with California until 2002 while Williams Cos. said it would only gradually increase the amount of available wattage in its 10-year contract. Both companies meanwhile will continue to profit this summer by selling into the volatile spot market where wholesale power went for as much as $1 500 per megawatt hour last year. You can't sell all your power into long-term contracts said Paula Hall- Collins a Williams spokeswoman. You save some for the spot market. Consumer groups worry that consumers will be hammered again this summer with sky-high power prices and then get nailed down the road by contracts for above-market rates. If we could look at the terms of the deals we'd see that California is being gouged for 10 years said Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. But the governor doesn't want us to see that. Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum said the state had gotten the best rates it could under current market conditions. California went for long-term contracts when everyone else moved in as well he said. Californians are paying a price for not acting sooner. ---- Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 7 2001) WASHINGTON -- California members of Congress pleaded for everything from wholesale price caps to extending daylight-saving time an extra hour to help the region cope this summer with its persistent electricity shortage but none of the ideas seemed to catch fire at a House hearing Tuesday. People will die in California because of this crisis Rep. Brad Sherman a Los Angeles-area Republican warned the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Sherman testified that his idea for saving lives is to extend daylight-saving time by an extra hour so that there would be more daylight at the end of the day when power consumption surges. One of the peak demand periods for electricity occurs between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m. when the sun sets and people come home from work Sherman testified. If people come home and it is light out there is less of an inclination to turn a light on. Sherman said the state Legislature has called for congressional approval for states to be given authority to extend daylight-saving time and he cited analyses by the California Energy Commission and other agencies suggesting that it could cut power consumption by 1 percent to 2 percent. Sherman who was one of about a dozen California lawmakers presenting their views on the energy squeeze drew no questions from committee leaders about what his legislation might do to everything from airline schedules to television programming if West Coast states didn't agree on the same time standard. Most of the committee's questioning was on the more popular idea proposed by several California and Western lawmakers primarily Democrats to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose caps on wholesale electricity prices that have gone wild because of a regional power shortage. Rep. Bob Filner D-San Diego charged that the price spiral has little to do with power shortages but a lot to do with a small cartel of generators bilking ratepayers. Rep. Jay Inslee D-Wash. said he brought up the idea of regional price caps with President Bush who was initially skeptical. But Inslee said that Bush warmed to the idea after being told that protections could be built into the caps so as not to discourage construction of new power plants. Upon hearing that Inslee said Bush invited him to meet with the president's Cabinet-level task force led by Vice President Dick Cheney on a national energy strategy. But Inslee said he can't get the group to meet with him. It's very disappointing Inslee said. Tuesday's hearing was part of a series the panel is holding on the California crisis so far without any emerging consensus on what if anything Congress should do. ---- Power plan called wrong Wall Street analysts say the governor's approach to the problem avoids the issue that caused the imbalance. March 7 2001 By DON THOMPSON The Associated Press SACRAMENTO California's scramble to insulate consumers from the soaring price of electricity may add to the state's power problems this summer Wall Street analysts said Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis' emphasis on buying utilities' transmission lines and negotiating long-term power contracts to help ease their debts skirts the deep imbalance between wholesale and market rates that led to the state's power problems in the first place they said. In the long run it doesn't solve anything said Michael Worms an industry analyst for Gerard Klauer Mattison & Co. In the long run you need to send the right price signals to consumers which will create its own conservation signals. Unfortunately customers were shielded from that in California. Davis said Monday that the state's first contracts to buy electricity for two financially struggling utilities will provide only about two-thirds of the power needed on a typical summer day forcing Californians to cut power use at least 10 percent to avoid blackouts. Since early January the state has been buying one- third of the power Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers need. The two utilities denied credit by suppliers say they have lost nearly $14 billion due to soaring wholesale electricity prices that the state's industry-deregulation law says they cannot pass on to consumers. The keepers of the state power grid had enough electricity Tuesday to avoid declaring an electricity alert but have faced an almost-daily scramble for weeks due to a tight supply and high wholesale prices. Several wholesale and retail rate proposals are circulating. Among them: Free-market advocates such as Worms want an immediate end to the deregulation-imposed retail rate freeze on Edison and PG&E that will expire next year. Davis wants a Western price cap of $100 per megawatt hour on power generators he says have been prof iteering from California's short energy supply. The Bush administration and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are cool to that idea. In December FERC imposed a soft cap of $150 per megawatt hour on wholesale rates in the state and required suppliers to justify any higher prices they charge. Consumer groups such as The Utility Reform Network or TURN want regulated rates for residential and small-business customers but free-market rates for large industrial customers which sought deregulation in the first place. TURN also advocates a tiered rate structure with higher rates for consumers who use more than a reasonable amount of electricity each month. Assembly Republicans say electricity and natural-gas prices will fall naturally if the state increases supply mainly by making it easier to build plants and pipelines. Right now you're sort of sitting partially with regulation and part with the free market said Paul Fremont an analyst with Jefferies & Co. Both these systems work. It's sort of that in-between system that you have in Califor nia that doesn't appear to be working. The system discourages generators from building new power plants because they aren't guaranteed a profit and it doesn't do enough to discourage power use by consumers because the price they pay doesn't reflect the true cost of power Fremont said. I don't think people here have much faith in the market and why should they? countered TURN's Mindy Spatt. I think there are probably better ways of encouraging consumers to conserve than by gouging them. Davis insists the crisis can be resolved without raising rates for Edison and PG&E customers beyond the existing rate structure. In January state regulators imposed temporary rate hikes of 7 to 15 percent on Edison and PG&E customers. The Legislature and Davis extended the increases for up to a decade to help pay back the estimated $10 billion in power buying the state expects to do for Edison and PG&E over the next several years and finance its purchase of the power lines owned by the two companies and San Diego Gas & Electric. Rates were already scheduled to increase next year for Edison and PG&E customers. Under the 1996 deregulation law the pair's ratepayers saw a 10 percent rate reduction but only until early 2002. That rate cut will likely expire as planned Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio has said. Davis wants those rates to cover not only the traditional cost of generating transporting and distributing power but the added cost of paying off the two utilities' massive debt and buying their transmission lines said Assemblyman Fred Keeley D-Boulder Creek the Assembly's chief power negotiator. Yet Davis has indirectly addressed the rate imbalance by signing legislation that will let regulators raise consumer rates if necessary Keeley said. The governor and lawmakers are in effect spreading out rate increases over a decade by using long-term revenue bonds to buy power for the nearly bankrupt utilities said Severin Borenstein director of the University of California Energy Institute. At some point we have to deal with the reality that all of the power that we buy has to be paid for by somebody - it's either going to come from taxpayers or it's going to come from ratepayers Bor enstein said. Raising rates now would get us a lot of conservation. Davis also wants financial incentives for conservation and power-plant construction in time to make a difference this summer. Our mouths were agape at the rapid timetable Keeley said. Legislators are rushing to pass those incentives by month's end he said allowing three months for consumers and suppliers to act before the heat of summer. Among bills considered Tuesday the Senate Energy Committee approved legislation to accelerate the siting of power plants. It also was considering a proposal to restructure rates for generators that use renewable energy to provide about 30 percent of the state's electricity. ---- Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls Energy: Democrats balk at varying payment levels for alternative generators. By DAN MORAIN JULIE TAMAKI Times Staff Writers SACRAMENTO--Legislation aimed at cutting prices for more than a fourth of the power consumed in California stalled Tuesday as Democrats questioned why a few alternative energy generators--some of them campaign donors--stood to receive higher payments than others. Lawmakers working to unravel California's energy mess have been negotiating for weeks in an effort to cut the price paid to more than 600 generators of alternative power by more than half to below 8 cents a kilowatt-hour. Those alternative generators' contracts with utilities have shot up in recent months because of a rise in the price of natural gas. The cash-strapped corporations have suspended or made partial payments to the generators over the last few months causing many to shut down or reduce their outputs. But even as the lawmakers reached agreement that pushed the average price to near the 8-cent level per kilowatt-hour some generators would have received higher prices under the bill by state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta). Some of the generators that stood to benefit had donated to Battin's campaigns. One--Windtec Inc.--gave Battin a $20000 campaign donation in 1999. Others contributed from $3000 and $5000 last year. Battin acknowledged that he has received campaign contributions from some wind power generators but said there is no connection between the donations and the bill's provisions. It is illegal it is unethical and it's not how I do business he said. Battin noted that 25% of the state's alternative energy producers are in his district. As Democrats on the Senate Energy Committee blocked the bill Battin warned that some alternative energy producers might react to the delay by trying to force Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric into bankruptcy. We will be the cause of bankruptcy Battin said. That prompted Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) to retort: I'm really tired of being threatened with bankruptcy. Alternative energy producers including those that use wind solar power biomass and other means produce 27% of the energy used in California. They sell the electricity to the utilities which in turn transmit it to retail consumers. But with the utilities facing multibillion-dollar debts the alternative energy producers under contract with Edison have not been paid since November. Scores of alternative energy producers supported the measure. Edison International and the San Francisco-based consumer group the Utility Reform Network opposed it. Michael Florio of the Utility Reform group said the deal could result in higher consumer prices an Edison representative said the same thing. Battin and Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) worked out an arrangement with many of the generators. Keeley took the lead in the early negotiations and then turned to Battin to introduce the legislation SB 47X. Rather convoluted language would have allowed higher payments to a select few generators that produce electricity from wind and biomass. Most of California's wind suppliers for instance would have received about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour. But a handful of them about half a dozen wind farms--mostly in the Palm Springs area represented by Battin--would have received 7.8 cents. Battin contends that other wind producers receive additional payments that boost them to the same level as Windtec and others that would get the higher payments. They get the same deal Battin said of the handful of generators that would benefit from the provisions he added to the bill. In California's overall energy market the amount of money that would have flowed to the favored generators is minor. But the added prices that would have been paid to the generators would have translated to at least $19 million in the next five years to be absorbed by Southern California Edison customers according to one analysis. Also Tuesday more details were disclosed about another leg of the state's effort to escape from the energy crunch--the deals with large power generators to supply electricity to California for as long as 10 years. Those arrangements were announced by Gov. Gray Davis Monday as the bedrock of California's energy policy. But some consumer advocates warned that the deals could lock the state into excessively high-priced contracts. S. David Freeman the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Davis' negotiator said that the state guarded against that by varying the time spans of its deals. About 6000 megawatts are expected to be available this summer about one-third of the energy needed by the state Freeman said. The amount of power under contract swells until more than 9000 megawatts are contracted in 2004 half of the needed amount before dipping to 8000 megawatts in 2010. What we're doing here is what everybody said had to be done Freeman said. We deliberately bought 50% so we'd have a good mix between long-term contracts which may turn out to be somewhat higher or somewhat lower than the spot market and purchases on the spot market. ---- PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published March 7 2001) Sacramento's electric utility wants out of a deal that imposes rolling blackouts locally on PG&E's command. So do a lot of other utilities. They've been writing letters lobbying lawmakers and launching informal talks with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to get off the hook before summer. Who dodges the blackout bullet is going to play out as a political hot button around the state said George Fraser head of the Northern California Power Agency a coalition of municipal utilities. In Sacramento the next volley is expected soon with the Sacramento Municipal Utility District reportedly poised to notify PG&E that it will no longer black out homes and businesses on the larger utility's command. We are absolutely trying to fight off the requirement for rolling blackouts for the Sacramento area said Linda Davis one of seven elected members of the SMUD board of directors. Saying they don't want to be dragged down by somebody else's problems two Southern California utilities have written grid operators asking to be exempted from any blackouts caused by PG&E's or Southern California Edison's financial woes. But in PG&E's view California is in an energy crisis (and) ... we're all in this together said spokesman John Nelson. The maneuvering comes amid bleak forecasts for power supplies this summer. Although Gov. Gray Davis has said conservation new power plants and moderate weather could avert blackouts officials at the Independent System Operator which runs much of California's grid expect frequent rotating outages. One consulting firm Cambridge Energy Research Associates predicts 20 hours of rolling blackouts during July and August and about 200 hours of especially intense calls for voluntary cutbacks. Before blackouts hit the jockeying over just whose lights air conditioners and assembly lines will be shut down is growing. The outcome could affect millions of people statewide. The state Public Utilities Commission is probing rolling blackout programs run by the for-profit utilities it regulates including PG&E and Edison. A PUC analysis has suggested that PG&E's program which currently exempts about 40 percent of its customers should spread the burden more broadly. For example it said 1.9 million homes and businesses are spared just because they share a circuit with a customer deemed essential. But not-for-profit utilities such as SMUD which answer to their own elected boards or city councils have other worries. Many have already lined up their power supplies for summer. Some have raised rates or are considering raising rates. Some have taken extra conservation steps. They think those preparations ought to give them leverage to ease blackout clauses in their contracts with PG&E. SMUD general manager Jan Schori is going to use every avenue ... any avenue to put pressure on including lobbying the ISO the governor and others said utility director Davis. The Northern California Power Agency a joint-powers authority that owns and operates power plants for municipal utilities has begun informal negotiations with PG&E to change blackout rules according to Fraser its top executive. It is preparing to write PG&E asking that its members be exempted from outages altogether. Failing that it wants them to face fewer outages or to be compensated for cutting off power he said. At SMUD the utility board has met in closed session to discuss exactly what it is required to do during electric emergencies under terms of the interconnection contract that links SMUD's lines to PG&E's. The contracts are being inspected with a fine-tooth comb said SMUD director Howard Posner. Schori declined to comment on any specifics. Sources indicated that the main option being considered is notifying PG&E that because of changed circumstances SMUD believes it no longer is required to routinely comply with outage requests. Other options being explored include re-negotiating existing agreements with PG&E. Posner said that ever since two days of rolling blackouts in January constituents have been asking him 'Why are we participating when we're not the problem?' And I don't have a good answer to that. Several directors said SMUD has already spent a lot of money -- and is considering 16 percent rate increases -- to ensure that it has enough electricity under contract to meet its customers' summer demands. They believe PG&E should do the same. We're almost like a David against Goliath here said board vice president Genevieve Shiroma. The huge investor-owned utilities next door have severe problems that they need to get under control. In addition SMUD plans to argue that because it can cut usage through its Peak Corps program which remotely turns off air conditioners at volunteer households it has already done its part without rotating outages director Davis said. PG&E believes the interconnection agreements that govern smaller utilities' ties to its transmission lines have benefits and burdens to both sides said Nelson. It wouldn't be fair or good policy for just one provision to be altered without taking a look at how that affects the entire contract he said. Interconnection contracts generally have clauses that require utilities to help each other out to avert greater emergencies. Sometimes reducing demand -- called load shedding -- can be the only way to stabilize the electric grid in the seconds after a major power plant or transmission line fails. It's been around in the electrical fabric forever said Jim Pope head of Silicon Valley Power Santa Clara's city-run utility. In addition to legal requirements you have a moral obligation so you don't bring the system to collapse. Like other city-run utilities Silicon Valley Power has a contract with PG&E that requires it to shed load during an electric emergency. But its contract allows it to work with big users to reduce their demand so no one has to be completely shut off. Such agreements formed long before deregulation when PG&E ran the north state's grid now are complicated by the 1997 creation of the state Independent System Operator. The ISO today runs pieces of the grid owned by PG&E Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. If it believes power use is about to surge past supply potentially triggering a grid collapse across the western United States the ISO notifies the three utilities that they have to shed a certain number of megawatts. The big utilities meet that requirement two ways. They cut circuits to some of their own customers and they tell smaller connected utilities to cut a proportionate share. In Northern California about 80 percent of the outages are borne by PG&E customers and the rest by customers of SMUD and other municipal utilities and irrigation districts. In one sense we are all in this together. If SMUD were in danger of going down we would hope others would help us out said SMUD's Posner. But that's if we're in danger from circumstances beyond our control not from mismanagement or lack of financial wherewithal. It is unclear what penalties if any a utility would face for violating an interconnection agreement. In the long run the issue would be fought either in the courts or before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission grid officials said. As a practical matter in the seconds when the risk to the grid is greatest if one utility refused to shed load the ISO would probably solve to problem by calling on PG&E Edison or others who are willing to make deeper cutbacks they said. ---- PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands cutting service Bernadette Tansey Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday March 7 2001 2001 San Francisco Chronicle State regulators are set to decide today whether debt-ridden Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison can conserve cash by laying off thousands of workers and letting service standards slip. Union officials who protested the layoffs before the California Public Utilities Commission warn that if the cuts go through neighborhoods hit by power outages could stay dark for hours and more customers could face busy signals when they call about their bills. An administrative law judge agreed advising the commission in February to order the utilities to restore 725 positions already cut and block the elimination of an additional 2125 jobs. Judge John Wong said PG&E and Edison have acknowledged the layoffs will not substantially improve their shaky financial condition which arose from skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs the utilities could not pass on to consumers under a rate cap. The savings would barely make a dent Wong said in his draft decision. The two companies together claim that their debt from power purchases amounts to more than $13 billion. PG&E says it has saved $18 million from the first wave of 325 layoffs. Wong's recommendation is already running into resistance on the PUC. Commissioner Richard Bilas said the five-member panel should not be micromanaging the utilities in a time of crisis. Bilas has proposed an alternate ruling that would allow the utilities to make the cuts but provide for PUC monitoring of service in case the commission wants to step in later. We're in a situation where the utilities are not collecting the revenues they need to operate and yet we may be guilty of not letting them cut expenses where they can cut expenses Bilas said. PG&E spokesman Jon Tremayne said savings from the layoffs are helping to keep electricity running and gas flowing. It keeps cash in our accounts so we can keep doing day-to-day business Tremayne said. In addition to the 325 positions dropped so far PG&E is proposing to cut an additional 675 during the next three to six months. The cuts affect temporary and contract workers who read meters handle new service hookups and replace equipment. PG&E has no plans to eliminate permanent positions. The company is struggling to keep up with a higher workload at its call center as customers deluge the lines with inquiries about their rising bills and the effects of deregulation. Calls to PG&E ballooned from 1.3 million in January 2000 to 2.3 million in January 2001. Bilas advocates granting PG&E's request to temporarily relax standards requiring the utility to respond swiftly to customer calls and to read customers' meters once a month. PG&E wants to read meters bimonthly and send bills based on the estimated use between readings. Discrepancies could be corrected later. Wong called those measures unacceptable. He said customers need to know immediately if their efforts to conserve power are working. Wong also said the utilities' own experts have said the workforce reductions will lengthen the time required to restore power after nonemergency equipment failure. Eric Wolfe communications director for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245 said some customers have already been left without power overnight because PG&E is trying to avoid the use of overtime on nonemergency power outages. It hurts a lineman to walk away from the job leaving a customer without power Wolfe said. Tremayne said PG&E is trying to minimize overtime costs but denied the company has allowed customers to go without power out of financial concerns. He said crews were pulled out when darkness and falling trees made the work too dangerous. ---- Power prices could soar during the summer Posted at 10:35 p.m. PST Tuesday March 6 2001 BY STEVE JOHNSON Mercury News Unless Gov. Gray Davis arranges significantly more long-term electricity contracts or persuades people to turn off a lot more lights California's unpredictable spot market for power could wreak havoc this summer. Even with the 40 long-term deals announced by Davis on Monday experts interviewed Tuesday said up to 43 percent of the state's daily needs may have to come from this highly volatile market in which power is bought within a day of need. That could could prove hugely expensive because some spot market energy has cost five to six times what it would under the long-term contracts. It's widely expected that consumers ultimately would have to pay that tab which could amount to billions of dollars. And because that power won't be locked up in contracts there is no guarantee it will be available when it's needed which could lead to blackouts according to a recent report to the California Independent System Operator which oversees three-fourths of the state's power grid. ``The situation in California could reach catastrophic proportions'' the report concluded adding that unless things change dramatically ``it is a virtual certainty that peak demand will go unmet during many hot summer days.'' Steven Maviglio Davis' press secretary conceded Tuesday that the spot market could be troublesome. ``It's a major concern'' he said which is why the state is trying to line up more power contracts speed up power plant construction and promote conservation. During the normally hot month of August peak daily demand for power in the Independent System Operator's territory is expected to hit about 47700 megawatts -- enough for nearly 48 million homes. The state's three main utility firms generate about 8200 megawatts and have long-term contracts from wind solar and other energy sources for about 11700 megawatts more. That totals about 20000 megawatts. Add in the 7000 megawatts of long-term power that Davis has announced for this summer and the state is still nearly 21000 megawatts short. Costly proposition If all that power has to be obtained on the spot market the price could be high. On Friday last-minute purchases on the market averaged $411 per megawatt-hour compared to about $150 per megawatt-hour for all power obtained by the Independent System Operator and $69 per megawatt-hour on average under Davis' long-term contracts. It's possible that not all 21000 megawatts would have to be purchased on the market. Assuming Davis is successful in getting people to save 10 percent -- which could prove difficult -- conservation could reduce peak demand by nearly 5000 megawatts. California also might be able to trade for another 5000 megawatts with the federal government's Bonneville Power Administration and a hydroelectric operator in British Columbia said Arthur O'Donnell editor of California Energy Markets a trade publication. Under such deals those two outfits often send that much power to California when they don't need it and California returns the same amount or more when its demand is low. But O'Donnell said it wasn't clear whether 5000 megawatts would be available this summer because ``they still haven't gotten the snowpack they need in the Pacific Northwest'' which could limit that region's generating capacity. Still falling short Even if those hydropower imports are available and conservation works as Davis hopes it's likely California would still require the spot market for 11000 megawatts to meet the August demand. That's more than 20 percent of the state's overall power needs. ``All of the surrounding states are buying probably less than 5 percent at most of their energy on the spot market'' said Frank Wolak a Stanford economist who monitors electricity prices for the Independent System Operator. He worries about how much that power could cost and is disturbed that state officials haven't adequately addressed the issue. ``No one has any idea what they are going to do and that is part of the problem'' he said. Officials at Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are particularly concerned. They fear that their company -- which is nearing bankruptcy -- could get stuck for much of the spot market purchases by the Independent System Operator which has threatened to bill the utilities for the cost. Fearing the annual bill for that power could hit $2.4 billion this year PG&E wants the tab sent to the Department of Water Resources which also is buying power on the spot market for the state. But the Department of Water Resources has objected to that idea and the matter is expected to be heard today by the California Public Utilities Commission. ``We're looking for clarity on a number of issues'' regarding how the spot market will work ``and certainly that's one of them'' said Thomas Hannigan the water agency's director. ``I don't think anybody knows the answer of who's going to pay for it'' added PG&E spokesman John Nelson. But Nettie Hoge executive director of the Utility Reform Network in San Francisco said she suspects consumers ultimately will foot the bill. The unfortunate likelihood about spot market purchases is that ``ratepayers are responsible for all of it eventually'' Hoge said. ``It's a very big problem.'' ---- Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors Jason B. Johnson Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday March 7 2001 Industry dreams of building new power plants in east Contra Costa's hills are prompting an angry reaction among residents and elected officials who say they don't want more plants. The conflict was sparked by a vote by county supervisors yesterday to aggressively explore possible sites for new power plants throughout the county. The measure by Supervisors Mark DeSaulnier and Federal Glover which passed on a 4-to-0 vote directs the county administrator and Department of Community Development to compile a report on possible sites within 45 days. Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained after criticizing the plan for potentially repeating the same mistakes that plagued the state's energy deregulation effort by not considering how much energy the state region and county will need in future years and how much power is slated to come online. Gerber said alternative power sources such as solar should also be examined. A site drawing much attention is on top of a deposit of natural gas near the Concord Naval Weapons Station off Highway 4. The owners of 70 acres of land near the station recently formed a company Golden State Power Co. to pursue construction of at least one small peaker plant and a much larger facility capable of producing 600 megawatts. The site could hold up to three small 50-megawatt peaker plants and a larger 15-acre natural gas plant said Steve Thomas managing partner with Golden State. No land use applications have been filed. Thomas said 30 acres could be kept as open space to form a buffer around the project. Both (facilities) are state of the art said Thomas. We believe that the site is ideal. But east county residents at yesterday's meeting blasted the supervisorial measure and the power plant proposal complaining that more plants could put people's health at risk. The region already is home to six power plants. We're going to get a good dose of poor air quality and (negative) health conditions from this said Concord resident Evelyn Frietas. I think we need to stop and think about what we're doing to our quality of life. Dan Torres said the home he bought in 1995 at a new Bay Point development would be alarmingly close to the proposed Golden State site. It will be dragging emissions over our home said Torres. I didn't buy a home on that hill to be surrounded by power plants. There are six power plants in operation in east Contra Costa. Pittsburg already has two power plants and two more under construction. City Council members Frank Aiello and Yvonne Beals said the Antioch-Pittsburg area has done more than its share of energy production. Aiello said Pittsburg will soon produce enough energy to power three million homes in California. When is enough enough? asked Aiello. Pittsburg has shouldered responsibility for a land-fill and two more power plants. At some point you have to say enough. Beals said that while power plants have added millions to the city's general fund the negatives of additional plants could outweigh the benefits. I don't think that Pittsburg or east county should be the dumping ground for energy for California said Beals. ---- Supervisors set search for power plant sites The board also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord By Thomas Peele TIMES STAFF WRITER MARTINEZ -- Contra Costa County supervisors took tentative steps Tuesday toward allowing the construction of at least one small power plant before summer ordering that its staff identify potential sites in unincorporated areas within seven weeks. The board voted 4-0 to search for locations. Third District Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained saying her colleagues lacked a comprehensive context'' to identify sites. I think the board knows just enough to be dangerous'' she said. Gerber said the county should examine the potential for additional power plants within its borders but not investigate individual sites yet. But Fourth District Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier said the action was necessary because of the energy crisis and because of Gov. Gray Davis' call for local governments to help speed the construction of so-called peaker plants before July and August. I wouldn't do this except under an emergency DeSaulnier said after the vote. There are unusual circumstances. We're not talking about putting this in a residential area. Fifth District Supervisor Federal Glover backed DeSaulnier but said he hoped for a location outside his heavily industrialized East County district. There's a lot of concern in East County as to the number of plants he said. DeSaulnier said though that the only logical place for a small plant remains the industrial belt'' stretching along the waterfront from West County to Antioch. He declined to provide specifics but said the only other potential site outside the industrial areas was the Concord Naval Weapons Station property. But he quickly added that he believes the U.S. Department of Defense would never go for it. Also DeSaulnier said he could not rule out the county building the plant itself and entering the electricity-selling market during peak demand times. Board Chairwoman Gayle Uilkema called that idea extremely premature and unlikely. That's a very powerful decision. I do not think we are ready'' she said. The California Energy Commission listed the Equilon refinery in Martinez as one of 32 potential peaker plant sites in the state last week. Peaker plants kick in during peak usage times. Davis called for their quick construction before the height of summer and its energy demand for air conditioning. Plants that generate as much as 50000 megawatts don't need Energy Commission approval. DeSaulnier said he believed a peaker plant could be built about a month after final approval. Supervisors also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord. Walnut Creek commercial real estate developer Steve Thomas announced his intentions for the site north of Highway 4 last week. Construction could take two years. Eric Hasseltine a consultant representing Thomas and what he described as a brand new company for the site the Golden State Power Co. told supervisors that if they intended to speed peaker plant construction they should do what they can to expedite the larger plant. The Thomas site could house a peaker plant until the proposed larger one goes online. A large natural gas line passes under the site. DeSaulnier seemed cautious about the larger proposal which he had described last week as a good site. Uilkema too said she knew too little about it to comment. A resident who lives near the Thomas property asked the board to build it (the larger plant) closer to where you have industrial areas. You have to carefully consider the people who live nearby said Dan Torres 39. Evelyn Freitas of Concord said she lives downwind of the proposed site. Our air quality is going to be worse then it is now she said. Gerber played on the environmental issues saying the county already ranks second statewide to Los Angeles in volume of hazardous materials and amount of electrical generation. ---- Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap (Published March 7 2001) By now California's surreal energy mess has grown from a crisis to a condition. It may not be quite as permanent as say death and taxes but it's still something that could get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Until there's more realistic pricing no gubernatorial pea-under-the-shell buyout scheme will solve it. Beyond the energy crisis however and in many ways similar to it California faces a whole range of other infrastructure problems -- in transportation in water resources and sewer systems in school and university buildings -- that seem once again to be all but forgotten. The Business Roundtable has estimated the need at roughly $90 billion though no number can possibly be exact. What's certain is that after a burst of high-level investment in public facilities during the 1950s and 1960s California's annual capital investment has sunk precipitously -- from an annual $150 per capita in the 1960s according to a set of recent studies for PPIC the Public Policy Institute of California to about $30 in the 1990s. But you probably don't need to tell anyone driving Bay Area or Los Angeles freeways or looking at the ubiquitous portable classrooms those dreary brown boxes that house a fourth of our public school students. Ever since passage of Proposition 13 in 1978 we have been flying the flag of deferred maintenance. As in the state's electricity crisis however there's no way California can effectively address those problems merely by building or bonding itself out of them. In highway construction in developing water resources in finding enough university space to accommodate the Tidal Wave II of students managing demand is likely to be as crucial to any solution as new construction. In the energy market -- and in electricity particularly -- it's been a familiar principle ever since David Roe of the Environmental Defense Fund first persuaded Pacific Gas and Electric that a dollar invested in conservation may be worth as much as the same investment in new generation. But in most other sectors of California's infrastructure state and local it's a lesson still to be learned. There have been scattered attempts to encourage conservation and reduce demand -- significant reduction in water use for example through the installation of low-flow faucets and low-flush toilets some reduction in traffic by using rush-hour diamond lanes or by adjusting highway or (as in New York) bridge tolls to levels of congestion. But as pointed out by David Dowall an urban economist at Berkeley state policy-makers have not really begun to consider how demand management strategies can be applied to infrastructure service areas or how the more efficient use of facilities and more realistic pricing -- highway tolls say or parking fees -- can reduce demand for scarce infrastructure resources. In any case says Dowall in one of the PPIC reports we should pick which major projects we will build not just according to per capita estimates of how much we need but according to how much consumers are willing to pay for them. To avoid hurting the poor congestion-related highway tolls and other tariffs can be rebated on the basis of income. University fees can be means-tested. In California they also could be adjusted to encourage summer school classes and other off-peak uses rather than (as in the past) making UC summer courses more expensive. Given the political and economic uncertainties there's no way to know how far such demand management can be taken. But there's not much doubt that as Dowall and others point out the state's infrastructure planning is a jumble of uncoordinated agency agendas and wish lists. The Legislature last year passed a bill AB 1473 by Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg that requires the governor beginning next year to submit an annual five-year infrastructure plan for state agencies and public schools along with recommendations on how to fund it. In addition Gov. Gray Davis' infrastructure commission is expected to recommend better coordination of infrastructure and land-use planning when it issues its report this spring. That would be a start. As California State Treasurer Phil Angelides has pointed out the state desperately needs to start joint planning -- regional planning -- for housing roads and other resources to reduce the need for long commutes to preserve open space and to bring jobs to where people live and housing to where the jobs are. That would itself reduce demand for more freeway lanes and equally important improve the quality of life. At present most planning for housing roads water systems and other facilities rarely recognizes the regional impact of local decisions. In the East Bay slow-growth forces push well-intended initiatives that would force more development into Tracy or Modesto and further tax the transportation systems to Silicon Valley. In city after city there are beggar-thy-neighbor efforts to grab yet another shopping mall that produces a little extra sales tax revenue for the city that gets it and that often compounds traffic and revenue problems in adjacent communities. In higher education we divide bond proceeds evenly among UC the California State University and the community colleges even though the community colleges serve eight times as many students as UC. We plan road projects according to county not regional priorities. It is all done according to antiquated political and fiscal formulas that often no longer make sense. We don't just need better capital planning we need a whole new planning system. ---- PG&E power plan debated at hearing A PUC meeting on the utility's capacity expansion project for the Tri-Valley follows weeks of protest from officials residents Power upgrade in valley debated By Megan Long TIMES STAFF WRITER SAN FRANCISCO -- Dublin officials and the developer of a Livermore subdivision faced questions Tuesday about their opposition to alternative routes of PG&E's controversial Tri-Valley power upgrade plan -- and answered by restating their long-standing objections. Tuesday's cross-examination came during the third and likely final week of the California Public Utility Commission's evidentiary hearings on the utility's $91 million Tri-Valley 2002 Capacity Increase Project. It has followed weeks of protests of PG&E's upgrade plans by officials and residents of Livermore Pleasanton Dublin and San Ramon. And before the questioning started Dublin Vice Mayor Janet Lockhart reiterated concerns about an alternative route deemed environmentally superior that would place a substation just 1000 feet north of Interstate 580 between Tassajara and Fallon roads. She said that would undermine the results of a 15-year process to plan the eastern development of the city. It's extremely important to the residents of our community to follow a plan we worked hard to produce she said. Dublin officials favor PG&E's proposed placement of the station three miles north of the freeway away from new high-tech company offices and housing developments. Besides the Dublin substation the project calls for construction of a substation in North Livermore expansion of the Pleasanton substation and installation of 23.5 miles of new lines. In response to questions from PUC Administrative Law Judge Michelle Cooke Dublin's public works director Lee Thompson confirmed that the Lin family the owner of the property where the alternative substation would go wasn't interested in selling the land to PG&E. Cooke also asked Thompson to define a discretionary permit which is how city officials said they might treat a permit for a substation. Lee said that type of permit is one the city has the right to approve or not depending on the project's impact. Eddie Peabody Dublin's community development director testified that the zoning for the Lin property accommodates uses such as commercial business research and development and light manufacturing. It would not he said be appropriate for a power substation. He said parcels within the East Dublin area that could host a station would include those zoned for public and semi-public uses including land recently bought by Oracle and Sun Microsystems for new campuses. While Dublin officials testified that one buyer of land in that area paid $86 per square foot others suggested land prices would be inflated to help make a PG&E land buy look prohibitively expensive. An executive of Centex Homes the developer of new houses near Isabel Avenue and Concannon Boulevard objected to an alternative route that would place high-voltage transmission lines overhead along Isabel and Stanley Boulevard. David Barclay president of Centex's Northern California division said that the 80-foot to 150-foot towers would have a severe visual impact on residents of the Prima tract. Ed O'Neill a lawyer for the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association pointed out that existing distribution lines on 50-foot poles on Isabel already mar the view for residents. The Foley family has been ranching on land south of Pleasanton city limits for years said their attorney Kennedy Richardson. The utility's project would place overhead lines and a transmission station on rolling hills that the family envisions as one day being public open space with limited development Richardson said. Lawyers for Pleasanton Livermore Kottinger Ranch and Centex are scheduled to cross-examine a PG&E engineer today about the project's routing. That testimony should be the most controversial of the hearings. Judge Cooke is expected to recommend an alignment by July to the PUC which will make the final decision. ---- NEWS State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50000 homes by August Marshall Wilson 03/08/2001 The San Francisco Chronicle FINAL Page A.20 (Copyright 2001) State energy officials yesterday approved plans to build a temporary electrical plant at San Francisco International Airport that should generate enough juice to power 50000 homes by August. Meeting in Sacramento the Energy Commission voted 4-0 to give the green light to the gas-fired plant. It will operate during peak summer and winter demand to help the state avoid Stage 3 power alerts and rolling blackouts. Texas-based El Paso Merchant Energy Co. won approval under a new state law mandating speedy four-month reviews of so-called peaker plants. It was the only one of seven applications statewide to win approval. The other proposals were withdrawn for various reasons. The 51-megawatt plant formally called the United Golden Gate Power Project is scheduled to be built at the northwest corner of the airport near the United Airlines maintenance center. Within the next few weeks El Paso plans to apply to build a 571- megawatt $400 million plant in the same area company spokesman Jesse Frederick said. It would undergo a separate review by state energy officials. The small peaker plant approved yesterday is to generate electricity beginning around Aug. 1 for up to three years. After the end of three years the plant would be closed or converted to a cleaner-burning system. Under state law a temporary peaker plant is permitted to spew more air pollution than a permanent plant. El Paso's temporary plant is to be built next to a co-generation plant operated by United Airlines. It would use existing connections for natural gas and water supplies and tap into existing power transmission lines. Electricity generated by the plant would be pumped into the state's electrical grid Energy Commission spokesman Gary Fay said. It would also serve as a backup for San Francisco Airport in case of a blackout. No one spoke against the proposed plant at yesterday's commission meeting. The proposal however has been criticized by area residents and environmentalists worried about air pollution. Scott Buschman a professional photographer and San Bruno resident said yesterday it was unjust that state officials 100 miles away in Sacramento approved a Texas company's proposal to put a power plant on land owned by San Francisco. The fact that they approved it without considering the public's concerns foremost air quality is very disturbing he said. Fay said the plant complies with clean-air standards. Answering the criticism about the location of yesterday's deliberation he said three hearings and several workshops were held in communities near the airport. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. ---- Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals By Wall Street Journal staff reporters Rebecca Smith Mitchel Benson and John R. Emshwiller 03/08/2001 The Wall Street Journal A1 (Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) SACRAMENTO Calif. -- Earlier this year Gov. Gray Davis made what may be the biggest bet in the history of the nation's biggest state: that he could tame an out-of-control electricity market and avoid devastating blackouts without busting the state's budget antagonizing its consumers or derailing his own political career. His wager is still on the table but the assumptions that underlie it are looking increasingly shaky these days. The governor has already spent around $2 billion of public money buying hugely expensive wholesale power taking over the role formerly played by the state's near-bankrupt electric utilities. And California will probably be obliged to spend billions more before its electricity market stabilizes and those utilities are restored to some semblance of financial health. Under the governor's plan California aims to recoup the money it is using to buy electricity by issuing $10 billion in bonds. That way it would still have a healthy budget surplus to finance new spending on roads schools and other public services. But there's a potentially big obstacle to this plan. The state Legislature worried about racking up billions in new debt has put limits on the size of any bond offering. In broad terms the Legislature's action would allow the state to borrow only four times as much as it can recover annually from utility customers. Right now that doesn't appear to be much. Under the current rate structure essentially set in place by California's flawed 1996 electricity-deregulation plan consumers pay far less for power than the cost of acquiring it on the wholesale market. Preliminary estimates submitted by utilities last month to the California Public Utilities Commission show the state's share of the proceeds from electricity sales this year could be as little as $241 million -- not enough to support even $1 billion in bond sales under the Legislature's formula. That would leave the state on the hook for much of the money it has already paid for power -- not to mention the billions more Gov. Davis will need to spend. That in turn raises the prospect that California's economy and its credit rating both could deteriorate significantly. But state finance officials say that based on their own projections they will be able to extract enough money to support a $10 billion bond issue. Walking a careful line between fiscal prudence and political survival Mr. Davis and others in his administration are scrambling to come up with ways to get around the legislative restrictions without raising rates for consumers. If I wanted to raise rates I could solve this problem in 20 minutes Mr. Davis says. The governor says he believes that the state can obtain enough affordable power through long-term power-supply contracts to avoid the need for a big rate increase. The billions of dollars the state hopes to borrow would be used to help pay for power until electricity prices drop as they are expected to do when new power plants come online over the next few years. The Davis administration fears that what may be its only other option -- a big increase in retail electric rates -- could prompt angry consumer groups to seek new electricity laws through a statewide ballot initiative during next year's election. That's when Mr. Davis is expected to run for a second term as governor. But trying to save California without rate increases is forcing Mr. Davis to make some colossal gambles with the state's money. State officials estimate that in the next several months California will need to spend as much as $6 billion on power purchases -- equivalent to the state's entire fiscal surplus. Mr. Davis is also looking to spend several billion more to buy the transmission assets of three investor-owned utilities in order to restore two of them to credit-worthiness. He also has announced plans to spend several hundred million dollars more on conservation programs designed to reduce demand while new power plants are being built in the state. In order to limit the state's financial exposure in the meantime the governor and his aides have in some cases ignored state law. They have threatened appointed officials who have stood in the way. And they have sharply restricted the flow of information to the public. None of those steps is expected to do much to reduce state spending on power in the coming months. In a few weeks power usage is expected to begin a sharp seasonal rise as Californians switch on their air conditioners with the coming of warmer weather. By various estimates demand during peak periods this summer could outstrip supply by 10% or several thousand megawatts. That could produce more rolling blackouts like the ones that hit Northern California earlier this year. It is also likely to put strong upward pressure on wholesale electricity prices. Steven Zimmerman managing director of Standard & Poor's Corp. says Mr. Davis and his aides don't have a lot of time to put a cap on the state's financial exposure to the crisis. The credit-rating agency has put the state on credit watch for a possible downgrade which would affect the value of all of California's outstanding public debt. Moody's Investor Service Inc. is also concerned. It said in a recent report that the power crisis could soon seriously threaten the health of the state's economy. Mr. Davis a Democrat and career politician was dealt a bad hand when he took office in 1999. The deregulation plan that sparked the state's electricity crisis was enacted under his predecessor Republican Pete Wilson. But Mr. Davis was slow to react to early signs of trouble this past summer and alarms sounded by members of the state Legislature. By the time Mr. Davis finally sprang into action earlier this year a troublesome power-supply squeeze had escalated into a crisis. In a Jan. 17 declaration of emergency the governor designated the state Department of Water Resources to take the utilities' place as the daily buyer of huge quantities of electricity. His hope: that by making the state the dominant player in California's power sector he would ease electricity producers' concerns about getting paid and give the state enough clout to negotiate lower long-term power prices. Earlier this week Mr. Davis announced final or tentative agreements with 20 power suppliers to furnish the state with a total of 8900 megawatts for periods of as long as 20 years. But the supply situation remains extremely uncertain for this summer when demand probably will top 45000 megawatts. If the state can secure enough power under contract and push down demand through aggressive conservation it might be able to squeak through the summer season. If not it will be forced to keep buying huge amounts of costly power in the cash market. Under deregulation retail electric rates were frozen for several years while wholesale-power costs were free to fluctuate. When the plan was conceived wholesale prices were low and expected to go lower. However a combination of unexpected growth in power demand and a lack of new generating capacity helped produce a supply squeeze. Average wholesale prices more than tripled last year from 1999. And in January those prices were up 10-fold from a year earlier. By then California's two biggest investor-owned utilities -- the Pacific Gas & Electric unit of PG&E Corp. and the Southern California Edison subsidiary of Edison International -- faced imminent financial collapse. They had racked up billions of dollars in wholesale power bills they couldn't afford to pay. As generators began shying away from selling to the two utilities the Clinton administration forced them to sell power into the California market an order left in place during the first weeks of the Bush administration. Still northern California was hit by rolling blackouts on several days in early January. Since then the DWR which does some electricity trading as an adjunct to its main mission of managing the state's giant system of aqueducts and reservoirs has had to learn the ins and outs of power markets on the run. It hasn't been easy. David Mills trading-floor manager for the federal Bonneville Power Administration says the water agency has at times offered to pay $50 to $100 per megawatt hour more than the available market price. They agree to prices that make you wonder says Mr. Mills whose organization markets electricity from federal dams in the Pacific Northwest. You'd at least think they'd check to see what the prevailing price is before throwing out their offer. Mr. Mills says that to cut California some slack he occasionally has instructed his traders to sell at prices lower than the DWR had offered to pay. Ray Hart the water agency deputy director responsible for the power purchasing says he isn't aware of any cases in which the DWR has overpaid. He says his team has been extremely successful by all measures. Ultimately the DWR's trading acumen is far less important than the overall arithmetic of power supply and demand in California. With the price of natural gas that feeds many of the region's generating plants at near record levels and some suppliers reluctant to sell into the troubled California market wholesale electric prices remain stubbornly high and in recent days have again been rising. The Legislature has advanced the DWR about $3 billion from the state's general fund for power purchases. Under emergency legislation passed by the Legislature and signed by Mr. Davis on Feb. 1 the general fund is to be reimbursed from a planned bond sale later this year. But under terms of the emergency law the water agency would have to wrest $2.5 billion a year in revenue from retail electricity rates in order to sell the $10 billion worth of bonds sought by Mr. Davis. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg a Southern California Democrat says the formula was created to ensure that there would be a way to repay the bonds without draining the state's coffers. We didn't want to just open our wallets he says. According to the language of the Feb. 1 law the water agency gets what's left of revenue collected from ratepayers after the utilities pay certain of their own power-supply bills and other expenses. And in their filings with the PUC last month the utilities reckoned under their worst-case scenarios that there would be only $241 million available to the DWR this year. State officials are quietly pushing the PUC to rejigger the formula so that the water department gets more money -- even though that would clash with terms of the Feb. 1 law. Robert Miyashiro deputy director of the Department of Finance says the emergency law was drafted poorly and has led people to believe the DWR only gets the leftover money. He predicts there will be cleanup legislation. At the request of the Davis administration the PUC is considering a plan to use a different revenue-sharing formula than the one in the state law. The proposed new formula was written in close consultation with Mr. Davis's Finance Department says PUC President Loretta Lynch who supports the initiative and is hoping to rush it through. The effort has drawn some opposition. Commissioner Richard Bilas at a recent PUC meeting questioned the legality of the commission attempting to change a formula set by the Legislature. PG&E is even more emphatic since the DWR's extra money could come at the utility's expense. The formula threatens to undo the very financial protections for the utilities that [the new law] attempted to provide the utility said in a recent filing with the PUC. As politicians and regulators wrestle with that issue the Davis administration has taken a step to reduce the outflow of state cash that also seems to conflict with the Feb. 1 law. It was widely assumed that the law required the DWR to buy any electricity the state needed to keep its lights on. However on many occasions the DWR has refused to buy power on the grounds that it was too expensive citing a portion of the new law that urges the agency to hold down costs. The task of covering any remaining shortfall has passed to the California Independent System Operator which manages the state's energy grid and is charged with buying power when necessary to avert shortages. However the ISO doesn't have any power-purchasing money of its own and the major parties it would normally bill are PG&E and Edison whose inability to pay their power bills was the reason the state started buying electricity in the first place. Amid criticism of its stance from generators utilities and Wall Street the DWR says it has started covering more of the utilities' electricity costs. The water agency is now buying 95% to 99% of what California needs in a given day says the agency's Mr. Hart. But increased buying only adds to the uncertainty about the eventual tab. The state's legislative analyst Elizabeth Hill recently recommended that lawmakers hold off considering more than $2 billion in state spending on items ranging from college construction to beach cleanups because of continuing questions about the financial impact of the electricity crisis. Like others Ms. Hill complains that the governor's office and state agencies haven't been forthcoming with information. Indeed the DWR refuses to say precisely how much power it is purchasing and at what prices though it has on several occasions gone back to the Legislature for more money. State officials say that data on its purchasing activities would give suppliers an advantage in continuing electricity-supply contract talks. State Controller Kathleen Connell who is running for mayor of Los Angeles in an April election recently announced plans to post state power-spending information on her department's Web site. But within 24 hours Ms. Connell suspended that plan after discussions with senior Davis administration officials. I feel very strongly that this information should be publicly released says Ms. Connell. I just don't want to do anything that would weaken the state's effectiveness in negotiating. In an effort to more tightly control events the governor obtained legislative approval to abolish the 26-member ISO board which was made up of everyone from utility executives to representatives of consumer groups. He then appointed a new five-member board. To ensure a quick transition the California attorney general threatened the old board members with fines of as much as $5000 each if they didn't immediately relinquish their positions. All did. I was offended at the heavy-handed treatment says Karen Johanson a former ISO board member. One of the first acts of the ISO's new board was to close a meeting about the electricity crisis. The former ISO board routinely held such meetings in public. ISO attorneys say the meeting was largely designed as a private briefing for new board members and that the organization is committed to keeping its deliberations as open as possible. The Wall Street Journal and other news organizations have unsuccessfully challenged the closure in Sacramento state court. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Gine Project- Briefing book sections DRAFT Body:: I agree. I am almost through it -- and while there are improvements per our suggestions from the first draft -- there are both substantive and format problems -- i.e. it does not read very well in places aside from substance. Will fax Amr my comments on the text and leave with DC colleagues as I will be up in the Senate on RTOs this afternoon. Thanks. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Public Policy Contacts for California Body:: I kept your contact list but now I can't find the CV you sent. Would you mind resending? Kevin Scott on 06/20/2001 02:02:00 PM Please respond to [email protected] To: Steve Kean <[email protected]> Jeff Skilling <[email protected]> cc: Subject: Public Policy Contacts for California Jeff and Steve ? As you requested I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts?for California.? It is composed of professionals from an array of public private and non-profit backgrounds.? I have worked in some capacity with?each of these people?and most I know quite well.? ? Please call me for further background. ? Kevin 213-926-2626 ? Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Short Biography for Highlands Forum XVII Meeting Body:: Please update my bio to include Human Resources and add some boilerplate on Enron. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: Okay so I didn't know what a DRIP is but now that I do I'm sending this to you. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Body:: Please respond to ANDREW - 7138536278 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO Greg Whalley President & COO Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures') which have been revised as of November 15 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information our reputation for integrity and EWS and its employees from legal liability. You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419 Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544 Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214 Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Transatlantic meetings Body:: fyi ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Body:: To:HAEDICKE MARK - 7138536544 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures') which have been revised as of November 15 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information our reputation for integrity and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419 Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544 Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214 Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Lockyer Fires Earthy Attack at Energy Exec Body:: Jeff =20 FYI - Strong and colorful words from a powerful man. =20 Given Lockyer's abilities position and and ambition I would advise build= ing bridges and mending fences while this is still at the taunting stage. = He wants your attention. Knowing him I'd say that a direct and friendly= call from you or Ken today followed by a meeting would go a long way. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 =20 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] News Politics Entertainment music = movies art TV restaurants [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jo= bs homes cars rentals classifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shop= ping [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] California= [IMAGE] [IMAGE] TOP STORIES * Bishop Asked to Quit for Defying Churc= h * Wide-Ranging Debate Reveals Much Accord * Limit on New Sea Wall= s Urged MORE [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] STORIES BY DATE FOR THIS SECT= ION 5/23 | 5/22 | 5/21 | 5/20 | 5/19 | 5/18 | 5/17 [IMAGE] = DAILY SECTIONS Front Page A Section California [IMAGE] Business = Sports Calendar [IMAGE] So. Cal. Living EditorialsLetters Op/Ed W= EEKLY SECTIONS Health Food [IMAGE] Tech Times [IMAGE] Highway 1 = SUNDAY SECTIONS Book Review Opinion Real Estate [IMAGE] Calendar Mag= azine Travel [IMAGE] TV Times Work Place [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [= IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Marketplace Find a home car rental job = pet merchandise boat plane or RV classifieds Place an Ad [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] L.A. Times Subscription Ser= vices Subscribe Change of Address Vacation Stops Suspend Delivery = College Discount Gift Subscriptions Mail Subscriptions FAQ [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Ads from the Newspape= r See this week's ads [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Edition Oran= ge County Valley Ventura County National Community Papers [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Books Columnists Crossword Education = Food Health Highway Horoscope Lottery Magazine Obituaries Readi= ng by Real Estate Religion Science So.Cal. Living Special Report= s Sunday Opinion Tech Times Times Poll Traffic Weather Workplace SI= TE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SHOP 'TIL YOUR LAPTOP DROPS [IMA= GE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shopping [IMAGE] Search Prod= ucts Stores [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] = =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] Wednesday May 23 2001 | [IMAGE]Print this story [I= MAGE] Lockyer Fires Earthy Attack at Energy Exec By JENIFER WARREN Ti= mes Staff Writer SACRAMENTO--In a dramatic escalation of energy cr= isis rhetoric California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer this week suggested the = chairman of a Houston-based power company should be locked in a prison cel= l with an amorous tattooed inmate named Spike. Lockyer who is inve= stigating whether energy firms have manipulated prices on the wholesale el= ectricity market made the comment in an interview with the Wall Street Jo= urnal that appeared Tuesday. I would love to personally escort [En= ron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share wit= h a tattooed dude who says 'Hi my name is Spike honey' Lockyer said. = Enron spokesman Mark Palmer called the comment counterproductive rh= etoric that does not merit a response. But other industry repres= entatives denounced the remark as outrageous especially because neither= Lockyer's office nor any investigative panel has filed charges against En= ron or other companies. You'd expect that the state's chief legal c= ounsel would file charges first and make public statements second said G= ary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum an association of energy = producers and traders. We're very disappointed with his choice of words = which don't exactly fit the profile of his office. In an interview = Tuesday Lockyer said he decided to ratchet up the commentary to put [e= nergy companies] on notice that we are not afraid of them and have the w= ill to prosecute. What I'm trying to do is let these economic buc= caneers understand that if we catch them they're going to be prosecuted= Lockyer said. Just because they're multimillionaires and run big corpora= tions it doesn't provide them with immunity. The attorney general = is investigating whether power company officials tried to maximize profits= through illegal manipulation of prices on the wholesale energy market. S= everal panels including a state Senate committee and the California Publi= c Utilities Commission are conducting similar probes. On Tuesday L= ockyer announced that three power companies have agreed to turn over docum= ents subpoenaed months ago by his investigators. The attorney general went= to court to obtain the documents after the companies failed to meet a Mar= ch 19 deadline to hand them over. Lockyer said the forthcoming docu= ments would help his office as it sifts through mountains of evidence in s= earch of possible violations of antitrust or unfair business practice laws= . Evidence is accumulating that certainly infers illegal activity= Lockyer said. But we need to make sure it's compelling and clear enough = that you can convince a jury. Lockyer said he singled out Enron's = chairman because the Houston company is the world's largest energy trader. = At least one observer found Lockyer's comments refreshingly candid.= Harry Snyder a senior advocate of Consumers Union said Let Lockyer be= Lockyer. * * * Times staff writer Dan Morain contributed to this s= tory. Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories = about: Bill Lockyer Enron Corp Kenneth L Lay Utilitiy Rates En= ergy - California Utilities - California Electricity . You will not = be charged to look for stories only to retrieve one. =09 News Politics Entertainment music movies art TV restaurants = [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jobs homes cars rentals cla= ssifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shopping [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09 G= et Copyright Clearance Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times Click for permi= ssion to reprint (PRC# 1.528.2001_000043205) =09 [IMAGE] =09 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process Body:: My suggestions are attached. Take the gloves off. James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON [email protected] Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as Monday am. Jim What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Barton,Tauzin letter to Gov. Davis Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: FERC course on for Thurs, July 26, 1-4 p.m. Body:: Great news. With respect to the Commissoners I think it makes sense to go back through Ellen and ask if she could set up meetings with a few commissioners ater the staff briefing. wgramm <[email protected]> on 07/17/2001 03:23:19 PM Please respond to <[email protected]> To: Jerry Ellig <[email protected]> Steve Kean <[email protected]> cc: Susan Dudley <[email protected]> Subject: FERC course on for Thurs July 26 1-4 p.m. Susan got it done -- it'll be Thursday July 26 1-4 p.m. at FERC (a room on the 3rd floor?). Susan has talked with Bill Albrecht. He'll probably be coming in on Wed. p.m. Steve any ideas about a Commissioner strategy? (invite them to attend if the FERC folks agree ask the FERC folks to do the inviting ask the FERC folks to help set up meetings afterwards or a follow on if they like what we do and think it useful for Commissioners try to do a walkaround -- that is offer to have Jerry Bill Susan visit commissioners individually Friday a.m. after the course or Thursday a.m. before the course?) Wendy Wendy Gramm Regulatory Studies Program Mercatus Center George Mason University 703-993-4884 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Bloomberg story Body:: Any follow up questions or India press about the bloomeberg story I sent you yesterday? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential issues Body:: As requested I investigated potential government approvals or potential political interventions if India assets/investments are sold. My understanding from the India CFO (in response to my query about approvals necessary for any sell-down like we are working on for Dabhol) is that it depends to whom we sell. If we sell to an Indian company then the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) must approve taking dollars out of India. If a sale is made outside India no Indian approvals are necessary. There are however many other approvals that would need to be obtained -- specifically from lenders and counterparties pursuant to project documents. I have not analyzed these financial-related approvals. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: executives Body:: Jeff Shankman (COO of Enron Global Markets) is interested in going and would like to see the schedule. I told him you would send it to him. Jeff can also help us get our message across on the problems in California's power markets (Dasovich can fill you in). Also John ( Woody) Wodraska managing director of Azurix is interested in attending. Please get in touch with him. I haven't heard from Stan yet. Susan M Landwehr 08/07/2000 10:26 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@Enron Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: executives Rick--just a reminder that I am not aware of anyone from the executive ranks that are interested in attending the democrat convention at this point. I believe that you and Steve Kean had asked the question about both conventions to those folks but I wanted to make sure that we had covered the bases. Stan Horton is the president of INGAA this year and they are having an event on Sunday the 13th but I have not been made aware of whether he will be attending and whether he would be interested in partcipating in any of Enron's other events. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western Electric Situation Body:: I attended both the House and Senate energy committee hearings today. House hearing was in the Barton Subcommittee (Energy & Air Quality). Senate hearing was on last week's FERC order on a soft price cap and related issues. The House witnesses were dominated by California officials: Cal Energy Commission Cal Air Resources Board Chairman of Gov Davis Generation Implementation Task Force. In addition there were witnesses from the Western Area Power Admin and Bonneville PA. The Senate witnesses were the three FERC commissioners. HIghlights Chairman Barton said it is still his intention to try to mark up the Barton bill H.R. 1647 next week (many on and off the Subcommittee doubt this will happen we are gathering political intelligence on those prospects and will report back with more information and conclusions once that is done) Chairman Barton also said he may go to California next week. There was considerable emphasis at both hearings about the alleged role that higher natural gas prices into California play in the electric power rate increases several witnesses focused on difference in alleged transportation costs for similar differences between California and non-CA states FERC at the Senate hearing said that today the commission announced a staff technical conference for later this month on all aspects of the natural gas market as it relates to California a House member from Southern Illinois coal country attacked California for using only natural gas in its new power plants. The House witnesses primarily BPA but also the California witnesses attacked the negawatt provision in sec. 102 of the Barton bill the criticism was that BPA would be forced to purchase power on the open market at a high price since it is short sell it to the DSIs under contract let the DSI sell it at market rates and capture the difference BPA witness said that thus sec. 102 would make it difficult if not impossible to implement their strategy to avoid as much as a 200 percent rate increase on 10/1/01 BPA testimony will make it tough for Members of Congress from that service region to support sec. 102. Both hearings also touched on how difficult it would be to actually devise a price cap at the House hearing none of those advocating a price cap among the witnesses could answer excellent questions about exactly how this could be done the witnesses just said cost plus a reasonable profit and said leave the details to FERC at afternoon Senate hearing Chairman Hebert had the staff bring in 15 boxes from one FP&L case to show how a price cap would take too long to bring any relief to California this summer he said last week's soft price cap is much better. Also on the price cap Rep. Walden (R-OR) got the Cal Energy Comm chair to admit that if the price caps had been in place earlier California would NOT have taken the conservation and new generation steps that it has taken recently. The interplay among the FERC commissioners was much more contentious than it was a House hearing on Tuesday although it could have been worse when Senate Chairman Murkowski (R-AK) said that help is on the way in the form of the nominees for the two vacancies Sen. Dorgan (D-ND) made a comment that suggested that the confirmation process will not be smooth the same concern came from the interplay among the Senators which was also somewhat contentious at times. Please advise if you have any questions or would like further details. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Something to shoot at--California Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Memo For Thursday Meeting Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: VP Candidate Greg Shea Body:: OK by me. From: John J on 04/30/2001 11:30 AM Sent by: Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate To: Wade Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cliff Baxter/ENRON@enronXgate James A Hughes/ENRON@enronXgate Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate Stephanie Harris/ENRON@enronXgate Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Loretta Brelsford/ENRON@enronXgate Dolores Fisher/Enron@EnronXGate Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jana L Connie Blackwood/ENRON@enronXgate Mrudula Cliff Baxter/ENRON@enronXgate Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate Lucy Marshall/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Kathy McMahon/NA/Enron@Enron Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES Philippe A Bibi/ENRON@enronXgate Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES James Derrick/ENRON@enronXgate Steve Elliott/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron Jeffrey McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT Jeffrey A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate Jeffrey Sherrick/ENRON@enronXgate John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES G G Garcia/ENRON@enronXgate Susan Skarness/ENRON@enronXgate Karen K Heathman/ENRON@enronXgate Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES Bridget Maronge/ENRON@enronXgate Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT Sue Ford/ENRON@enronXgate Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Mercedes Estrada/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Christina Grow/ENRON@enronXgate Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT Laura Taylor/ENRON@enronxgate Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES Suzanne Danz/Corp/Enron@ENRON Peggy McCurley/ENRON@enronXgate Marsha Schiller/ENRON@enronXgate Tammie Schoppe/HOU/ECT@ECT Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate Jennifer Burns/ENRON@enronXgate Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES Leah Rijo/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Kathy Campos/ENRON@enronXgate Julie Armstrong/Corp/Enron@ENRON Kelly Johnson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Rebecca Carter/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: VP Candidate Greg Shea I would like to pursue an offer to Mr. Shea prior to the next Executive Committee meeting on May 7 2001. Please forward your comments or questions by Tuesday May 1 2001 so that I can extend the offer by Wednesday May 2 2001. You will find attached the recommendation letter and his resume. Regards John Lavorato Tammie Schoppe on behalf of John Lavorato. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: [Second Delivery: WPTF Friday Amen Burrito] Body:: Sorry about this gang but my new computer messed up the e-mail list. It's 4 am and I think I have fixed it. Maybe. Bear with me if you are getting this for the second time this morning. gba X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Date: Fri 04 Aug 2000 01:42:26 -0700 From: Gary Ackerman <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Organization: Foothill Services X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh U PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webmaster <[email protected]> Subject: WPTF Friday Amen Burrito Content-Type: multipart/alternative THE FRIDAY BURRITO ...more fun than a fortune cookie and at least as accurate. Everyone is getting into the act. When I started this gig I was the only guy in town writing to folks like you about the power industry in California. I wrote about what?s new what?s happening and all the important stuff. This week Governor Gray Davis decided to write his own Burrito. His epistle got more press than mine but why is he muscling in on my turf? Not to be outdone PUC President Loretta Lynch released a report which looks into every facet of California?s power business. No stone left unturned. I?m telling you there isn?t enough room in this business for all of us. They need to clear out. With people like Herr (Hair?) Peace Governor I?m-Not Mr.-Rogers Davis and Let?s Do Lynch who needs a Friday Burrito? They re-define our reality each week with mind-numbing aplomb. For example starting in early June the PX was ordered to compete for business against other Qualified Trading Vehicles. Then two weeks later the Energy F_hrer legislated that idea to an early death which kept the status quo for at least one year. This week the PUC approved 5-year bilateral deals for PG&E and SCE thereby opening the PX to competition and emasculating the PX?s Block Forward Market. Zip bam boom. I can?t wait to see what next week will bring. I hear Senator Bowen is holding Committee hearings on re regulating the industry and the Governor?s new Energy Security Council will meet to decide six things: What?s for lunch? Who will sit at the head of the table? Does anyone have good seats for next week?s Democratic convention? Is there anyone we haven?t indicted yet in the power industry? Who will crank up the air conditioning in this room? It?s getting too warm. Then they will collect data from innocent businesses under subpoena ignore the facts and publish a report. It makes one want to take a deep breath and inhale the scented fumes of democracy. You know I can?t think about where to begin so let?s start somewhere. >>> Things on the Island of California @@@ Is there anyone left at SDG&E with a brain? @@@ The PUC issues its scathing report @@@ The ISO invokes $250 price caps. Duh! >>> Things at the throne of FERC @@@ Amen for the Morgan Stanley Order >>> Odds and Ends (_!_) >>> Things on the Island of California @@@ Is there anyone left at SDG&E with a brain? Well the answer very clearly is no. I have been astounded by repeated attempts of SDG&E?s most senior people to ape humans but instead they mimic apes. Consider the following. First they waltz their default customers into the summer with little of no protection from price spikes in the wholesale market. Forgivable in that it is human to err. The prices skyrocket in June and they start looking for who to blame. _Must be them damn independent generatorsO say their managers. Gary Cotton informs the ISO Governing Board that hedging SDG&E?s position in the Block Forward Market wouldn?t have made any difference. There?s one nobel laureate who missed his prime. Next under pressure they ask for help from suppliers and anyone else who will assist the utility and their customers. Nine offers show up at their table and they can?t choose any of them. Again Mr Cotton tells his fellow ISO Governing Board members that these things take time and we don?t to rush since there are many legislative barriers and well the surfing was good this week so why spoil it? Now they are in a panic because the Energy F_hrer is visiting old ladies living in trailer parks advising them not to pay their SDG&E electricity bill and to continue to operate their air conditioners. SDG&E puts a full page ad in the local newspaper telling everyone that SDG&E is doing everything it can to lower their electric bills including asking the ISO for a $250 price cap but the public can help by calling the ISO [address and phone number provided in the ad] and urging them to lower the cap. I always thought the location of the ISO was a State secret for security reasons. No secrets in San Diego. But we are not done. No sir we are not. Those buffalo heads who run that company decide they will win a gold star on their collective foreheads and implement one of the four resolutions passed by the Electric Oversight Board. The one they pick is to petition FERC on an expedited basis to cap at $250 the price at which sellers may bid energy or ancillary services into the ISO and the PX. The primary reason is that Western power markets are not workably competitive. In other words they want FERC to set a max price on what generators can sell in addition to the price limit at which the ISO can buy! What I find most astounding about this double talk is that SDG&E continues to collect tons of money from the sales of regulatory must run energy into the PX. These are sales from their stranded assets. Their grief hasn?t abated their greed. So to recap SDG&E missed the boat on price hedging failed to win consumer confidence in public meetings asked for help from suppliers and did nothing in response then filed at FERC to cap the sale price because the wholesale market into which they sell (over-priced?) energy is not workably competitive. Too much time in the direct sun light. >>> Things on the Island of California @@@ The PUC issues its scathing report The PUC report released yesterday is a gem with which I have not spent enough time. I only read the Executive Summary and that only because our counsel Dan Douglass forwarded me a copy. Let me pick out some of the gems in President Lets Do Lynch?s burrito. I would recommend reading the whole text if you have time and if you seek perverse entertainment. _California is experiencing major problems with electricity supply and pricing caused by policies and procedures adopted over the past ten years. _ Since June wholesale prices for electrical power in California have increased on average 270% over the same period in 1999 resulting in over $1 billion in excess payments for electricity. _Hot weather aging power plant and transmission infrastructure and dysfunctional bidding behavior in the wholesale power markets combined to drive prices up ... _Because of serious market defects and tight supply of electricity purchasers of California power will likely pay billions more in electricity costs this year. Moreover these price increases do not necessarily fund new investments in electricity supply or delivery reliability - they may flow solely to power producer profit margins. _Despite the Electricity Oversight Board's legislative mandate to oversee those institutions we have been unable to obtain [bid] data. Nevertheless ... we believe enough evidence of questionable behavior exists that the Attorney General should conduct an investigation into these statewide market practices coordinating with other State agencies including the PUC and the EOB. Such an investigation would provide the factual foundation that California policy makers and regulators need to recover any illegally obtained profits. _A momentous consequence of California's attempt to create a market in electricity is that the federal government now regulates California's electric system. Washington D.C. now controls pricing decisions directly at the wholesale level and indirectly at the retail level and to the extent that supply incentives are correlated to prices Washington D.C. now affects California's ability to attract new investment in power plants. _Past administrations' willingness to cede the State's authority to the federal government combined with the legislative creation of two non-public supervisory organizations that have no duty to protect the public or consider the retail customer. The Independent System Operator (ISO) and the Power Exchange (PX) the nonprofit private corporations that operate the State's transmission system and control wholesale pricing policies are governed by boards whose members can have serious conflicts of interest. Some of these board members or their companies financially benefit from higher prices in electricity markets. Neither of these private organizations is accountable to the State or its consumers .... _Despite the federalization and the fragmentation of the State's electric services the State of California should protect its businesses and consumers from cartel pricing collusive behavior inadequate power plant maintenance and lack of market planning for adequate electricity supplies. _California consumers and businesses deserve to know in advance - as San Diegans did not this summer - how and when the price of an essential service like electricity will double. California is now largely constrained by federal mandates from providing comprehensive retail price relief as long as wholesale prices remain so high. If California tried to re-impose a price freeze in San Diego now federal regulators would likely prevent that action. ... Short-term price relief however cannot resolve market gaming or fundamental wholesale pricing problems controlled by federal regulators. _We have been precluded from obtaining the data necessary to know if the ISO and PX failed to detect manipulation and gaming on several fronts. We do not know how market players acted in price offering and bidding and scheduling. The FERC has just announced an inquiry into national pricing and energy market issues. California should not wait for national findings before it investigates California market practices. We recommend that the California Attorney General immediately subpoena relevant records and data to determine the pricing and offering behavior of market participants the actions of the ISO and its board members and the actions of generators in supplying California's energy needs. _Ten Actions to Consider or Act Upon to Prevent Current Electricity Problems From Spreading in 2001: ... 2. Create a California Energy Council modeled on the National Security Council to unify State action to resolve energy problems and to perform integrated energy planning 3. Ask FERC for extended wholesale price cap authority to moderate California wholesale market pricing 4. Ask FERC to recognize the defects in the California and western regional markets and find that no competitive market exists in California power markets ... 8. Eliminate potential conflicts of interest in ISO/PX stakeholder boards 9. Improve California's ability to obtain ISO and generator data and enhance the State's enforcement capability for power plant maintenance price manipulation and generation gaming consistent with protection of proprietary business information 10. Provide the EOB with effective enforcement ability and additional oversight authority for the ISO and PX. _Ten Issues to Consider or Act Upon Within the Next Six Months: ... 4. Streamline state power plant siting procedures consistent with environmental requirements and prioritize applications to advance clean BACT+ power plant proposals. 5. Institute use-it -or- lose-it permitting power plant licensing and emissions credits rules to ensure power plants get built ... 8. Reform PX pricing protocols and structures to lower wholesale and retail prices and reduce excess profitsO I told you I don?t need to write a Burrito anymore. The Democrats in Sacramento are doing that for me. Welcome comrade. >>> Things on the Island of California @@@ The ISO invokes $250 price caps. Duh! It is really hard to describe the drama of an ISO Governing Board meeting especially when our favorite topic arises. It seems the only time the Board becomes animated is when one of three issues are on the agenda: price caps FTRs and priorities for software enhancements. Otherwise its pretty much hum-drum. %Round and %round we went once again. A few more forced votes tipped the scale in favor of the cap. There were 15 yes votes which included a forced yes vote from our friend Jerry Toenyes by order of Secretary of Energy Mr. Richardson. [Jerry did you realize that the last letters of your name could be re-arranged to spell _NO ET YESO? Kind of a french thing.] I?m sorry about that vote Jerry. You still go in my book as one of the brave and bold for standing up to that sort of intimidation for so long. Your picture in the SF Chron said it all. The brave souls who stood tall and voted NO included David Parquet (Enron) Jan Smutny-Jones (IEP) Barbara Barkovich (CLECA) Caolyn Kehrein (CMA) Dan Kirshner (EDF) and Stacy Roscoe (Procter & Gamble). Now I must admit that Dynegy?s Greg Blue did help by voting a Texas No spelled _A-B-S-T-A-I-NO. I have instructed Dynegy trader Dave Francis in Houston to work with Greg to correct that problem. We?re going to work things out. The Energy F_hrer addressed the Board again. I didn?t mind that I only had a few brief very brief moments to address the Board and Herr (Hair?) Peace got over 20 minutes. That didn?t bother me at all. He did more damage to himself in 20 than I could do in 2. He blasted away at everyone who opposed him. He pined about Camden quitting the Board. He said he knew how prices and markets work that it isn?t the way those academic egg-head FERC-loving economists tell you who pray to the gods of competition. He lambasted WAPA for withholding generation to protect fish and wildlife (what was that all about?). He predicted that on Thursday?s PUC meeting he and all the other powerful Democrats Republicans and angry citizens of San Diego would demand that the PUC impose a rate cap on retail electric rates in San Diego that are just and reasonable (it didn?t happen). And on and on and on. This man is very delusional. He believes that Steve and only Steve Peace can save the world. He believes that political will trumps judicial quasi-judicial or independent Board actions. This man makes relevant all the abstract musings of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) ... The will to power the ?bermensch the transvaluation of values etc. But we are getting under (uber?) his skin with the help of the press. Wednesday afternoon I called Commissioner Dick Bilas to see if he thought whether the next day?s PUC meeting was going to be a roll over. Dick said he got a call from Peace and that Peace said he would not come to the meeting. Apparently Peace had received a lot of press and all of it bad. That?s the thin line of freedom which keeps tyranny at least one step away from our front door. >>> Things at the throne of FERC @@@ Amen for the Morgan Stanley Order And now the good news. You deserve this. FERC gave the California market a little wiggle room last Friday. FERC issued a last minute reply to the complaint by Morgan Stanley Capital Group relating to the ISO?s intent to lower the price cap. FERC denied the complaint but they didn?t waste time with an Order to simply deny a complaint. FERC danced on the head of the ISO and pulled the bite out of the price cap. Here are some excerpts: _We accepted this [Amendment 21] not because it was a cap on sellers? prices but because it would promote order and transparency in the market by clearly telling sellers of the maximum price the ISO was willing to pay and allowing sellers to make informed economic choices on whether to sell in the ISO market or to sell elsewhere... _ ... The ISO has no more or less ability to procure capacity and energy than any other buyer of these services ... If the ISO is unable to elicit sufficient supplies at or below its announced purchase price ceiling (because generators are free to sell elsewhere if they choose) it will have to raise its purchase price to the level necessary to meet its needs. ... Therefore an increase in out-of-market (OOM) calls for generation may be necessary to maintain system reliability. Because the current payment for OOM is not subject to a maximum purchase price the resulting overall payments may be higher. _To the extent the ... ISO Board resolution contemplates implementing a directive that generators must bid their capacity into the ISO markets under any circumstances (e.g. when system load exceeds 38000 MW) such a requirement is not permitted by our ... Order and the ISO tariff. ... Future implementation of the ISO Board resolution with regard to a requirement to sell would require significant revisions to the ISO market rules. Such market changes could not become effective absent a corresponding amendment to the ISO tariff which would have to be filed under section 205 of the FPA.O Well. What do you think about that? Just wait. Here is what the sleeping bear Commissioner Hebert said in his concurring remarks: _Getting to the bottom of the problem in my view requires us to begin a proceeding to rescind our approval of the ISO as the operator of the California grid. The record supports such a move. ... A memorandum to the ISO from a stakeholder who resigned from the governing board eloquently brings to our attention repeated attempts to undermine the independence of the ISO. The memorandum also thoughtfully outlines consequences to the markets of a return to %command and control.? _Because these allegations come from a non-market participant especially should we take heed. We must also take notice of the public pressure on the Board to compromise its independence.O Amen brother amen. >>> Odds and Ends (_!_) As you can imagine this week like an endless string of weeks before this has been interminable. I get about three phone calls a day from press reporters very little of which ever sees print. My shtick is just too complex for casual readers. But I do notice that the reporters are asking better questions. The public is becoming more savvy. The information flow is moving in our favor and will disarm the forces of evil in about 10 years. I have other problems on my mind. I am working on a new computer system. Really it?s just an upgrade of an older computer that is a bit faster than the laptop I tried to upgrade very unsuccessfully. As a result of the all the new hardware and software I purchased my office looks like a war zone with an odd mix of PUC service copies computer documentation and diskettes laying all around. Quite a mess. Prepare for the future. Our next general meeting is scheduled for Thursday and Friday October 5 and 6 at Moro Bay. Barb Ennis will prepare a blurb for us in next week?s Burrito about room reservations timing golf etc. Our guest speakers will include MSC Chairman Professor Frank Wolak who will talk on the subject of his choice Ms. Irene Moosen of Grueneich Resource Advocates who will make a presentation on the distributed generation case before the PUC and William Freddo of PG&E National Energy Group who will give us some education on operating a power plant inside the New England ISO. Now for your daily bread provided this week by Dan Douglass. Last week we had a joke about Catholics. This week it?s agnostics. ===================== An atheist was taking a walk thru the woods admiring all that the accident of evolution had created. What majestic trees! What powerful rivers! What beautiful animals! he said to himself. As he was walking alongside the river he heard a rustling in the bushes behind him. As he turned to look he saw a 7 foot grizzly bear charging towards him. He ran as fast as he could up the path. He looked over his shoulder and saw that the bear was closing in on him. He tried to run even faster so scared that tears were coming to his eyes. His heart was pumping frantically as he tried to run even faster but he tripped and fell on the ground. He rolled over to pick himself up and saw the bear right on top of him raising its paw to kill him. At that instant he cried out Oh my God! And time stopped. The bear froze. The forest was silent. The river even stopped flowing. A bright light shone upon the man and a voice out of the sky said You deny my existence all these years teach others I don't exist and even credit my creation to a cosmic accident and now do you expect me to help you out of this predicament? Am I to count you as a believer? The atheist ever so proud looked into the light and said It would be rather hypocritical to ask to be counted as a believer after all these years but could you make the bear a believer? Very well said the voice. And the light went out the river flowed the sounds of the forest continued and the bear brought both paws together bowed his head and said Lord I thank you for this food which I am about to receive. ================== Amen. And have a great weekend. Oh and thanks to all of you who sent me happy birthday wishes. It was very much appreciated. KSB gba - att1.htm What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product Body:: The DC Team (Linda Robertson Ray Alvarez) attended and reported on today's prehearing conference in the California case. The schedule has moved back about a full month mostly due to the time required by PX and CAISO to produce mitigated market clearing prices and to re-run settlements based on those revised prices. Testimony by Enron on what it is owed is now not due until October 26. In addition to adopting this schedule the ALJ reported that the FERC likely not rule on petitions for rehearing of the July 25 order until October 15 2001. A revised schedule is attached. (To see how it has changed you can toggle Track Changes | Hightlight on Screen on and off) The PNW case is moving along on schedule changes attached are corrections rather than actual changes to the schedule. Notably in today's case Seattle and Tacoma waived all cross on TFG witnesses including Enron's. Alan Comnes What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Star Wars Event - Monday, 6/11/01 Body:: Thanks I will attend. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: ticket Body:: Pani Urszulo Czy to jest Air France? Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Purely Personal <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: Please put on my calendar and call to confirm my attendance. thanks ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Organizational Changes Body:: Mary -- see attached Stacy Guidroz@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/22/99 09:36 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Organizational Changes The following is a message from Sanjay Bhatnagar: Organizational changes in India (South Asia) Region which includes India Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The team is lead by Sanjay Bhatnagar CEO. Wade Cline has joined the team as the Chief Operating Officer. Other management appointments include: (1) Bobby Farris will lead all development efforts in the region (2) Raj Thapar will lead the M&A efforts (3) Bangladesh will continue to be managed by David Howe who will report in to Bobby Farris (4) P. Sreekumar leads up the accounting function as Chief Accounting Officer assisted by Carol Hoes in Houston (5) Neil McGregor heads up the Dabhol Power Company as its President and reports directly into Sanjay and Wade (6) Communication is currently being lead by Sanjay (7) Ranabir Dutt leads the Finance Team What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Follow Up On California Information Body:: Alan and I spoke about point #2 on the comparison benchmark. At this point we may be able to just say it is based on a comparison of the contracts with today's forward market and gloss over the exact forward curve we used. Of course if there is a way to come up with a similar number using publicly available data (or if we are willing to provide our numbers if pressed) then all the better. In the mean time should I hold off on using the $13.8 billion number until I hear back from you about the conversation with Steve? Also do I understand correctly from Alan that the $13.8 billion figure is NOT comparing the long term contracts California signed with recent spot market prices but rather is a comparison of the contracts to our present forward pricing curves? From you e-mail it is the latter I take it. As to point #1 on the deal last year we just need a similar back of the envelope calculation on what California could have saved had California taken us up on the offers we and others made. Any guidance on where to get that would be most helpful. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Report for Prof. Duffie Body:: Amitava Let's talk about it on Monday. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: EES Associate and Analyst Mid-year 2001 PRC - SAVE THE DATE Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Ross Perots EMS company Body:: We can create significant mutual benefit by partnering with a firm which is focussed on developing IT systems for bulk power systems: We need to take our deregulation model to the next level of detail by having IT solutions which will support our view of how the market ought to work. The IT firm would benefit from our access to the policy makers (domestic and international) whose decisions will make the IT firm's systems either successful or obsolete. Call me if you would like to discuss. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enrons Global Asset Management Conference Body:: I think you or someone in your group should cover this. The attendees are operations focussed and may be interested in issues such as siting interconnection and environmental issues. Also from a more macro perspective what kinds of demands the new industry structure may place on operators -- the importance of flexibility in asset operations (ie the premium the market will place on quick response) or the challenges of different scheduling regimes between the gas and power markets. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Senator Dunn Hearing Body:: Can you circulate the link to Cal TV again? Scott Govenar <[email protected]> on 07/16/2001 01:58:41 PM Please respond to <[email protected]> To: Ban Sharma <[email protected]> David Leboe <[email protected]> Eric Letke <[email protected]> Jennifer Thome <[email protected]> Ken Smith <[email protected]> Bev Hansen <[email protected]> Hedy Govenar <[email protected]> Miyung Buster <[email protected]> Janel Guerrero <[email protected]> Robert Frank <[email protected]> Mike Day <[email protected]> Leslie Lawner <[email protected]> Harry. Kingerski@enron. com <[email protected]> Karen Denne <[email protected]> Steven Kean <[email protected]> Alan Comnes <[email protected]> Susan J Mara <[email protected]> Paul Kaufman <[email protected]> Jeff Dasovich <[email protected]> Jim Steffes <[email protected]> Rick Shapiro <[email protected]> cc: Subject: Senator Dunn Hearing THE SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE PRICE MANIPULATION OF THE WHOLESALE ENERGY MARKET WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY JULY 18 AT 9:30 A.M. IN ROOM 3191 TO REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENAS FOR DUKE DYNEGY RELIANT AES NRG AND WILLIAMS. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Angle Master Invention Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 004 Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Speak to DFSC - Sharon Murphy, per Gary von Fischer, in 49C1 Body:: Moved to 11:00 per Larry Trybus Please address issues in 889 OASIS in addition to deregulation material You will have an hour to speak What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: CONFIDENTIAL (The Manifesto) Body:: To: Ad Hoc Committee Dear Colleague Several of you have pointed out that the Manifesto is a bit long. We will endeavor to shorten it somewhat which will be possible as there is some duplication however more importantly we plan to add an executive summary which will be the editorial link version that most will read. I hope to get that out by 5:00 PM today. Thanks David David J. Teece Director Institute of Management Innovation and Organization F402 Haas School of Business #1930 University of California Berkeley Berkeley CA 94720-1930 Phone: (510) 642-1075 Fax: (510) 642-2826 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enron Mentions Body:: California Adopts Variable Pricing Raising Ire of Generators Traders The Wall Street Journal 10/30/00 Enron Offers Cash To Help Azurix Take Itself Private The Wall Street Journal 10/30/00 Companies: U.S. Companies The Wall Street Journal Europe 10/30/00 Wessex switch likely The Times of London 10/28/00 Enron water unit could go private under loan plan Houston Chronicle 10/28/00 Quietly Bush's team talks about transition Plenty of folks in Austin would love to follow Bush to D.C. Austin American-Statesman 10/28/00 Dynegy: Calif Price Caps Will Compromise Elec Reliability Dow Jones Energy Service 10/28/00 SEC Filing Shows 3rd Parties Contacted Enron About Azurix Dow Jones News Service 10/27/00 Enron offers to buy out Azurix Financial Times October 27 2000 California Adopts Variable Pricing Raising Ire of Generators Traders By Rebecca Smith Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal 10/30/2000 The Wall Street Journal A4 (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) LOS ANGELES -- In the latest attempt to fix California's troubled deregulated energy market officials adopted a unique variable-pricing plan that already is being criticized by power generators and traders as unworkable and praised by utilities and consumers as much needed protection against gouging. Under the plan adopted late last week by the governing board of the California Independent System Operator or ISO a quasipublic agency responsible for maintaining electricity reliability in the state the cap on wholesale power will be reset hourly from about $65 per megawatt hour at low-demand times to no more than $250 an hour at periods of high demand. It was the third time this year that officials effectively lowered the price cap on wholesale electricity in a bid to contain -- so far unsuccessfully -- soaring total power costs. The move underscores the chaotic atmosphere prevailing in California's power market after a two-year-old experiment in deregulation has come undone. In other deregulated markets such as New York and New England prices are capped at $1000 per megawatt hour which are intended to be low enough to prevent market abuse but high enough to give generators incentive to build new plants. California's system was supposed to work the same way. But because utilities in California divested themselves of the bulk of their plants but weren't allowed to lock in fixed-price supply contracts unlike in the other markets merchant generators have had much greater sway over prices here on the spot market where most power trades. During the first nine months of the year the average price of wholesale electricity was $90 per megawatt hour in California triple the price of a year earlier. Even on cool days in October the price generally has remained above $100 per megawatt hour. California utilities have lost money on those power purchases because their customers' rates are frozen at $54 to $65 per megawatt hour far lower than the average price utilities have had to pay for that power. The deficits exceeded $5 billion in the June-to-September period. California utilities buy the power used by their customers from the state-sanctioned auctions administered by the ISO and a sister organization the California Power Exchange. In New York and New England by comparison less than 20% of power is purchased from the spot markets because utilities there were able to sign the fixed-price contracts which California utilities weren't allowed to do. The price-cap decision passed last week by a vote of 13 to 10 primarily with support from utilities and board members representing consumer interests. It was pushed aggressively by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison the state's two big investor-owned utilities that have gotten caught in the price-spike vise this year. Some ISO members say they had no choice but to support the measure to ratchet down price caps. We're going after the windfall profits said S. David Freeman general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power who voted for the measure. What we've got now is a market accustomed to ripping off the consumer. This can't be allowed to go on. But other experts said the hasty measure may make California's problems even worse. The short-term regulatory fix is always to fix prices said Pam Prairie director of the Institute of Public Utilities at Michigan State University in East Lansing. But there's a real danger you'll set prices too low and make your supply problems even worse. Other economists agreed. At best this is poorly administered cost-based regulation said Frank Wolak an economics professor at Stanford University who sits on an independent market-monitoring committee at the ISO. At worst it creates all sorts of perverse market incentives. For example it may increase the problem of megawatt laundering on hot days in which in-state generators sell power to out-of-state customers who then sell it back into the state effectively bypassing the cap. Likewise it could encourage generators to build new plants outside of California rather than where they are needed near its major cities also to avoid the cap. In the end it could increase stresses to the state's already overburdened transmission system. In fact the decision already has brought to a halt the state's forward electricity market which allows wholesale customers to sign contracts for power they will use in the future. The market had been trading as much as 1000 contracts a week. On Friday there was practically no activity. This decision shows the height of lunacy said Rick Shapiro a managing director at Enron Corp. the giant Houston-based energy trader. Mr. Shapiro said Enron and other generators will file appeals at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asking that the new pricing formula be rescinded. It is possible the FERC may throw out the pricing formula anyway. It is expected to issue a major order on Nov. 1 directing changes in California's market structure. That order will include its determination of the effectiveness of price caps. It also is expected to judge the merits of the governance structure at the ISO which has lately been marked by infighting. Recently consumer groups have charged that the ISO board has put the business interests of its members ahead of members' fiduciary duty to California residents. The most recent price-cap measure was approved over the objections of executives at the ISO whose job it will be to implement the formula. ISO Chief Executive Terry Winter said the measure is flawed because it doesn't take into account the amount of power available to the California market. Mr. Winter fears the caps will place the state at a disadvantage relative to neighboring states with no price caps. About 11 states are electrically interconnected in the West meaning power can be moved between them and chase the highest prices. We keep getting accused of making our market too complicated Mr. Winter said. Then along comes this proposal with caps that would adjust repeatedly throughout the day depending on demand. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Enron Offers Cash To Help Azurix Take Itself Private By Rebecca Smith Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal 10/30/2000 The Wall Street Journal A12 (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) Enron Corp. offered to lend Azurix Corp. an Enron spinoff $275 million so that it could take itself private. Enron which has been frustrated with the global water company's performance suggested Friday that public shareholders receive a cash offer of $7 a share for their Azurix stock. While nearly double the stock's value prior to the offer the suggested price nevertheless was far below the $19 at which Azurix made its debut in 1999. An Azurix spokeswoman said the board on which Enron has seats had not yet decided how to treat the Enron offer. An Enron spokesman said that taking the company private would give us more opportunity to directly affect our investment. In 4 p.m. New York Stock Exchange composite trading Friday Azurix soared $3 to $6.56 in heavy trading. Azurix had hoped to create a splash by doing to the water business what Enron had done to the energy business -- increase competition and provide trading skills capable of creating new financial products out of old commodities. But Azurix stumbled nearly from the outset. Deregulation of the water business and government privatizations of water systems on which it was counting were slow to come crimping growth opportunities and profit. And Enron accustomed to higher faster returns grew impatient with the capital-intensive water business. The company's first chief executive Rebecca Mark a onetime head of Enron's international division resigned in the summer with the agreement of Enron executives who said it was time for new leadership. The incoming chief executive John Garrison said he would look for buyers for some of the company's businesses he was unavailable to comment Friday. Ms. Mark was believed to be considering making an offer for some of those businesses herself. She declined a request for an interview. In its letter to Azurix officers Enron said the water company received four offers from prospective suitors after Ms. Mark's departure the best of which came from an unidentified bidder who offered $7 a share and went through a lengthy due-diligence process before backing down apparently spooked by Azurix's cash flow capital structure tax considerations and some securities litigation. In its proposal letter made public Friday Enron said it concluded that there is no other buyer willing to pay the $7 and so proceeded with its own offer. But Enron said it won't try to limit Azurix's ability to negotiate a better deal with others should they come forward. Finally Enron noted that Azurix had considered various partial or full-liquidation alternatives but said they didn't seem likely to produce more than $7 a share. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Companies: U.S. Companies 10/30/2000 The Wall Street Journal Europe 5 (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) Enron Offers Loan to Azurix Enron Corp. offered to lend Azurix Corp. an Enron spinoff $275 million (327.6 million euros) so that it could take itself private. Enron which has been frustrated with the global water company's performance suggested Friday that public shareholders receive a cash offer of $7 a share for their Azurix stock. While nearly double the stock's value prior to the offer the suggested price nevertheless was far below the $19 at which Azurix made its debut in 1999. (Staff) Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Business Wessex switch likely Adam Jones in New York 10/28/2000 The Times of London News International 2W 64 (Copyright Times Newspapers Ltd 2000) Wessex Water's American parent company is likely to be taken private after a disastrous 14-month spell as a quoted company. Wessex which provides water services to the South of England was bought by Azurix in 1998 for Pounds 1.6 billion. Azurix wanted to use Wessex's expertise in privatised water supply to build a global business. However since listing at $19 a share in June last year Azurix stock has gone into freefall closing at less than $4 earlier this week. Azurix slumped because it drastically misjudged the number of privatisation opportunities. It emerged last night that Enron the Texan energy and trading company that is Azurix's biggest shareholder has taken the unusual step of offering to lend Azurix $275 million (Pounds 190 million) to buy its publicly held shares thereby taking it private. The Enron proposal would value Azurix at about $800 million or $7 per share - 63 per cent less than the IPO price. Enron would control Azurix and Wessex Water if it went private. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. BUSINESS Enron water unit could go private under loan plan NELSON ANTOSH Staff 10/28/2000 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 1 (Copyright 2000) Enron offered Friday to lend Azurix its struggling water affiliate about $275 million so Azurix can go private by purchasing 38.6 million shares that are publicly traded. The deal would have Azurix buying back its stock at $7 per share about double what the shares were trading for Thursday. That's a big comedown for Azurix shares which sold for $19 each when the Houston company went public in June 1999. The maneuver technically can be called a take-under said analyst Carol Coale of Prudential Securities in Houston. She also described it as Enron's least painful solution for what to do with the venture that never lived up its ambitious plans. Nothing about Azurix has been positive for Enron in my view said Coale. This is a solution to a problem. Azurix spokeswoman Diane Bazelides said its board is studying Enron's proposal. She added that it was too early to comment on the offer because the proposal's structure had not been outlined. Enron imposed no deadline for a decision by Azurix but reserved the right to withdraw the offer if Azurix's position with prospective customers and employees deteriorated. One of Enron's conditions is that Azurix not sell any major assets before the buyout. The deal would not change Enron's large stake in Azurix said Palmer. It owns a third while the other third is owned by the Atlantic Water Trust in which Enron owns a 50 percent voting interest. The proposal's advantages include giving public shareholders a premium to the market price said Enron spokesman Mark Palmer. The common stock of Azurix zoomed Friday on the news gaining $3 to close at $6.56 on the New York Stock Exchange. Becoming a private company would give Azurix management greater flexibility in restructuring. Coale said it would reduce Azurix's general and administrative costs helping it to bid against lower- cost foreign competition particularly two big French companies. Azurix's high cost structure has been its primary problem she said. Azurix has been looking at cost and strategies ever since it got a new president and chief executive on Aug. 25 said Bazelides. That was the date that Rebecca Mark resigned as Azurix's high-profile chairman and chief executive. Enron and Azurix have been looking at strategic alternatives for nine months J. Mark Meets Enron's executive vice president for corporate development said in a letter filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. One alternative was selling the company he said. That didn't work out because the offers from three companies didn't exceed $4 per share. The fourth potential buyer said it would consider offering $7 per share said Meets. But that suitor backed out citing reasons like cash flow complexity of the capital structure tax considerations and pending securities litigation. We are obviously quite disappointed by this most recent turn of events Meets said in the letter. However we strongly believe that there is no other buyer willing to pay the $7 per share initially proposed (but later withdrawn) by the fourth bidder. Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Quietly Bush's team talks about transition Plenty of folks in Austin would love to follow Bush to D.C. Ken Herman American-Statesman Capitol Bureau Chief 10/28/2000 Austin American-Statesman A1 (Copyright 2000) Not long ago at a glossy wooden table in a Texas Capitol office two of Gov. George W. Bush's high-level appointees discussed one of the key issues in state government these days. It involved the relative merits of White House posts that could be available to the two appointees if Bush becomes president. Asked this week whether it's a common topic around the Capitol one of the appointees gestured to the anteroom of his office and made a motion indicating that even the midlevel folks have Washington on their minds. Near the banks of the Colorado Potomac Fever is a near-epidemic. And though it is political faux pas to be too open about doing White House transition planning before Election Day be assured it is going on at Bush headquarters where top officials are cognizant of the fine line between looking too confident now and looking too unprepared later. The candidate himself -- as well as his top aides -- steers clear of transition talk. When asked who might wind up in his Cabinet Bush looks backward instead of forward saying that his selection of Dick Cheney as his running mate should offer a glimpse of the kind of people who would wind up in his administration. The transition work such that it is is under the aegis of longtime Bush friend and aide Clay Johnson who began as head of the gubernatorial appointments office and now serves as chief of staff. Johnson said nobody has been interviewed for any Washington post but he has compiled a file of folks who are interested in serving in a Bush administration. Johnson also has been reading up on previous transitions -- ones that went well and ones that didn't. His preliminary conclusion is that the outgoing administrations are generally helpful and supportive even if they were ousted by the incoming administration. It's the incoming administrations that can make the mistakes he said. There is no shortage of think tanks that have think-tanked the topic. Back in August the Heritage Foundation based in Washington issued a transition handbook titled The Keys to a Successful Presidency. Though we really don't expect either campaign to talk about it (and would discourage them from doing so) the message here is it's time to start planning for a possible presidential transition quietly well behind the scenes but with the understanding that the preparation done during the next 70 or so days and the work done in the 70 or so days that follow (between the election and the inauguration) will very well determine the initial success or failure of the next administration Herbert Berkowitz a foundation vice president said in releasing the study. All indications are that the Bush team has been following the advice with Johnson at the helm. Johnson cautions against expectations that a Bush administration would be overloaded with Texans. It's the United States of America not the United States of Texas he said. Despite that caveat there is no shortage of Texans who are considered shoo-ins to fill some of the thousands of slots Bush could offer if he wins. Johnson confirms that he is very interested in a Washington job. Early speculation among Bush aides makes Johnson a potential leading contender for head of personnel at the White House. Karen Hughes Bush's communications director since his 1994 gubernatorial campaign is expected to become Bush's press secretary if he wins the White House. Karl Rove Bush's longtime political guru also will be on board though he could wind up with an out-of- the-White-House post perhaps at the Republican National Committee. Not as certain is the potential future for Joe Allbaugh who is part of the iron triangle of top advisers -- along with Rove and Hughes -- who have been on board with Bush since the 1994 campaign. Allbaugh serves as manager of the presidential campaign and previously served as chief of staff in the governor's office. Capitol speculation indicates Allbaugh could decide to skip a White House post possibly in favor of a lobbying job if he is not tapped as chief of staff. That post could go to Don Evans a longtime Bush friend who headed the megasuccessful fund-raising effort for the presidential campaign. However not everyone has Potomac Fever. For example Terral Smith Bush's legislative director said he will stay in Austin to lobby. In addition to the speculation about appointees the approaching election has sparked talk about when Bush might leave office if he wins. Under the U.S. Constitution he could remain governor until he has to become president on Jan. 20. Much more likely however is that Bush would leave office sooner than that perhaps as soon as two or three weeks after the Nov. 7 election if he wins. That could cause a housing problem for Bush whose main residence is the Governor's Mansion which comes as a free perk of the job. The Bushes have a home under construction at their ranch in Crawford near Waco. The ranch also has a smaller house in which the Bushes now spend weekends. Not out of the question is that Bush could work out an arrangement with Lt. Gov. Rick Perry who would become governor if Bush resigns to remain in the Governor's Mansion for several weeks after he leaves office. If the race among Texas senators to replace Perry as lieutenant governor complicates the timing of the resignation Bush could stay in the governor's office a little longer but no later than the first week of January. After all he will want to give Perry time to bask in his gubernatorial inauguration before the Legislature convenes Jan. 9. No matter when Bush resigns confidantes believe he might use his Crawford ranch for interviews with potential top-level appointees including Cabinet members. You may contact Ken Herman at [email protected] or 445-1718. Washington buzz A look at Bush allies expected to get appointments in a Bush administration: * Texas Secretary of State Elton Bomer * State Rep. Tom Craddick R-Midland * Public Safety Commission Chairman Jim Francis of Dallas * Texas Railroad Commissioner Tony Garza* Texas Supreme Court Justice Al Gonzales * Former Dallas ISD board President Sandy Kress * Kenneth Lay of Houston chief executive officer of Enron * Ralph Marquez of Texas City member of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission * Vance McMahan of Austin a policy adviser in the governor's office * Harriet Miers of Dallas Bush's personal lawyer and former appointee to the Texas Lottery Commission * Pat Oxford Houston lawyer and member of the University of Texas System Board of Regents * Pat Wood of Austin chairman of the Texas Public Utility Commission * Margaret La Montagne the governor's education adviser Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Dynegy: Calif Price Caps Will Compromise Elec Reliability 10/27/2000 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- A Dynegy executive said Friday that the California Independent System Operator's plan to impose hourly price caps on the wholesale power market will compromise reliability by forcing generators to sell electricity out of state. If the ISO says it will not buy above a certain price and generators cannot operate below that price then we have no choice but to find other markets to participate in said Dynegy senior vice president of marketing and trading asset management Lynn Lednicky. That may lead to the ISO not finding the power it needs at a price it wants to pay. The ISO plans to construct hourly price caps each month based on forecast load natural gas prices and generation unit efficiency. The caps will take effect Nov. 3 or soon therafter. Dynegy Inc. (DYN) sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asking it to address reliability consequences of the price caps before Nov. 3. Dynegy specifically requested that FERC discuss the issue at its Nov. 1 meeting when it will release a report on California's electricity problems. Enron Corp. (ENE) and Southern Company (SO) share Dynegy's concerns about reliability and plan to petition FERC about the issue said a trader listening in to a conference call between the three companies. -By Jessica Berthold Dow Jones Newswires 323-658-3872 [email protected] Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. SEC Filing Shows 3rd Parties Contacted Enron About Azurix By Christopher C. Williams 10/27/2000 Dow Jones News Service (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES New York -(Dow Jones)- Shares of Azurix Corp. (AZX) jumped 84% in heavy trading Friday after parent Enron Corp. (ENE) proposed to take the company private in a $7-a-share buyout. Filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission showed that Enron made the proposal after not being satisfied with offers it had received from four third parties for its stake in Azurix. In a letter to two members of Azurix's board Enron said three potential buyers were unlikely to be willing to pay more than the then-current market price of approximately $4 a share. Enron said a fourth potential buyer indicated it would consider a $7-a-share offer but it said that proposal was recently withdrawn. The reasons given by the bidder included pro forma cash flows the complexity of the capital structure tax considerations and the currently pending securities litigation the letter said. Mark Palmer a spokesman for Houston-based Enron declined to say whether Enron was entertaining current third-party interests or was in any talks with other parties regarding its Azurix stake. In New York Stock Exchange composite trading Azurix ended Friday up $3 to $6.56 on 2.8 million shares compared with average daily volume of 239000 shares. Enron was up $1.38 or 1.8% to $78.88 on 1.6 million shares compared with its daily average turnover of 2.4 million. In the SEC filing Enron saying it's familiar with Azurix's various partial and full liquidation alternatives said its buyout proposal is conditioned upon Azurix not selling any significant assets prior to the buyout. Although we agree that such plans may result in greater value to Azurix's shareholders than the maintenance of the status quo we believe that these options almost certainly will not result on a present value in a greater return to Azurix's shareholders than $7 a share the letter said. Enron also said its buyout proposal doesn't include any breakup fees or other deal protection devices. This frees Azurix's board to pursue an acquisition that might provide greater value to shareholders. Daine Bazelides a spokeswoman for Azurix declined to say whether Azurix is now entertaining offers for the company. She did however confirm the information contained in Enron's filing. The historical information in the filing is factually correct she told Dow Jones Newswires. She said she doesn't know when Azurix board will respond to Enron's proposal. In the filing Enron didn't set a deadline but warned that Azurix's position with customers and employees may deteriorate further. We must therefore reserve the right to withdraw our proposal at any time Enron's letter said. In the letter Enron pointed out that Azurix had retained two internationally recognized investment bankers early this year to evaluate strategic alternatives which included the potential sale of the company to unrelated third parties. Enron said it strongly believes there isn't another buyer willing to pay $7 a share for Enron's indirect interest in Azurix. We believe it is in Azurix's best interest as well as the best interest of its shareholders and employees if Azurix were no longer a publicly traded company Enron said. -By Christopher C. Williams Dow Jones Newswires 201-938-5219 Copyright 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved. Enron offers to buy out Azurix Financial Times By Hillary Durgin in Houston Published: October 27 2000 23:31GMT | Last Updated: October 27 2000 23:36GMT Enron the Houston-based energy and trading group said on Friday it had offered up to $275m in funding to take Azurix private at a buy-out price of $7 per share. The specific structure of Enron's proposal has yet to be determined Enron said. Azurix said its board would now consider the proposal. The timing of any decision was unclear. Enron owns directly and indirectly about 66 per cent of Azurix the troubled Houston water company whose main asset is UK-based Wessex Water. The buyout offer is the latest development in a history of problems at Azurix which was spun off from Enron and taken public at an offering price of $19 per share. But a combination of poor market timing competitive industry conditions and empty promises by the company on Wall Street took their toll on the company whose shares have since plummeted and have been trading most recently around the $3-per-share range. In August Rebecca Mark Azurix chief executive officer resigned both from Azurix and from the board at Enron. Enron's offer came after four unnamed parties approached Enron about buying its stake in Azurix. While three of the four were unwilling to pay more than the then market price of about $4 per share a fourth party who was considering offering $7 per share (before accounting for any dilution for stock options) later declined to pursue the transaction Enron said in Friday's letter to Azurix outlining the buyout proposal. We strongly believe that our proposal is fair to Azurix's public stockholders the letter stated. Our proposed transaction would permit Azurix's stockholders to receive on a timely basis a cash payment for their shares that is significantly above the price at which those shares have traded in several months. Analysts that follow Azurix and had valued the shares at between $6 and $8 per shares said the offer was fair. Analysts that follow Enron said that Azurix's business strategy had proved to be a failure and was characteristic of the hard asset approach that Enron has gradually distanced itself from. Enron's shares closed at $78.88 up $1.38 on Friday. Azurix's shares rose $3 to close at $6.56. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: REVISION - New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration Body:: Please do send it out. Thanks for the kind words. I know you know how I feel about your work and I have shared that view widely. I have enjoyed working with you I always valued your insights your responsiveness and your work ehtic. I wish you all the best in your new role. Gwendolyn Petteway@ENRON 07/24/2000 02:47 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: REVISION - New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration Arquella's last day is Wed. 7/26. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: FW: Request for PR2 Access Body:: OK From: Jo Ann Hill/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Kathryn Schultea/ENRON@enronXgate Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Request for PR2 Access Steve -- For your approval. As some additional information regarding the request Kathy Diane Taylor and I met with Deana Taylor this afternoon to understand what each person's role was and the specific access needed. For the interim we are recommending that the HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP and View Payroll and Time ENTP role be granted to each of the individuals listed below. Until January 1 this function was performed in the Payroll Department and at that time was transitioned to Karen and Deana's group. The people listed below actually transferred from the Payroll Department. For the long term we are going to look at creating a specific role for this group that would let them access only those data elements needed. I've spoken with Mary Joyce by phone and she has approved so I am requesting your approval as well. These people have basically been prevented from being able to reconcile any of the net pay accounts etc. for the past week. Please let me know if you will approve or if you need any additional information. Thanks. Jo Ann What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: IEP in the News, and other headlines Body:: San Jose Mercury News April 19 2001 Thursday SJ-POWER 593 words ????Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998 By ????Brandon Bailey (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 19 2001 Thursday BC cycle ???? 9:55 AM Eastern Time State and Regional 930 words Developments in ????California's energy crisis By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 19 2001 Thursday BC cycle ???? 9:32 AM Eastern Time State and Regional 820 words Legislators probe ????possible power natural gas collusion By DON THOMPSON Associated Press ????Writer SACRAMENTO (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 18 2001 Wednesday BC ????cycle State and Regional 833 words Legislators probe possible power ????natural gas collusion By DON THOMPSON Associated Press Writer SACRAMENTO ???(Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 18 2001 Wednesday BC ????cycle State and Regional 841 words Developments in California's energy ????crisis By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis ???????By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Copley News Service April 19 2001 Thursday State and regional 780 ????words Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing Bill Ainsworth SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times April 19 2001 Thursday Home Edition Page 3 772 ????words CAPITOL JOURNAL ?CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST ??Price Caps Don't Fit in ????Cheney's Head for Figures GEORGE SKELTON SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times April 19 2001 Thursday Home Edition Page 3 1373 ????words CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST ??DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT ????ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION ????BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM. JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY TIMES ????STAFF WRITERS SACRAMENTO The Orange County Register April 19 2001 Thursday STATE AND REGIONAL ????NEWS K7970 275 words Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines ????By Kate Berry The San Francisco Chronicle APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION ????NEWS Pg. A18 585 words Alameda public utility rents four backup ????generators ???Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling ????blackouts Matthew Yi Alameda The San Francisco Chronicle APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION ????NEWS Pg. A3 845 words Davis' gouging claims disputed ???Officials say ????no link between PG&E bankruptcy high prices David Lazarus The San Francisco Chronicle APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION ????NEWS Pg. A3 888 words Davis backs San Jose power plant ???He also ????acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight Lynda Gledhill ????Sacramento The Vancouver Sun April 19 2001 Thursday 731 words B.C. Hydro's credit ????to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines David Baines The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 18 2001 Wednesday BC ????cycle Business News 348 words Williams again target of overcharging ????allegations from federal regulators TULSA Okla. The Associated Press State & Local Wire April 18 2001 Wednesday BC ????cycle State and Regional 332 words Governor congressman to fight ????proposals for national power deregulation policy By MARGERY BECK ????Associated Press Writer LINCOLN Neb. San Jose Mercury News April 18 2001 Wednesday SJ-POWER-PLANT 1038 ????words California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant Scripps Howard News Service April 18 2001 Wednesday DOMESTIC NEWS 588 ????words Davis says Edison agreement may need altering EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN ????YAMAMURA SACRAMENTO Calif. San Jose Mercury News April 19 2001 Thursday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER LENGTH: 593 words HEADLINE: Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998 BYLINE: By Brandon Bailey BODY: ??SACRAMENTO Calif.--California's electricity market was showing signs of trouble as far back as 1998 the year that it was officially opened to competition members of a special legislative investigating committee were told Wednesday. ??Abnormal price spikes -- far higher than what should have occurred in a competitive market -- were showing up in August 1998 the committee was told by Frank Wolak a Stanford economist and top advisor to the California Independent System Operator which runs the state's transmission grid. ??Appearing on the first day of hearings called by a state Senate select committee to investigate alleged wholesale energy price manipulation Wolak testified that the ISO's economic advisors repeatedly found signs that power suppliers were able to influence prices over the last three years -- even before wholesale prices soared skyhigh last summer. ??By controlling even a relatively small portion of power supply just enough to make a difference in whether the state could meet consumers' needs Wolak said generators have been able to charge prices far higher than their costs. ??All told the ISO has estimated power suppliers collected more than $ 6 billion in unjustified profits last year. ??In his opinion Wolak added that violates the terms by which federal regulators allowed the suppliers to enter the state's newly deregulated market when it opened in 1998. ??The ISO is now filing petitions with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asking that agency to revoke the generators' right to charge unregulated prices. ??But Wolak repeatedly told the committee that he had no evidence that the suppliers acted in collusion or that they had violated any federal anti-trust laws. ??When state Senator Joe Dunn D-Garden Grove pressed him on the point Wolak insisted I can't say yes I can't say no. There's a lot of things that certainly look puzzling. It's hard without further information and analysis to say definitively but there's lots of things to seem to be worth looking into. ??Dunn a former consumer attorney is leading the Legislature's efforts to answer a question that a host of other state and federal officials have also posed: have California's electricity prices been the result of any illegal or unethical acts? ??Power suppliers and their representatives have repeatedly said the answer is no. They say their prices are the result of short supplies and natural market swings. ??Eleven investigations into California's electricity market have been conducted or are currently under way said a statement issued Wednesday by Jan Smutny-Jones executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Not one has found or proven any wrongdoing by generators. ??Dunn however said Wednesday's testimony was only the start of what he promised would be a vigorous investigation. He said the committee has already asked several power companies for records and other information and he hinted that subpoenas may be issued in the coming weeks. ??We will try to figure out how to stop these high prices if they are unjustified Dunn said at the beginning of the hearing. ??We're not going to be looking for ways to finance these payments he added. The state is now paying $ 70 million a day to buy power for California consumers after major utilities wracked up billions in debts while buying power on the open market in recent months. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News or to subscribe to the newspaper go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19 2001 Thursday BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 930 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??THURSDAY: ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??- Gov. Gray Davis meets with 25 members of the California congressional delegation at the Los Angeles International Airport to discuss the state's power crisis. ??- An Assembly committee continues hearings on the natural gas supply and possible price manipulation. ??-The Public Utilities Commission meets in San Francisco to decide whether to investigate if a key bloc of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants offline. ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6 thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when the suit says the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40 down 48 cents while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co. to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??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 that 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 raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19 2001 Thursday BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 820 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Southern California Edison was charged about $750 million more this year for natural gas because of unchecked free-market forces an industry consultant testified. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee on Wednesday the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate El Paso Merchant Energy to control the pipeline capacity. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers are expected to testify Thursday that they did not illegally manipulate the market. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a monopoly to game the system. ??It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. It's obviously way higher than $100 million. ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation Carpenter said. ??I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world said Carpenter who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power Frank Wolak chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However there is no law against me saying 'I'm not going to sell to you' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion Wolak said and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations are wasting everybody's time Smutny-Jones said adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??People have been playing by the rules Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn D-Garden Grove also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state federal academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant Dynegy Williams Energy Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??If the state's offering a $50 million reward they haven't found anything Smutny-Jones said. I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here. ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza D-Long Beach said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on. ??But Assemblyman John Campbell R-Irvine isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??There clearly are market forces at work that's evident Campbell said. Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18 2001 Wednesday BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 833 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year an industry consultant testified Wednesday. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate El Paso Merchant Energy to control the pipeline capacity. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a monopoly to game the system. ??It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. It's obviously way higher than $100 million. ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation Carpenter said. ??I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world said Carpenter who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers have denied illegally manipulating the market. They are scheduled to testify Thursday. El Paso officials did not return telephone calls for comment Wednesday. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power Frank Wolak chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However there is no law against me saying 'I'm not going to sell to you' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion Wolak said and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations are wasting everybody's time Smutny-Jones said adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??People have been playing by the rules Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn D-Garden Grove also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state federal academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant Dynegy Williams Energy Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??If the state's offering a $50 million reward they haven't found anything Smutny-Jones said. I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here. ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza D-Long Beach said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on. ??But Assemblyman John Campbell R-Irvine isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??There clearly are market forces at work that's evident Campbell said. Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18 2001 Wednesday BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 841 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6 thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when the suit says the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40 down 48 cents while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co. to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??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 that 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 raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune SACRAMENTO -- Outraged by a report in The Oakland Tribune that some lawmakers asked the governor to seize high-priced power contracts a key industry group Tuesday warned the Davis administration and Legislature that such action would worsen the energy crisis. We're publicly saying . . . this kind of rhetoric will have dire consequences on both the reliability and cost of power in California for years to come said Jan Smutny-Jones executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. It is the kind of rhetoric one would expect in Indonesia or the Philippines not the sixth largest economy on the planet he said in a teleconference. At the same time Davis administration officials confirmed that seizing contracts of allegedly profiteering brokers is the most likely last-ditch move if options continue to narrow ahead of the previously discussed concepts of seizing California power plants owned by out-of-state firms or passing a windfall profits tax. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio pointed out the governor already seized power contracts on which California's investor-owned utilities were defaulting in early February. The state trying to buy its way out of the energy crisis with no clear end in sight lost a substantial measure of control over electricity prices and supplies to the courts with the recent bankruptcy filing by the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Gov. Gray Davis a Democrat employed hard-sell tactics Tuesday in an effort to convince reluctant Democrats that their failure to embrace his plan to financially rescue teetering Southern California Edison could plunge that utility into bankruptcy as well. While most Republicans are flatly opposed to the plan as misguided Democrats who hold a majority in the Legislature worry it's a public bailout of an investor-owned utility and would hand the state control over only Edison's south-state piece of the strategic high-voltage transmission grid in California. Soaring wholesale power costs have financially shattered utilities forcing the state into runaway multibillion-dollar spending that helps keep the lights on but threatens the state budget. The manager of the state's power grid has accused generators and marketers of overcharging Californians more than $6 billion in recent months. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg D-Van Nuys said Monday that members of both legislative houses were interested in seizure of California power plants' contracts with brokers who sell to customers within or outside the state. Sen. Don Perata D-Oakland an outspoken critic of the Davis administration's handling of the crisis said some lawmakers had asked the governor to use emergency or eminent domain powers to seize the overpriced contracts and were awaiting Davis' answer this week. Supporters of the move said seizure would allow the state to control where the power is sold and decrease price markups by eliminating the middleman. But myriad questions remain unanswered including regulatory and interstate commerce issues as well as any state reimbursement of the brokers. Any move to seize power contracts would be overturned by the courts said Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. Instead of trying to do what's legally within their reach they go to extreme measures that are on their very face unlawful and unconstitutional Ackerman said. Moreover industry officials said seizure would not only chill industry investment in California's power system and lead to higher power costs but would be ironic since California has shunned lower-cost long-term contracts industry officials said. It would create a very unstable political regulatory environment Smutny-Jones said. It would have extremely adverse consequences for California in the long term. Even so the talk has worried the industry. Smutny-Jones said his clients are very very troubled by this sudden turn in rhetoric. I assume when senior members of the Legislature make pronouncements about potentially seizing contracts it's designed to get our attention and we obviously take those things seriously he said. The Independent Energy Producers group is in the process of contacting the Davis administration and lawmakers said Smutny-Jones. You'll hear more about this. Copyright 2001 Copley News Service Copley News Service April 19 2001 Thursday SECTION: State and regional LENGTH: 780 words HEADLINE: Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing BYLINE: Bill Ainsworth DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million to Southern California Edison's cost of electricity a consultant estimated yesterday. ??The consultant Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group spoke to an Assembly subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas prices in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas. ??Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation but the bench mark price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench mark locations throughout the nation for months according to figures released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight. ??Next week Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington D.C. on behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities Commission which are asking federal regulators to intervene. ??The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the sister companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural gas that flows into Southern California from Texas. ??El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an unregulated sister company. ??Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ''simply unprecedented'' in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million British thermal units of gas. ??In addition he said El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power plants ''qualifying facilities'' that get paid based on the price of natural gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's revenues Carpenter said. ??El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly subcommittee today but in proceedings before the federal regulators they have denied any sweetheart deal. ??In a report they commissioned the company blamed the higher natural-gas prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeline capacity. ??Gov. Gray Davis meanwhile gave his strongest endorsement yet to a windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph Dunn D-Laguna Niguel began a series of hearings to probe possible price gouging by generators. ??''I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist that generators receive an appropriate reduction whether it's 20 percent or any other number the Legislature hit upon'' Davis said. ??Senate Democrats Davis said will form a special committee to help work on his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern California Edison for $2.76 billion in exchange for state aid in paying off the utilities' debt. ??The governor said he told Senate Democrats a number of whom are skeptical of the plan that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a $400 million tax refund to the utility. ??At the natural-gas hearing yesterday state officials said that after El Paso Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its sister company it withheld natural gas to drive prices up. ??''Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and undermine competition'' said Harvey Morris an attorney for the California Public Utilities Commission. ??State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which regulates natural gas to open the market to more competitors. ??But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. On March 28 FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal. ??''The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does not in and of itself render the El Paso contracts unjust unreasonable or unduly discriminatory'' FERC ruled. ??In other cases involving natural gas federal regulators acknowledged that certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior but they approved those contracts anyway. ??Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action. ??''It baffles me that we've found the problem anti-competitive behavior and market gaming but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take action'' said Assemblyman Juan Vargas D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19 2001 Thursday Home Edition SECTION: Part A Part 1 Page 3 Metro Desk LENGTH: 772 words HEADLINE: CAPITOL JOURNAL CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST Price Caps Don't Fit in Cheney's Head for Figures BYLINE: GEORGE SKELTON DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Want price caps on wholesale electricity to staunch the bleeding of billions from California? Not going to happen Vice President Dick Cheney insists. Don't waste your energy thinking about it. ??Frankly California is looked on by many folks as a classic example of the kinds of problems that arise when you do use price caps Cheney said in a telephone interview Wednesday. ??The vice president was referring to another type of price cap--the infamous state cap on consumer rates that has left the private utilities billions short of enough revenue to pay their gouging wholesalers. What political leaders in California and the Northwest are pleading for from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is a regional cap on wholesale prices. ??Early last year a megawatt-hour was selling wholesale in California for $ 30. By year's end it had risen to an average $ 300 according to state officials. At peak prices have soared to $ 1500. Meanwhile demand increased last year by less than 4%. In fact demand last month was 9% less than in March 2000. ??This is the sorry news for ratepayers/ taxpayers: Californians paid $ 7.4 billion for electricity in 1999. This year the tab--without price caps--is projected at $ 70 billion. Gov. Gray Davis disclosed Tuesday that his administration has been shelling out $ 73 million a day to buy electricity for the pauper utilities. ??The profits of power producers--many of them Texans and Bush backers--have risen 400%-500%-600%. ??* ??But none of this budges the Bush administration. ??Price caps Cheney declares may provide short-term political relief for the politicians. But they don't do anything to deal with the basic fundamental problem. That problem is supply he says price caps discourage investment in new power plants and encourage consumption. ??Counters Garry South Davis' political strategist: The notion by free market zanies that you have to let profits rise 500%-600% is ludicrous. Reasonable profits can be made without bankrupting the system. They're just trying to protect the profits of their friends in the energy business. ??In truth California is building power plants as fast as it can. But not enough new megawatts apparently will be online by summer to prevent blackouts--and the bleeding of billions more into the pockets of out-of-state profiteers. ??How about a temporary price cap? ??Six months? Six years? Cheney replies. Once politicians can no longer resist the temptation to go with price caps they usually are unable to ever muster the courage to end them . . . ??I don't see that as a possibility . . . Any package you can wrap it in any fancy rhetoric you can prop it up with it does not solve the problem. ??* ??The White House clearly understands it has a problem in California--a political problem. A problem with a Democratic-dominated state that voted overwhelmingly for Al Gore. And now a problem with that mythical headline--Bush to California: Drop Dead--which seems to be getting bigger each day. ??There have been several recent California: Drop Dead stories. One was in Sunday's New York Times--Bush Devoting Scanty Attention to California. Tuesday the Sacramento Bee reported that when Cheney met with Northwest members of Congress to discuss West Coast energy he barred Californians from the room. ??Cheney flatly denies it. ??But Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says she has had trouble making contact with the Bush White House. She has sent two letters to President Bush asking for a meeting on energy. The first time she got back a form letter with her name misspelled. On the second try she got a group meeting with Cheney. ??It was very disappointing she says. He spoke about letting the free market work and drilling in Alaska . That's not going to help California in the short-term. We need price caps until we're able to fix this very broken market. . . ??There seems no interest in really wanting to understand the California situation. ??I asked Cheney whether he sensed an anti-California bias across the country? No more than there's an anti-Texas bias he replied. I wouldn't get paranoid about it. ??The fact is California is one of the leading states in the nation. Often a trendsetter. . . . Well we hope not to emulate your energy policy. Hopefully we'll learn from that. ??His message to California: There's no reason not to be optimistic. The energy crunch obviously is a significant problem. . . . But it too will pass. ??While learning from California the Bush White House also might take a refresher course in the free market Hoover administration. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19 2001 Thursday Home Edition SECTION: Part A Part 1 Page 3 Metro Desk LENGTH: 1373 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM. BYLINE: JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Attempting to show that no region in California is safe from sacrifice Gov. Gray Davis on Wednesday called for quick state approval of a controversial power plant proposed for the Silicon Valley. ??The governor's action locks him in combat with the San Jose City Council which has unanimously rejected the plant and Cisco Systems the computer networking giant that wants to build its worldwide headquarters on adjacent land. ??In praising the proposed plant as a model of low-polluting efficiency Davis said all regions of California must share the pain as the state expands its power supply--a key step toward ending blackouts and reducing sky-high electricity prices. ??If approved the plant would be the 14th licensed by the California Energy Commission since Davis took office. The 13th--a 510-megawatt plant near San Diego--was approved unanimously by the commission Wednesday with little controversy. ??Rushing to expand the state's overtaxed energy supply the governor has recently cut in half the approval times for the licensing of some plants. Six are under construction according to Davis and three are scheduled to begin operation this summer. A fourth--the AES Corp. generator in Huntington Beach that is due to be restarted --could add more megawatts to the supply this summer. ??V. John White an energy consultant in Sacramento said the governor's newly active role as an advocate for power plants was a necessary step given the urgency of the supply shortage. ??It's very rare and I wouldn't want him to short-circuit the commission's review process White said. But I think he's trying to reassure folks we're doing everything we can and not just sitting around in our hot tubs. ??Davis urged the Energy Commission--a five-member panel dominated by his appointees--to stop talking about the project and grant it a license. If the commission does so it will mark only the third time the panel has usurped a local government's authority over zoning. ??We are all in this together Davis said flanked by a forest of electric transformers near the Capitol. We are one state and we all have to make the sacrifices necessary to make up for the mistakes of the last 12 years when no major power plants were built. ??The governor said the plant's developers Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Holdings Inc. have made numerous concessions to San Jose officials including an agreement to sell power exclusively in the region. ??He added that the $ 300-million plant--expected to supply about 450000 homes--will be equipped with state-of-the-art systems that make it one of the cleanest plants to go up in the nation. ??The commission's staff has recommended licensing the project and some analysts said the governor's intervention--said to be unprecedented--should fuel momentum for approval. ??Commissioner Robert Laurie--one of two members who held evidentiary hearings on the project and is preparing a recommendation for the full commission--would not comment on the plant's prospects. But Laurie an appointee of former Gov. Pete Wilson insisted that the project would receive an impartial review. ??I know the importance of independent decision-making he said. ??San Jose officials say the Calpine project conflicts with the aesthetics of its site in a bucolic valley 15 miles south of downtown. On Wednesday Mayor Ron Gonzales urged the Energy Commission to give serious attention to the city's concerns about the plant's potential impact on residents and the environment. ??As the project has been designed and proposed to operate . . . it would present an unfair burden to our community the mayor said. ??A spokeswoman for the Calpine/Bechtel partnership disagreed and characterized the plant as key to restoring energy stability in the Silicon Valley a region heavily dependent on imported power. ??This is the only project in the pipeline that can help Silicon Valley out of its predicament in the near future said the spokeswoman Lisa Poelle. ??She expressed hope that the governor's comments which cap numerous meetings between the partnership staff and Davis aides would encourage San Jose to soften its stance on the project. ??The 600-megawatt plant is proposed for a swath of open space currently leased to a rancher and occupied by grazing cattle. A preliminary ruling by Laurie and the other commissioner scrutinizing the project is expected by June. The full commission would take a final vote about a month later and if a license were granted the plant would begin operations sometime in 2003. ??From the beginning the plant has been dogged by opposition and the Energy Commission has held more than 20 hearings--an unusually large number--on its fate. ??On Wednesday a spokesman for its heftiest foe San Jose-based Cisco said the company still has serious concerns about health and safety issues. ??Cisco has strongly opposed the plant because the company wants to build a $ 1.3-billion headquarters for 20000 employees nearby. In the past Cisco officials have threatened to relocate to another state if the power plant is built. ??Company spokesman Steve Langdon said the firm's plans to build an industrial campus were not scuttled by the announcement Monday that it is cutting 8500 workers from its payroll because of slumping sales of its Internet networking equipment. ??But he suggested that the plans were flexible enough to be scaled down for a smaller work force and that the campus may not house the company's headquarters. ??It doesn't all get built at once he said. We will build and occupy the site over time in phases as needed. ??Another leading opponent of the power plant argued Wednesday that the Energy Commission lacks authority to override San Jose officials and license the project. The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group launched by homeowners near the site says the commission may only take such a step if a better plant site hasn't been identified. ??The group charges that the commission is aware of other available sites including one in an industrial part of the East Bay area and lists eight other reasons the plant should not be built among them the noise and emissions it would produce. ??The local Sierra Club chapter however has endorsed the plant largely on grounds that it would run cleaner than existing plants in the area. By offsetting emissions from those older plants the new project would actually reduce air pollution said Kurt Newick of the Sierra Club's Loma Prieta chapter. ??On another front Davis continued to lobby legislators for support for his plan to rescue Southern California Edison from bankruptcy through purchase of the utility's transmission grid. ??Emerging from lunch with state Senate Democrats who are openly wary of the deal Davis said he'd made progress to bridge some of the gaps. It was the governor's third meeting in two days with lawmakers of both parties. ??Some of the toughest skeptics are members of his own party in the Senate. Many fear that the deal Davis struck with Edison will hand the utility too much at the expense of ratepayers and some say bankruptcy might be a better option for the state's second-largest private utility. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy April 6. ??To assuage concerns Davis proposed that a special Senate committee be named to meet with his energy advisors as the administration and Edison finalize details of the deal before it goes to the Legislature for approval. ??Senate leader John Burton (D-San Francisco) who has called the Edison agreement problematic said he may appoint such a committee but continued to suggest that an Edison bankruptcy might be acceptable. ??Many of the Fortune 100 companies have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and it ain't like the end of the world for anybody Burton said. ??* ??Times staff writer Carl Ingram contributed to this story. ??Powering Up California ??Power plant projects recently licensed by the California Energy Commission and when they are expected to go online: ??* ??* Two of four turbines are expected to go online in December 2001 the other two are expected to go online in March 2002. ??Source: California Energy Commission GRAPHIC: PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC: Powering Up California Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 19 2001 Thursday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7970 LENGTH: 275 words HEADLINE: Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines BYLINE: By Kate Berry BODY: ??ONTARIO Calif. _ Former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said Wednesday that he is uncomfortable with the state's $2.76 billion purchase of the transmission lines of Southern California Edison because it would derail future plans to fully deregulate the state's electricity market. ??I'm leery of a state purchase Richardson said at an economic conference in Ontario adding that the jury is still out on a plan by Gov. Gray Davis to keep Edison out of bankruptcy. ??He called for a rescue of Pacific Gas and Electric the San Francisco utility that filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago. ??In a half-hour speech Richardson admonished the Bush administration for failing to take a more active role in the California crisis. He backs a one-year regional price cap to calm the volatile wholesale market. ??In the Clinton administration California was gold he said. With the new administration it's another ballgame. ??Richardson also pushed for a bipartisan energy bill with Democratic themes including energy-efficiency standards conservation and environmental regulations. ??We need an energy policy for this country that embraces both parties' proposals he said. ??Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has sparred with Richardson by trying to rescind new energy-efficiency standards for air conditioners that were approved in the last 30 days of the Clinton administration. ??ARCHIVE PHOTOS available from NewsCom-PressLink: ??Richardson. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001 The Orange County Register (Santa Ana Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS Pg. A18 LENGTH: 585 words HEADLINE: Alameda public utility rents four backup generators Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling blackouts SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Matthew Yi DATELINE: Alameda BODY: Alameda's public utility announced yesterday that it is leasing four portable diesel electrical generators to avoid the one woe of the state's energy crisis they haven't been able to duck so far -- rolling blackouts. ???The utility's move to provide a backup source of electricity for its customers is part of a trend among city-owned utilities to gear up for expected power shortages during the dog days of summer. ???Healdsburg Santa Clara and Palo Alto -- all with their own electric grids -- are also initiating their own energy backup plans. ???The generators would kick in only during severe energy shortages when rolling blackouts are on the horizon. ???In Alameda four generators -- each the size of a tractor trailer -- arrived last week and are ready to be fired up Alameda Mayor Ralph Appezzato said yesterday. ???We're going to be the masters of our destiny he said. ???Alameda Power and Telecom is one of about 30 municipal utilities in California that opted not to deregulate with the rest of the state four years ago. Consequently its customers' power rates are expected to be stable this year while Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers face huge rate increases. ???But municipal utilities such as Alameda's are still part of the statewide power grid which is managed by the Independent System Operator and are subject to rolling blackouts like everybody else when the state's energy reserves dip below 1.5 percent. ???Each of Alameda's four diesel generators will produce 1.5 megawatts of power. Each megawatt can light up 1000 homes utility officials say. ???The units leased at a total cost of $68000 a month through the end of the year are parked at Alameda Point. ???Their cost will be paid through the municipal utility's reserve fund and customers' power bills won't be affected said Junona Jonas the utility's general manager. ???I think in the long run we'll see more supply in the state but until that happens there will be communities that'll have to take these short-term drastic measures Jonas said. ???The utility's spokesman Matthew McCabe said the diesel exhaust from the generators won't be an environmental factor. ???Our environmental record is extremely important to us McCabe said. The diesel generators are only for emergency backup. . . . Besides these things are clean -- it's not like standing next to a diesel bus. ???The city is also getting help from the U.S. Maritime Administration which operates more than a dozen ships at the former Navy station in Alameda. When the juice is low those ships will unplug from the port and use onboard generators Jonas said. ???In the North Bay Healdsburg officials are waiting for the arrival of two diesel generators. Combined they are expected to produce 3.5 megawatts of power which can account for about 20 percent of the city's expected summer peak load said Bill Duarte city utility director. ???We're taking matters into our own hands he said. ???Farther south both Santa Clara and Palo Alto are considering leasing portable generators officials said. ???Bill Reichmann senior electric utility engineer at Santa Clara's Silicon Valley Power said the utility is planning to lease eight generators operating them in the southeastern end of town near the San Jose International Airport. ???Palo Alto's municipal utility also has recommended that the City Council approve renting two generators starting next month said spokeswoman Rima Johnson.E-mail Matthew Yi at [email protected]. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS Pg. A3 LENGTH: 845 words HEADLINE: Davis' gouging claims disputed Officials say no link between PG&E bankruptcy high prices SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: David Lazarus BODY: Officials on the front lines of California's energy mess yesterday challenged Gov. Gray Davis' assertion that the state is being gouged by power companies because of PG&E's bankruptcy filing. ???Such dissent from the governor's own subordinates could make it harder for Davis to gain support for his energy measures in the state Legislature. ???Despite Davis' latest claims the Department of Water Resources which is spending about $70 million a day buying power said there is no evidence linking recent price increases to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. filing for bankruptcy protection on April 6. ???It is a seller's market said Viju Patel executive manager of the Department of Water Resources' power systems department. The power companies do not need an excuse to raise prices. ???Critics say Davis' penchant for secrecy on energy issues has come back to haunt him at a time when he needs all the allies he can find. ???People aren't taking his words at face value said Michael Shames executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ???Republican lawmakers -- and even some Democrats -- have challenged a number of the governor's initiatives including a multibillion-dollar bailout scheme for Southern California Edison. ???Nevertheless Davis reiterated his belief yesterday that recent electricity price increases are an aberration driven by the bankruptcy of PG&E. ???He said California's spending on power jumped 40 percent in the week following PG&E's bankruptcy filing because generators say they face a greater risk of not being paid. ???Nothing else in the equation has changed said Steve Maviglio a spokesman for the governor. Everything is the same except the bankruptcy. ???However power companies were quick to challenge this assertion. They insisted that PG&E's bankruptcy actually was seen as a positive development by those in the energy business. ???If anything PG&E provides some solace for traders because the bankruptcy provides an organized mechanism for recovery of payments said Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum a Menlo Park energy-industry association. ???On the other hand he acknowledged that power companies are becoming increasingly wary of the state of California's creditworthiness as an energy buyer. ???The Department of Water Resources already has spent nearly $5 billion buying electricity and has yet to recoup a dime from ratepayers. State regulators are still trying to come up with a way to apportion the limited revenues from power rates among the various parties in California's energy picture. ???Rating agency Fitch Inc. said yesterday it may cut the state's credit rating because of questions surrounding recovery of energy costs. ???People are keeping an eye on things Ackerman said. They're watching how California finances things. ???If a premium on electricity sales to the state exists he said it probably has been in place since the beginning of the year well before PG&E's current woes. ???UCAN's Shames agreed. He said power companies added a risk premium to their California power sales late last year when it looked like the state's energy troubles were worsening. ???PG&E's bankruptcy may have increased the uncertainty Shames said but we've been paying a risk premium for months now. ???Richard Wheatley a spokesman for Reliant Energy in Houston insisted that his company's traders are not using questions about PG&E's or California's financial solvency as a fresh excuse for higher prices. ???I haven't seen any evidence of it he said. ???Mark Palmer a spokesman for Houston's Enron Corp. laid blame for recent price increases on low rainfall throughout the West which has cut output at hydroelectric facilities as well as on California's chronic power shortage. ???It's not that there's a premium on prices he said. It's just supply and demand. ???That said Palmer acknowledged that California's firm insistance on blackouts being avoided at all costs leaves the state vulnerable to virtually any price generators choose to demand. ???This means prices will be used to allocate a scarce resource he said. There's no other way it could work. ???Bottom line for consumers: It's going to be a long hot summer and electricity prices will soar even higher as demand surges. ???And despite the best efforts of state officials a daily threat of blackouts remains a virtual certainty as California's beleaguered power grid is stretched to the breaking point. ???At the Department of Water Resources' command center in a Sacramento shopping mall the state's team of electricity traders has moved onto a new high-tech trading floor where they negotiate power deals each day from the crack of dawn. ???The department's Patel said daily blackouts may be averted this summer after consumers see skyrocketing power prices reflected in their bills. ???People will respond to these prices and they are going to conserve like never before Patel predicted.E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected]. GRAPHIC: PHOTO Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19 2001 THURSDAY FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS Pg. A3 LENGTH: 888 words HEADLINE: Davis backs San Jose power plant He also acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Gov. Gray Davis urged the state Energy Commission yesterday to approve a controversial power plant in San Jose saying California needs every megawatt it can harness. ???Davis' recommendation runs counter to the wishes of the San Jose City Council and Mayor Ron Gonzales who have come out against the 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center in south San Jose's Coyote Valley. It also puts the governor at odds with one of his political allies Cisco Systems chief John Chambers whose company opposes the plant because it would be built near the tech firm's proposed new campus. ???Davis' announcement came the same day he all but admitted he lacks the support he needs in the state Senate for the deal he reached with Southern California Edison to restore the utility to financial health. Davis has portrayed that deal and construction of new power plants as essential to making California's energy market functional again. ???I think when we have an opportunity to put more power on line we should seize it Davis said. I believe we spend too much time talking about Metcalf. It's time to start building it. ???The Energy Commission has been reviewing the proposal by Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Inc. for months. The commission's staff recommended in October that the plant be built and a final decision is expected by summer. If it is approved the plant could come on line next year and provide enough electricity for 600000 homes. ???None of the five commissioners could be reached yesterday. Three are Democrats appointed by Davis and two are Republicans appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson. ???Gonzales and the rest of the City Council rejected the Metcalf plant in November. Until yesterday Davis had sat on the sidelines as the energy crisis deepened and a long line of state and federal officials including four of the five Assembly members from Silicon Valley urged the commission to overturn the council's vote. ???Some neighborhood groups oppose the plant along with computer networking giant Cisco which hopes to build a 20000-worker campus on a neighboring parcel. Cisco chief Chambers donated $50000 to Davis in the first six months of last year. ???Cisco's reaction yesterday was restrained. ???We have great respect for the governor and respect his decision said Cisco spokesman Steve Langdon. ???However Langdon added: We still have serious concerns about health and safety issues related to the proposed power plant. ???Some neighbors were much angrier. ???He's trying to act like he's the big bad tough governor and he's spineless said Issa Ajlouny who lives in the Santa Teresa neighborhood less than a mile from the proposed plant. He knows the approval process isn't working in his favor so he's trying to come out and act like a hero to the state of California. But he's nothing but backstabbing the city of San Jose on the environmental issues. ???Supporters of the plant see the 14 acres of former junkyard as the perfect site -- right next to Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s largest substation in the South Bay close to major transmission lines and shielded from its neighbors by a 350-foot hill. ???But a housing development is also nearby and residents fear the power plant will belch pollutants in an area already suffering from some of the worst air quality in the Bay Area. ???Mayor Gonzales continued to express his concern yesterday. ???I would support clean power plants that will help us achieve greater energy self-sufficiency for San Jose residents and business Gonzales said. As the Metcalf project has been designed and proposed to operate however it would present an unfair burden on our community. ???That's not what Davis said however calling Metcalf one of the cleanest most efficient plants in the country. ???Davis praised the efforts of Calpine/Bechtel to work with the local community and said he was especially pleased that the venture had agreed to commit all the power to the local region. ???The Silicon Valley is obviously the engine driving our economy but they are very dependent on outside power Davis said. ???Also in Sacramento yesterday after an hourlong session with Senate Democrats -- the toughest legislative sell for Davis' proposed Edison deal -- the governor all but admitted his plan could not win enough votes for Senate approval. ???I think he knew there weren't enough votes going in said Sen. Don Perata D-Oakland. But there may be a way of perfecting a deal people can at least think of supporting. ???Senate Democrats have openly opposed Edison's deal saying the only beneficiaries are Edison shareholders and power generators who would be paid every cent owed them by the utility -- at the expense of customers who would pay more to erase Edison's debt. ???Unlike his meeting with Assembly Democrats after which Davis said he was encouraged the governor said yesterday he wanted the Senate to appoint a special committee to iron out differences over the Edison deal. ???Senate President Pro Tem John Burton D-San Francisco said he was not aware a committee was being set up. He said he favored an up-or-down vote on Davis' current proposal.Chronicle staff writers Greg Lucas Alan Gathright and Maria Alicia Gaura contributed to this report. / E-mail Lynda Gledhill at [email protected]. GRAPHIC: PHOTO Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Pacific Press Ltd. Vancouver Sun ????????????????????April 19 2001 Thursday FINAL EDITION SECTION: BUSINESS Pg. F1 / Front LENGTH: 731 words HEADLINE: B.C. Hydro's credit to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines BYLINE: David Baines SOURCE: Vancouver Sun BODY: ??A confidential document issued in late 1999 shows that B.C. Hydro's power-trading subsidiary Powerex set a credit limit of $100 million US for its California customers. ??However by the end of 2000 Powerex had extended three times that amount of credit to those customers -- the California Independent System Operator and the California Power Exchange. With the California Power Exchange and Cal-ISO's major customer Pacific Gas & Electric under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection repayment of this debt is now in doubt. ??Powerex spokesman Wayne Cousins noted that the document obtained by The Vancouver Sun which is marked strictly confidential was issued in November 1999. ??That's an old copy of our risk-management policy he said in an interview Wednesday. ??Credit limits have changed since then based on careful assessment of several factors including market conditions risks maintaining long-standing relationships and helping California meet its electricity needs to prevent crisis situations. ??Temporary revisions were only implemented after very diligent review incorporating the best market intelligence available our own due diligence and on-going dialogue with appropriate market participants. ??He refused to say when the credit limits for Cal-ISO and the California Power Exchange were increased. ??That type of information is confidential. You have a copy that I assume was leaked in some way but this is commercially confidential information. ??He said the increase in credit limits helped B.C. Hydro achieve record net income of about $1 billion during the year ending March 31. This figures does not include any write-downs that may occur if Powerex determines that any of its customer accounts are not collectible. ??Cousins however was insistent that all debts will be collected: We continue to pursue monies owing and we expect to be paid for electricity we have sold. ??He noted that Powerex suspended trades to all California entities on Dec. 8 unless those trades were fully secured by creditworthy customers. ??By that time Cal-ISO and California had racked up an unpaid bill of about $ 300 million US or $475 million Cdn -- about half the net income that Hydro has tentatively reported for the year ending March 31. ??The confidential document states that Powerex's policies and procedures are designed to control the risk of financial loss due to changes in market prices or volatility and the risk that a counterparty (customer) in a commodity transaction defaults on delivery and/or settlement. ??It states that the amount of credit to be advanced to any customer depends on its credit rating. An AAA customer for example may be granted credit to a maximum of $20 million. ??Cal-ISO and California Power Exchange are not utilities they are power pools. They purchase power from Powerex and other suppliers and re-sell it to utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. ??The pools are not rated but are assigned specific credit limits. As of November 1999 Cal-ISO had a credit limit of $40 million US and the California Power Exchange $60 million US. ??The risk-management document notes that the credit-worthiness of these pools depends on that of its suppliers. ??The Powerex credit-risk manager and the treasury manager are responsible for initially evaluating and then monitoring the credit-authorization policies and credit limits for each power pool in which Powerex trades the document states. Significant alterations in the credit policies of a power pool will trigger a mandatory reappraisal of the power-pool credit limit. ??California has been caught in a power vice in recent months. The problem dates back to 1996 when the state developed a plan to deregulate the electricity business. Competition was supposed to lower rates below a price cap that had been imposed. ??However dry conditions cut the ability to generate hydro-electric power and a surge in the state's economy created unprecedented demand for electricity. Prices soared. ??The result was that the California utilities paid record prices for power but weren't allowed to pass along the full cost to consumers. ??Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison the state's two biggest utilities now owe about $12 billion. [email protected] TYPE: Business LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18 2001 Wednesday BC cycle SECTION: Business News LENGTH: 348 words HEADLINE: Williams again target of overcharging allegations from federal regulators DATELINE: TULSA Okla. BODY: ??Federal regulators are once against targeting Williams for allegedly overcharging Californians for electricity. ??The Tulsa-based energy company was cited in a notice this week from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for allegedly overcharging California customers $25574 in March. ??Two other companies were also cited in the notice from federal regulators Monday. ??Dynegy Power Marketing Inc. of Houston was cited for overcharging California customers $469662 while Mirant California LLC of Atlanta was cited for overcharges of $92620. ??The commission told Williams and the other two companies to either refund the money or justify their prices which exceeded a price of $300 per megawatt hour that was set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission because of the California's electricity shortage. ??Williams also was accused of excessive charges of $8 million in January and $ 21.6 million in February for a total of $29.6 million. ??Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said while the overpricing allegations against Williams in March were not as significant as in the other months the process of justifying them will be the same as in previous months. ??They determine the price that they feel is fair and justifiable and then we come back and say why we charged what we did she said. ??Hall-Collins said federal regulators haven't said whether they are satisfied with how Williams justified its alleged overcharges from previous months. ??Also in March the commission accused Williams and AES Southland of generating less power to drive up electricity prices in May and June 2000 resulting in alleged overcharging of $10.8 million. ??Williams denies overcharging for electricity it provides. ??In other news Williams Express Inc. a unit of Williams announced Tuesday it was selling 198 MAPCO Express convenience stores to Israel-based Delek Group for $147 million. Most of the stores are in Tennessee and executives expect to close the deal by the end of May. ??Williams will keep 29 MAPCO stores in Alaska. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18 2001 Wednesday BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 332 words HEADLINE: Governor congressman to fight proposals for national power deregulation policy BYLINE: By MARGERY BECK Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LINCOLN Neb. BODY: ??Gov. Mike Johanns and Rep. Lee Terry R-Neb. said Wednesday they will be working to make sure national leaders understand Nebraska's stance on a national energy policy. ??Nebraska's unique status as the only 100 percent public power state in the nation and its reliance on the corn-based fuel additive ethanol make the state's input in the development of national energy policy important Johanns said. ??Public power has worked very well for Nebraska consumers by providing low cost electricity he said adding that the deregulated state of California has suffered through weeks of rolling blackouts. We are committed to protecting public power in this environment of deregulation. ??Terry said he has talked at length to the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney who has been tapped to come up with a national energy policy draft. That draft will end up before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on which Terry serves. ??There will be a discussion about a national deregulation policy Terry said. ??A national deregulation policy would threaten Nebraska's public power system Terry and Johanns said. Terry said he plans to push for a states' rights exemption to any such policy. ??It is absolutely necessary that Nebraska have a voice in that discussion Terry said. ??Terry said he also has pleaded with the Bush administration not to grant a request from California to wave the Clean Air Act's gasoline oxygen requirement. ??Such a move is considered a death knell to ethanol a clean-air fuel additive because other states would be expected to follow suit in requesting - and receiving - similar waivers thereby destroying ethanol's market. ??They did not telegraph their position on the waiver Terry said of White House which is expected to decide on California's request this spring. ??Other energy concerns Nebraska leaders hope to address are rising heating costs and gasoline prices which are expected to top $2 a gallon in Nebraska this summer. LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News 2001 San Jose Mercury News Jose Mercury News 18 2001 Wednesday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER-PLANT LENGTH: 1038 words HEADLINE: California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant BODY: ??Under intense pressure to increase California's energy supply Gov. Gray Davis is expected to announce today his support for Calpine Corp.'s proposed South San Jose power plant -- a move that could ensure the state's most controversial power project is built. ??Davis said for months that he would not interfere in the environmental review of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. But a source close to the governor said Davis has decided to use Calpine's Coyote Valley project to send a signal that California is ready to build more power plants and is open to business. ??San Jose has strenuously opposed the power plant. But Davis' decision to urge the California Energy Commission to approve it would likely hold sway with the agency which has authority over where plants are located but has almost never overridden local opposition. ??The commission -- three of whose five members were appointed by Davis -- is expected to complete its environmental review and make a decision early this summer. ??A spokesman for the governor declined to confirm the endorsement. But late Tuesday the governor scheduled a press conference for this morning to make an important energy generation announcement. ??San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales declined to comment. But another of the plant's leading opponents pledged to keep fighting what would be the South Bay's largest power plant. ??An endorsement from Davis would cap a stunning turnaround for the project. ??Five months ago Calpine's Metcalf Energy Center was unanimously rejected by the San Jose City Council which decided that the power plant would be incompatible with the city's plans to develop high-tech campuses in North Coyote Valley. ??Some Calpine officials even considered giving up plans to build the power plant. ??But as California's energy woes intensified the Metcalf plant increasingly became a poster child for the need for more power generation to reduce the skyrocketing cost of electricity and avoid rolling blackouts. Silicon Valley one of the state's largest electricity consumers produces only a fraction of the energy it uses. ??Despite fierce opposition from local residents concerned about the environmental effects of a large power plant a steady stream of state and local organizations lined up behind the project including the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce and the local chapters of the Sierra Club and American Lung Association. ??The California Assembly voted unanimously in February to urge the energy commission to override San Jose and license the power plant. ??And top officials and attorneys at the energy commission have been working for months to ensure that the project wins approval a Mercury News investigation of the commission's environmental review of the project showed. The officials undermined negative environmental assessments of the Metcalf site and silenced commission analysts who said other sites would be better. ??The energy commissioners are weighing the staff's recommendation to approve the plant. ??Commissioner Robert A. Laurie who oversaw hearings on the project insisted at one hearing two months ago that the commission would complete an independent review. ??Although Davis has stressed his efforts to speed construction of new power plants the governor insisted he would not take a position on the project. ??The governor has repeatedly said he wants the process to play out Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio said last week. The governor believes the energy commission should complete its review. ??But there have been growing signs that Davis would throw his weight behind Calpine's project. ??A senior energy commission official said aides to the governor have been calling the commission for months to urge quick approval of the Metcalf plant. The governor's press secretary said no calls have been made. ??When Davis was looking for a backdrop to hold a press conference earlier this year to announce his plans to speed up approval of new power plants he chose Calpine's new plant in Sutter. ??The company also has actively campaigned for the governor's support. ??Earlier this year Calpine offered to sell the state cheaper power from the plant if it is approved. ??When Calpine and its development partner Bechtel Enterprises were looking for a lobbyist in Sacramento the companies turned to Platinum Advisors whose president Darius Anderson was finance chairman of Davis' 1998 gubernatorial campaign. ??The San Jose-based company gave the governor $ 19000 last year according to state campaign finance reports. ??Maviglio said the governor's ties to Calpine are no different from his relationship with Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers who has opposed the power plant. Campaign finance reports show Chambers gave Davis $ 50000 last year. ??Calpine officials said Tuesday they did not know of the governor's impending announcement. But they said they were not surprised. We've been working with the governor on a number of issues said project manager Ken Abreu. Metcalf is just one of them. ??Meanwhile Calpine's opponents in San Jose City Hall and in the neighborhood nearest the proposed power plant appear more isolated than at any time since the contentious debate over the Metcalf site began more than two years ago. ??Mayor Gonzales refused to comment on Davis' planned announcement. I don't respond to rumors said the mayor who has helped lead opposition to Metcalf. I have not heard anything. If he makes a statement I'll respond. ??But one of Calpine's fiercest local opponents said the nearby Santa Teresa neighborhood will continue to fight. We have a strong case said longtime South San Jose resident Issa Ajlouny. And we will win. ??The Mercury News strives to avoid use of unnamed sources. When unnamed sources are used because information cannot otherwise be obtained the newspaper generally requires more than one source to confirm the information. ??By Noam Levey and Mark Gladstone. Mike Zapler of the Mercury News contributed to this report. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News or to subscribe to the newspaper go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Scripps Howard Inc. Howard News Service 18 2001 Wednesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS LENGTH: 588 words HEADLINE: Davis says Edison agreement may need altering SOURCE: Scripps-McClatchy Western Service BYLINE: EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN YAMAMURA DATELINE: SACRAMENTO Calif. BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis indicated Wednesday that he may need to alter the agreement to purchase Southern California Edison's transmission lines if he wants legislators to approve the deal. ??Though the Democratic governor declined to discuss particulars he said he asked Senate leaders to appoint a special committee dedicated to resolving disagreements between the administration and lawmakers. ??Many provisions of the memorandum of understanding the document that lays out the terms of the Edison deal must be approved by the Legislature and the state Public Utilities Commission. ??There is a determination to try and solve this problem whether or not it means amending the MOU or trying a slightly different approach Davis said after meeting with Senate Democrats. ??A spokesman for the utility declined to comment on the governor's statements. ??Davis announced the Edison agreement April 9 just three days after Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unexpectedly cut off transmission line negotiations with the governor and filed for bankruptcy protection. ??The deal would require the state to pay $2.76 billion for Edison's transmission lines or 2.3 times book value. In addition a portion of consumer electricity rates would be dedicated to paying off the remainder of the utility's debt estimated at about $5 billion. ??Both Edison and PG&E stockpiled massive debt when wholesale electricity prices soared. Price caps prevented them from passing along the entire cost of electricity to consumers. ??Since the Edison deal was announced however legislators have been critical of certain provisions suggesting that California consumers will receive little in return for relieving the utility of billions of dollars in debt. ??It's clear that the deal as is could well be problematic said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton D-San Francisco. This has to do with what's in the bill what's in it for the people of the state. ??Lawmakers initially believed they would have little ability to change the agreement and referred to it as a take it or leave it deal. ??In fact the memorandum of understanding itself says the deal can be nullified in the event any law is passed adopted or repealed ... (which) would materially impede or frustrate the ability of the Parties to effectuate all of the elements of the plan as a package. ??But in his meeting with Senate Democrats Davis indicated he may be willing to compromise. His goal he said is to keep Edison from following PG&E into bankruptcy. ??We still have some work to do Davis said. I think the appointment of a special Senate committee assuming that happens will let us work through the detail in an appropriate fashion. ??Burton said he has not decided whether to appoint a committee. ??Other senators came out of the meeting guardedly optimistic that they could compromise with the governor. ??It was obvious that there were concerns from members said Sen. Don Perata D-Alameda. He is open and ready to have the proposal perfected as it moves through the legislative process. ??Sen. Jackie Speier D-Hillsborough said she hopes to amend the deal to ensure power generators are penalized for over-charging the utilities and the state for electricity. ??The way it's presently crafted (generators) are being rewarded she said. They are getting a premium for selling electricity at a higher premium than ever conceived of by humankind. ??(Contact Emily Bazar and Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee in California at http://www.sacbee.com.) LOAD-DATE: April 19 2001 ??? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Daily Research reports Body:: I would like to see research from all of these sources on areas of interest to enron -- energy and broadband North America and Europe. Thanks Henry Emery <[email protected]> on 07/19/2001 12:03:17 PM To: undisclosed-recipients: cc: Subject: Daily Research reports Attached are two research reports that I can send to you on a daily basis. One of our many benefits here at our new location is the availability of various research sources. The two reports I have attached are from : The First Union Securities Equity Marketing Group and Merrill Lynch We also have access to Goldman Sachs research and CS First Boston Research. Please let me know if you would like me to continue sending these reports on a daily basis or if you have any particular companies that you are interested in hearing about. Sincerely Hank Emery - Spotlight071801.pdf.pdf - smith.pdf.pdf What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Dinner Plans Body:: I get in too late tonight but maybe dinner or drinks on Thurs? Linda Robertson 06/19/2001 06:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Dinner Plans You are here Wed and Thur nights. Do you have plans? Do you want to do something with some of the DC staff? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: We handed the Oped to DeLay's staff at lunch. I think we're finished for now. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Ackerman to talk to Wolak Body:: Gary has been seeing Frank Wolak all over the place on the media scene. I asked him to ask Frank to do something POSITIVE and under the state's own control and push DA. Gary is also speaking to a bunch of CEOs (with Anjali of the ISO and Carl Wood) and he said he would carry our message to them as well. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Board of Directors Meeting - August 14, 2001 Body:: calendar and meeting file ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message (due to missing attachment) <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Wolak report Body:: Sue: I'm so impressed that you know how to put the link on the email. I can't figure out how to do that and I think that looks much more high tech than attaching a silly old report. Thanks for the link. We can take it from here. Sarah Susan J Mara 12/22/2000 11:31 AM To: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Wolak report Call me computer illiterate. I could not figure out how to download the report off the web site so here's the link. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Time Magazine - Enron Plays the Pipes.... Body:: this is fantastic!! ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential Attorney Work Product Attorney-Client Communication Body:: Dan I need your help to make sure we get the appropriate evidence of these receivables into the record so as to offset refunds deemed to be due (if any after netting purchases and sales). As you will recall we submitted some documentation of the $40MM receivable to Judge Wagner. I expect that we will have to provide quite a bit (more) detail regarding this and the other receivables. Also who do you suggest for a witness on this or will affidavits be sufficient? Need your input on this since we may have to do additional research and now is the time to do it before the August 13 prehearing conference. Thanks! Ray ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Ken Lay/ Jeff Skilling visits Body:: No I had the right date from our previous communications. Nicholas O'Day 08/31/2000 09:25 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Ken Lay/ Jeff Skilling visits I have noticed a fairly significant typo in the note below. The correct date for the key note address is 26 October as set out in my first note. Did that impact on the issue of availability? ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Speaking engagement with PUF Conference, on mergers, 9:00 a.m. - 10:00, give a 10-15 minute presentation, then youre on a panel. Body:: In Washington DC. Get Des to set up appointments What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Bahamas LNG Body:: I think it would be a good idea to get together. I would include Eric Thode as he has been living through the PR battles on a daily basis. James D Steffes 05/30/2001 08:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Bahamas LNG Steve -- In a discussion today with Mike Kelly etc. it was apparent that the Public Affairs team viewed the Bahamas LNG transaction quite cautiously. Given the recent issues power plant development has had in Florida (big political fights that are going the wrong way) I was wondering if it made sense to bring together a meeting of all of Public Affairs and the deal team to analyze the implications of our development plans. My primary worry is that P/L under water could have severe ecological implications that are not being internalized into the transaction. I would like to try and arrange a meeting to (1) ensure Public Affairs coordination and (2) understand the deal impacts better. Please advise if I'm worrying for no good reason. Jim What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Confidential --CFTC Chair Body:: Hi Steve Folks love Newsome and I think he's very nice and appears to be very free market. Spears the other Republican appointee is not at all free market in my view. I would not like this to mentioned anywhere else but I have found that the farm reps on the Commission may sound deregulatory but are not and have been really troublesome without a good free market person on board. And there are no truly free market persons on board at the Commission (every single other agricultural rep that I worked with on the Commission were trouble even though they claimed to be deregulatory -- and they were far worse before I got there and after I left.) I visited with Newsome a day before Inauguration and I was appalled at what they were planning to do concerning agency structure -- that would have elevated the regulatory lawyers and diminished the role of the economists at the agency. Misguided and showed to me a lack of understanding of how organizational structures can affect what comes out of an agency. I am often at odds with the industry view regarding CFTC issues. I don't think the futures exchanges who have a lot of power necessarily are pro-competition and many of the non-exchange folks who lobby on CFTC issues are Washington or New York (Democrat - which is why they want to involve Ken at this level) lawyers who do not understand markets and who are more interested in being able to claim influence or impact. The CFTC is in awful shape -- the quality of staff is horrendous and the Commission is relying on some of the worst people for their policy work (same folks that Brooksley Born used same folks who have advocated more regulation of the OTC market for years). Many quality folks do not want the job as Chairman because it's been such a backwater. I am looking for some good folks. Have at least one person who would be good at that job. And it's not Newsome. Please do not share this information with the usual folks as they hate me anyway (I'm too free market and have argued against their fixes). Sorry for this scathing review but this is an important appointment. Wendy What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Dinner with Craig Goodman - Cancelled Body:: 202-333-3288 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential - ENhome Program Body:: The purpose of this message is to provide key areas (specifically IT Suppor= t=20 and Purchasing Organizations which might receive questions about the new=20 ENhome program) with preliminary information about the ENhome program as we= ll=20 as a standard message to deliver. The goal is to communicate a consistent= =20 message to all of our employees. Please keep in mind that changes are stil= l=20 being made at this time so your discretion is welcomed until the internal= =20 communication has been distributed. At the same time please inform the=20 appropriate individuals within your area that you believe might receive=20 questions. What is ENhome? An OTC approved program that will provide eligible employee= s=20 (active regular full-time and part-time employees whose business units ele= ct=20 to participate) at home with high-end internet devices broadband internet= =20 connection (where commercially available) and an employee-centric portal fo= r=20 personal use.=20 Attached to this message are three documents concerning this new program. = =20 These documents are: ENhome PowerPoint Presentation - High-level presentation provided to all of= =20 the Business Unit=01s Human Resource Departments describing the program. = =20 ENhome Draft of Internal Communications =01) This is a draft of the interna= l=20 communication that will be sent to eligible employees. I will send you the= =20 final copy when it has been approved. ENhome Q&A Draft =01) This is a draft of the Q&A document in case you may= =20 encounter these questions. Please review this document and if you feel the= re=20 are additional questions that need to be addressed let me know and I will= =20 work to get these answered. This program is scheduled to be announced to all eligible Enron employees a= t=20 either the end of this week or early next week. Remember that these=20 attachments are drafts and may be changed. As soon as I receive final=20 copies I will forward them to you. =20 Questions regarding the message from the Office of the Chairman concerning = =01&A=20 Computer for You and Your Family=018 should be responded to as: This program is being sponsored by Enron=01s Office of the Chairman and w= ill=20 be coordinated by Corporate Human Resources. The Global Information=20 Technology unit of Enron Net Works and Global Strategic Sourcing are workin= g=20 in conjunction with Corporate Human Resources to support this endeavor. =20 Details about this program are still being finalized and will be communicat= ed=20 as they become available. An eSpeak session will be scheduled in the near= =20 future where you will have an opportunity to ask questions. If you have any additional questions regarding this program or the=20 communications that will be released please feel free to contact me at=20 713-853-7947. Thanks Susan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT Body:: Thanks for the thoughts. I fully agree on BF costs and DWR costs. I believe that you are right on Est RT$ = CAISOM Imbalance but I need to check. On the question of retroactive ratemaking it is my understanding that you are correct. PG&E probably won't rebill but will need to put in place an adjustment to the going forward PX Credit to collect the overpayment of Negative CTC. All of this means that the impact of the FERC refund is less than 100c on the $ for the Negative CTC. Jim What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Weekly Retail Meeting, EB 27C1 Body:: John Anderson PTC/NERC Brad Petzold Power Nav -- John Henry (202) 466-0547 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Moving foward at a good clip Body:: Call at 5:00 today (3:00 your time) if you can. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Meeting Notice - California Document Production Issues Body:: calendar ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Terminability of Val Verde interconnect agreement Body:: I've looked into whether we can terminate our Val Verde interconnect agreement with Burlington and have determined we may do so only if we take the following steps: 1. Terminate the OBA by giving 30 days notice to Burlington. Paragraph 13 of the 6/1/94 OBA with Burlington (as successor in interest to Meridian) provides that either party may terminate the OBA at the end of the primary term or thereafter by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice to Burlington. (The one-month primary term ended June 30 1994 and has since gone month-to-month.) 2. On the effective termination date of the OBA terminate the interconnect agreement by giving 30 days notice to Burlington. The 12/31/92 Interconnect Point Operating Agreement Paragraph 6 provides that either party may terminate on 180 prior notice after expiration of the primary term. This is of limited use to us since the primary term does not expire until 12/31/02. However the paragraph also provides that the agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days prior written notice in the event the OBA between the parties is terminated. As we've already discussed termination of the agreement is an extreme measure from a customer relations standpoint and we probably need to weigh our other options first. Let me know if you have further questions. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Charts from Terry Thorn Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING - CONTACT IS TIM BURNS 703-741-5900 IN NAPLES FLORIDA, WANT TO GET THEM MORE ACTIVE, THEYVE ALREADY JOINED US, HAPHAZARD IN THEIR SUPPORT, DINNER ON THE 14, ASKED FOR SKILLING, CANT DO IT. Body:: Want you to speak from 10:15 - 11:00 ** Will be sending a letter this week (3/19/97) Flew to Austin on company plane What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: GENERATOR ORGANIZATION Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 005 Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Draft Organizational Announcement about Japan Body:: Suggested changes are highlighted below. John Sherriff@ECT 04/24/2001 12:55 AM To: (713) 529-7757 Ken Rice/Enron Communications Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications Mark Frevert/NA/Enron Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON Jeremy Thirsk/AP/Enron@ENRON Morten E Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT Jeffrey A Shankman/Enron@EnronXGate Raymond Bowen/enron@enronxgate Joe Gold/LON/ECT@ECT Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Carey Brian Stanley/EU/Enron Michael R Brown/LON/ECT Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT Ted Murphy/LON/ECT@ECT Rick Buy/HOU/ECT Richard Causey/Corp/Enron Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate [email protected] cc: Subject: Draft Organizational Announcement about Japan May I please have your comments if any on this draft by close of business Wednesday. We hope to have agreed on the Q&A's by then and to send it out the announcement on Thursday. John To be sent to: All Enron Europe all employees in Japan all Global Markets and all VPs and up around the company Enron has established several wholesale businesses in Japan in the last year including Metals Power Plant Development (via our investment in EnCom) Coal LNG & Weather. We see significant opportunities in each of these businesses and we will continue to expand our presence in Japan in order to capture these opportunities. However while Japan continues to make progress towards a liberalized electricity market significant barriers to power trading remain under the current interim market structure. Until further tangible steps are taken to improve third party access for electricity in Japan we will suspend our power marketing efforts and focus on the significant opportunities that currently exist in our other wholesale businesses. [Any statement regarding our existing power sales commitment?] Once the necessary regulatory changes have been completed we expect to aggressively pursue Enron's traditional position as the leading buyer and seller of electricity in every deregulated market. We are making a number of organization changes in order to better align our resources with the opportunities in the Japanese market. [deleted text] Joe Hirl our President of Enron Japan will move to the Global Markets group and lead a team that will focus on developing all our Global Markets opportunities in Japan especially Weather Oil LNG Coal and Shipping. We expect to continue our general recruiting of Japanese nationals and as President of Enron Japan Joe will continue to provide the overall business leadership to both recruiting and the Analyst and Associate program in Japan. The Finance origination team headed by Jeremy Thirsk will continue to report to Joe and also move to Global Markets. Our power trading group led by Morton Erik Pettersen will transition into other roles around Enron. The Equity/FX/Interest rate team which is a part of Global Markets has two employees in the Tokyo office today and they expect to expand their efforts throughout the year. The EnCom group which is our power plant development business (with minority partners) and headed by Carey Sloan will continue its efforts in developing power plants in Japan. We are pleased with the progress we are making on a number of sites and EnCom will continue to report to the Enron Europe Office of the Chairman. Our Metals team headed by Kazunari Sugimoto will continue to report through Enron Metals in London. By May we expect Enron Credit to have two to three employees in Tokyo pursing the Credit Derivative business. These employees remain in Enron Credit a part of Enron Europe. EBS has two employees headed by Jim Weisser and this team expects to expand by year end. The Industrial Markets team also expects to have two employees in the Tokyo office in the next couple of months. In the last seven months the commercial support services for Japan have been transitioned to London for support and this is not changing. Jane McBride heads the legal team and will continue to functionally report to Mark Evans General Counsel in London. The RAC function will continue to report to Ted Murphy head of RAC for Enron Europe. The Risk Management and Accounting team is headed by Jan-Erland Bekeng will continue to functionally report to Fernley Dyson in London. The IT HR Tax and real estate teams will also continue to functionally report to London. Nick O'Day who heads the Public Affairs group (Government & Regulatory Affairs and the Public Relations) in Japan will report to the Enron Europe Office of the Chair with a Public Relations functional reporting to Jackie Gentle in London and a Government Affairs functional reporting to Rick Shapiro in Houston. We anticipate that his team's efforts will be primarily directed to supporting the EnCom power plant development team but they will also continue to provide support for Global Markets EBS & Industrial Markets. We have already made considerable progress in breaking into the Japanese markets across a wide range of Enron businesses and we anticipate that this will provide significant profit growth for years to come. Through these current changes we can demonstrate our ability to be flexible and target our resources where they will realise the most immediate value for the company. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RED Index shows Texas, NY, and Maine advance on retreating Pennsylvania Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: Firsst article attached refers to the 1946 Nebraska case I mentioned to you= =20 in DC What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: ticket Body:: Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and from Amsterdam to Warsaw? I can also fly Continental through Rome or London as long as I don't have to change airports. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Purely Personal <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: CPUC Subpoena - Conference call TODAY! Body:: I won't be on the call but will fax my comments to you this am Twanda Sweet@ECT 10/06/2000 09:51 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT [email protected] cc: Subject: CPUC Subpoena - Conference call TODAY! Please be advised that there will be a conference call today at 11:30a.m. central standard time to discuss the draft response to CPUC. The dial in number is 800-998-2462 (passcode 4672956). If you have any questions please call me at 713-853-5587. Thanks. Richard Twanda Sweet Enron North America Corp. EB3821 (713) 853-9402 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Request Confidential Information by FERC Body:: We will be asking for confidential treatment unless and until the FERC requires similar information to be released by all market participants. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Body:: To:CASH MICHELLE Email:[email protected] - 7138536401 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities Enron Wholesale Services (EWS) has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (Policies and Procedures). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process the Review Team will play a more centralized role so that the role of the Resource Group is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year you need not re-certify at this time although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Assoc PRC (4 Seasons) Body:: Hartsoe: PJM HoganSPP WSCCHebertdemocratic nominee ACA Andy Rotherham AAE membership (703)875-0764 Gordon Weil page Maureen Joe Allen Dave Marquart Richard Tabors What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message (due to missing attachment) <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Fantastic Article in wash post on Refunds Body:: - California Changes Stance on Refunds Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks By Peter Behr Washington Post Staff Writer Friday July 6 2001 Page E01 California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. We've made suggestions we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion. The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr. according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood Wagner told reporters. In the event we're unable to do that [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment. The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner FERC's chief administrative judge has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California's largest utility drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative Michael Kahn chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high sources said. Wagner's settlement conference which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a joke that the parties might as well wear clown suits according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers led by Reliant Energy Inc. Williams Energy Services Duke Energy and Southern Co. for failing to make serious settlement offers these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile spot market prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer so did the state's electricity bills. In response Davis's aide S. David Freeman and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a refund because the deals were reached under commercial duress according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be said Michael Zenger California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a just and reasonable standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. It's not rocket science but it does require the regulators to regulate said Frank Wolak a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room billions of dollars apart as the talks approached their final weekend sources said. 2001 The Washington Post Company What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Southeast RTO: Southerns Load Body:: The Barton discussion draft says that FERC's hands would be tied and that they would have to approve a proposed RTO as to size and scope if the proposed RTO owns or has operational control over transmission facilities that serve at least 40000 MW of load. Southern's CEO testified in Congress recently that their load is over 35000. I assume the 40000 MW minimum would permit the SeTrans proposal to meet the proposed statutory minimum since it is Southern plus a few munis as I understand it. Is this correct? Who would know how many RTOs there would be if each were just over the 40000 MW minimum? I assume it is much more than 4-5 RTOs -- if so this is a good contrast to use in our Hill efforts. Thanks. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Confidential Attorney Client Privilege - Attorney Work Product Body:: The letter looks fine. Eric H's letter was addressed to market participants. Can we get EPSA or WPTF to file this letter? Alan C. Mary Hain 01/25/2001 04:58 PM To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT [email protected] Richard Sanders James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Joe Hartsoe@Enron Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT [email protected] Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT Richard Shapiro Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES Greg Wolfe@ECT Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro cc: Subject: Confidential Attorney Client Privilege - Attorney Work Product I have drafted the attached letter denying the Cal ISO's request to send it (and the EOB) EPMI and EES' cost information for transactions over the FERC's cost cap. Since I believe we are on very firm ground my initial inclination was to send no response to the ISO's letter so there would be nothing to quote in the press. However I drafted this letter at Alan's suggestion for purposes of discussion. We should decide whether to send a letter before distributing this draft more widely in-house to discuss how to parse the message. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Joao Neves Body:: Rita I have postponed all the hiring decisions till late August - early September. We can revisit Joao's case at this point. We shall have better information about the space in the new building we can count on and the time of the move. We appreciate Joao interest in Enron. Vince Kaminski What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Summary of Administration Comments on Bingaman Bill Body:: I have read through the 19 pages of Administration comments on the Bingaman draft electricity bill released last month. Here are the main items in a quick bullet format so you have the flavor of them. Delete provision on federal jurisdiction over bundled/unbundled (they don't offer a reason). We of course agree for tactical reasons. Add a provision to authorize FERC to order wheeling in States that open retail markets. Add a provision to allow FERC to issue wheeling orders on its own motion based on an informal hearing rather than an adjudicatory hearing as under current law. Make it clear that the Federal Power Act does not affect the authority of a State to require retail competition (the comments say some utilities have tried to argue that the FPA prohibits states). The provision giving FERC power to order RTO participation should be deleted. The comments raise drafting question. The changes to the FERC merger review sections of the FPA should be limited. FERC lite should be extended only to state municipal utilities and cooperatives not the Federal utilities. The FERC should authority over the Federal transmission systems equivalent to FERC authority over public utilities (with special BPA rules). No need to legislate on market-based rates (we oppose the Bingaman language anyway so this is helpful). Interconnection language should be limited to transmission facilities not local distribution. No objection to streamlined reliability provision (this is good for us). Remedial measures for market power should be deleted. Administration to provide legislative language on federal transmission siting provisions which they want to retain. Not convinced there is a need for market transparency rules because FERC and DOE already have enough authority. Administration supports even tougher criminal penalties. Recordkeeping under PUHCA repeal should be clarified. Federal purchase requirement for renewable energy should be deleted. No objection to real-time pricing standard. Net metering should be limited to small residential renewable facilities. Do not support federal renewable portfolio standard (but could clarify state authority to adopt same). What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Invitation Body:: Deniese Thanks for the invitation. I shall join you. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enron Japan Office Opening Ceremony Body:: I would like to do this but I have a speaking engagement the next day -- do the time zones work out so that I can do both or do I need to find a sub for the nov 1 speech? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: FERC/SEC Update Body:: please print What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Chairmans Speech Body:: Re-read your reply. Just wondering what it means to possibly add a provision which I understand is a may -- dealing with FERC's authority to change existing RTOs. Depending on what that means it could seriously hamstring FERC's efforts for a 4-5 RTO model as sought and we support by not letting FERC change existing RTOs (particularly if that includes pending but not approved) to change. For example would the language under consideration block a Northeast RTO of PJM NY and NE since PJM is existing and NY has filed? What would be the rationale for such a serious limitation on FERC's authority? Thanks. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Jeff on CNN Body:: fyi -- further distribute this message as you see fit. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Welcome New Associates - Reception Body:: calendar ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message (due to missing attachment) <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Hold for Cynthia - possible meeting with Erskine Bowles (with Dr. Lay) and others Body:: Dept of ag What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Industry News: Charges of Gouging as Power Costs Skyrocket Body:: fyi ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: CA Price caps Body:: Oops. My computer sent the message before I was finished. I continue to hope that there is more opportunity than risk in this for us. Price volatility is in the news like never before and our main product is price risk management. I know that the inquiries are up I hope EES and ENA can get some sales out of it. More utilities have been approaching TNPC EES and ENA about taking over their merchant functions. On the policy side we are working the issue on both a state and federal level. Whether this country does anything meaningful to deal with the current crisis comes donw to one person ... Linda Breathitt. Ken Lay spoke with Secy Richardson and Sen Schumer about proposing rulemaking initiatives to FERC. We are working the RTO process hard elsewhere in the country and coming up with messages to arm our remaining allies around the country. THis is the biggest time for us on this issue since the very beginnings in California and New Hampshire. In the current panic however we will be decimated if we are associated only with a move to keep price caps from going into effect (I saw your message to Mona). I am going to read the comments next but I start off thinking we need to avoid running headlong into the price cap movement we may be better off trying to co-opt the movement to get broader reform. Hang in there. Susan J Mara 08/11/2000 11:56 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: CA Price caps I heard you've been raising a ruckus about our activities on the price caps -- asking us to do more. Thanks. I feel as if I have been a voice in the wilderness for the past six months when I was trying to get people to pay attention to the bad things happening in CA and warning that the problems (mainly a threat of reregulation) will spread elsewhere. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Greetings from London Body:: Hello Darrell I am in London this week looking among other things at our CreditDesk.com operation. I was trying to access your expert report from your web site but it's password protected. Can you send me a copy? Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: Please see the following articles: Sac Bee Wed 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee Wed 6/6: PG&E ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee Wed 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union Wed 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union Wed 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union Wed 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union Wed 6/6: Port budget large but power bills loom SD Union Wed 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union Wed 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union Wed 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times Wed 6/6: 'Hi My Name Isn't Justice Honey' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times Wed 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times Wed 6/6: Natural Gas Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation mild weather are among factors keeping costs down exper= ts=20 say LA Times Wed 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron Wed 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel milder weather credited SF Chron Wed 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron Wed 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron Wed 6/6: California conserves SF Chron Wed 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron Wed 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News Wed 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register Wed 6/6: Feds probe AES Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire) Wed 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire) Wed 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight Wed 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 A lot of people are treating this like a lottery said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc. the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many Medhekar said the rationale seems to be 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' =20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on Sean O'Brien the club's golf course superintendent told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 When the power goes out everything just stops said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But she said I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.=20 Pam Chin a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues= =20 estimates that fewer than 1000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6000 customers are classified as essential by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co. Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab a veterinary hospital nursing homes medica= l=20 facilities businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present imminent danger to public health or safety but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 critical fuels saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 It's probably a stretch said Amanda Leveroni who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico about her request to the PUC. The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event she added. I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 [email protected]. PG&E ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.=20 In California the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However the department which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 summit between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis an= d=20 maybe the onus as well has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it and thus to FERC the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry pirates and profiteers. Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power Reliant Mirant Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that in the year 2000 sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator the agency that manages the state's grid who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute who conservatively calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion from Paul Joskow a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT and from Edward Kahn an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power. That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours when no one had ever seen a price spike before makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is in addition the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co. now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is Blackout a Frontline program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman who in working for both Frontline= =20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay a major Bush=20 supporter and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not fair and reasonable as federal law requires but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779 Sacramento CA 95852-0779 or at= =20 [email protected]. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying selling of electricity is a growth business but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices yet it's largely unregulated.=20 Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price said Frank Wolak a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market they add is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions shrouded in secrecy can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998 AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa Okla.= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing electricity is a commodity power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar) said Michael Peevey an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging or eve= n=20 better rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders but these often provide incomplete information or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000 FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey a FERC commissioner says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 Electricity can be flipped stripped and chopped up Massey said. It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.=20 Before deregulation electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4000 for a megawatt-hour of power a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak the Stanford economist and state Sen. Joseph Dunn D-Garden Grove= =20 who is investigating the state power market say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices they say.=20 As I trade to you and you trade to me we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get said Wolak. It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.=20 Mark Palmer a spokesman for Enron the nation's biggest power trader said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 It's a result of shortages Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn the California state senator says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand he noted companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices said Dun= n.=20 Trading develops a level of trust. You my alleged competitor will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 The broad goals of trading are the same Trebing said.=20 The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month 11 percent and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 We have had a few good days here lately said S. David Freeman a Davis= =20 power adviser. I don't think that I want to project.=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts an energy information service said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary Steve Maviglio told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now well below $50 million which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts fewer power plants off-line for maintenance and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However he said The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated Maviglio said referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21 Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June 48 percent in July and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June 67 percent in July and 60 percent in August.=20 We are still on target. There are risks Fichera said yesterday among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month as compared to May of last year came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000 set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego El Cajon Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval said Shames the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday 1 p.m. San Diego Concourse Copper Room 200 C St. San Diego.=20 ?Monday 7 p.m. El Cajon Community Center 195 E. Douglas Ave. El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday 1 p.m. Country Inn Hotel 35 Via Pico Plaza San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday 7 p.m. Center for the Arts 340 N. Escondido Blvd. Escondido.= =20 Port budget large but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 The rock is rolling financially but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 As far as trends we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years said Bruce Hollingsworth the port's treasurer. But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey president of Manchester Resorts told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth the treasurer said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a peaker= =20 plant such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= =20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower said Dale= =20 Mesple a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant if approved would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese CalPeak's plant would be able to operate up to 8760 hours= =20 per year typically when the demand for electricity is high. That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator which manages the energy grid.=20 We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed= =20 said Mark Lyons CalPeak's development director. Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process Rady said. It boils down to an issue of local control.=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 I expected they would want to approve the project and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under said Kathy=20 McCafferty spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 That $2000 was a big reserve for us she said. It seemed like a ton of= =20 money but boy it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here and we have to use air conditioning.=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem= =20 which is lack of community support she wrote. Ironically audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 If our energy bills double or triple we could be in dire straits she=20 said. It could push us over the edge financially.=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 We can't run a much leaner operation she said. If our power prices go u= p=20 again we may still be forced out of business.=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 In case there are planned or unplanned outages we still will be operating= =20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do Ruhm= =20 said. Now our service won't be interrupted.=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards= =20 fair officials said so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless Gosney said SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday June 6 2001=20 'Hi My Name Isn't Justice Honey' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says 'Hi my name is Spike honey.'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged raped and brutalized. What's worse Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who as a state senator sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity are the cause of= =20 the problem not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 [email protected] Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation which began last month in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal know= n=20 as a tolling agreement Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3900 megawatts=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos. said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April when Williams without admitting any=20 wrongdoing agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 We've always maintained that we've operated within the law and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington Va. and Williams Cos. of Tulsa Okla. California Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000 traders say with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night when demand slackens power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation mild weather a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 Conservation is starting to worry the generators which is nice to see= =20 said Severin Borenstein director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000 according to the state Energy Commission.=20 I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation [prices] won't= =20 stay down Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 It's hard to draw specific conclusions said Bruce Henning who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc. an Arlingto= n=20 Va. consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state Henning said= =20 adding The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday however the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock Ariz. a pipeline junction near the California border dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos. reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. Storage levels have been filling very rapidly= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater he said. That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons he said we could really break the backs of the generators we= =20 could really collapse the price.=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather which reduces demand for air conditionin= g=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 There's more supply relative to demand which is softening prices said= =20 Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. The= =20 market is working and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources not PG&E purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices Robinson said Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6 saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 California is not yet out of the woods said Kelley Doolan who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.=20 Along with lower gas prices the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum an=20 energy-industry association said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour he noted compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 If the weather stays this way we could have reasonable prices all summer= =20 Ackerman said. We may also have fewer blackouts.=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up as=20 critics have alleged might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 They're trying to take the heat off she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 This was just one month's decline said Michael Shames executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.=20 Steve Maviglio a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 We're not there yet Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. But the trend is pointing in the right direction.=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue though California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 The contracts look really ugly right now said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. They may be way overpriced.=20 Maviglio the governor's spokesman said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 No one has a crystal ball on this he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts which monitors average monthly spot prices found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer = he=20 said. That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather Doolan observed= .=20 The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 We're back on track to be completely full for winter said Staci Homrig = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. That's a very good thing.=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected].=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 I'm just as unhappy as everybody else Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = I=20 feel like no matter what happens we can't win.=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003 company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales the council yesterday approved a new= =20 cooperation agreement with Calpine. The vote with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay and a $6.5 million community benefits= =20 package with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition Gonzales said.=20 This council has not changed its decision he said. What we've done is= =20 change the facility.=20 Critics incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 It's too great of a risk she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather conservation more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle D-S.D. supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...= =20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. Unless FERC acts soon Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose R-Sacramento cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly by a 69-0 vote approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15 the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05 down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25 down 15 cents. Sempra Energy the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric closes at $26.91 down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co. to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand high wholesale energy costs transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings are refusing to sell to them leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility San Diego Gas & Electric which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= =20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable then that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed within two months to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time Gov. Gray Davis who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long hot summer filled with blackouts but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 Our customers are being really nice to us said Angelina Galiteva the=20 utility's strategic planning director. They love the DWP.=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 Without our support a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts which is a powerful message Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 When deregulation came the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment Galiteva said. But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s=20 however only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been somewhat isolated from the energy crisis= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses which officials= =20 have dubbed sympathy conservation. The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts Galiteva said. By= =20 this summer we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December we expect 60 megawatts in savings.=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 Conservation no longer means doing without Galiteva said. Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.=20 A Green Power program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar wind and hydroelectric power. About 75000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use Galiteva said. They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916 and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 It's nice to be the lean mean green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS Associated Press Writer Wednesday June 6 2001=20 2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= =20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks who represents the committee said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a management retention program.= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan Marks said.=20 The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network a consumer watchdog group says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess= =20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 01-30923 DM.=20 2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday June 6 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26 but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company Great Oaks Water may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte meanwhile said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation however didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at [email protected] or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp. the biggest U.S. power-plant developer disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation whic= h=20 began last month into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric the state= 's=20 largest utility to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas a spokesman for AES based in Arlington Va. said the U.S.= =20 investigation started no more than a couple of weeks ago.=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona Justice Department spokeswoman said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach designated must run under the Federal Power Act did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland which operates the three power plants was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05 to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1 to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy Calif.=20 June 6 2001=20 SAN JOSE Calif. June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN) the San Jose Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25 2001 Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21 2001.=20 Because the required natural gas water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw natural gas-fired simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation based in San Jose Calif. is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean efficient natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date the company ha= s=20 approximately 32200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation under construction pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933 as amended and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934 as amended including statements regarding the intent= =20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (the Company) and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= =20 but not limited to (i) changes in government regulations including pendin= g=20 changes in California and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= =20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media Lisa Poelle ext. 1285 or investors Rick Barraza ext.=20 1125 both of Calpine Corporation 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6 2001=20 HOUSTON June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29 or at a minimum amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps which send inaccurate market signals are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication said Joe Bob Perkins president and chief=20 operating officer Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported dispatch costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the proxy price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will by law run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers particularly=20 industrial companies which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations Los Angeles=20 310-444-1303 for Reliant Energy or media Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax=20 800-758-5804 ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall [email protected] President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price and they can also=20 generate income for farmers landowners and others who harness them his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language however the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment and surprise to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that with congressional leadership we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year said Katherine Hamilton=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates however envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably) environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 In the lumber and paper industries wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity=20 however biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power depending on its location at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already said the DOE six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example Southern Co. is working with DOE the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S. switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly per unit of energy than coal f= or=20 example and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use the IPCC report said. However note= s=20 the report's authors economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term however for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100 the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food fibre and energy but at some stage after that land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.=20 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Confidential - Rob Stewart Body:: Shanna I'm supportive of the raise to $150k. I think he is doing a good job and has a lot of value. He didn't fair well during the ranking due to lack of big $ or closure but maybe this will send him a good message. Thanks m What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: I love you. Call me. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Purely Personal <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Additional Lobbying Efforts Body:: FYI. I think they should try to get in to see Lundquist but I don't think we need to participate in this. We have been focussed on nation-wide issues when we have had the opportunity to meet with Lundquist and I don't think we should use our limited shots here. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Ken Lay Mention At NRSC Reception Last Night Body:: Last night I attended the National Republican Senatorial Committee's reception at Senator Frist's home in DC. (Frist is the NRSC chairman this cycle.) Enron including Jeff and Linda had been invited to the reception the purpose of which was to introduce ex-RNC chairman Haley Barbour as the NRSC's National Finance Chairman. Present were over a dozen Republican senators including Minority Leader Lott Whip Nickles and Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison Bunning (KY) Fitzgerald (IL) Cochran (MS) Inhofe (OK) Bond (MO) Crapo (ID) Voinovich (OH) Allen (VA) and Chafee (RI). The news from our perspective is that Haley Barbour singled out Ken Lay for praise as the first person to step to the plate and agree to help with their new Majority Makers program. This is the effort that Barbour will head up to raise $21 million for this election cycle by concentrating on events outside DC that would target businesses and business leaders without a DC presence. Barbour said that Ken had agreed to organize and chair a Houston fundraiser to raise $1 million toward the $21 million total. Ken was the first name he mentioned. The only others were the DeVos family in Michigan and Julie Finley a major GOP fundraiser based in DC. Needless to say I was suddenly quite popular after Haley made his remarks to the assembled group. Haley said he looked forward to working with us on this project. As you know from a previous e-mail Pat Shortridge had earlier seen our mutual friend Mitch Bainwol the executive director of the NRSC who had told Pat at lunch last week that Haley had spoken with Ken but last night was the first I had heard a dollar figure -- and a big one at that -- linked to the effort. While it was not stated I assume from the location and size of the event's goal that the President would be involved (but this is only an educated assumption on my part). Later I saw Karen Hughes of the White House staff but I do not think she was present when Haley made his comments. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Composition of unsecured creditors committee Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Body:: Shirley No problem. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Hope youre staying dry! Body:: Kate Not yet. I will know sometimes in August - September. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Op Ed satire Body:: Can one of you forward to Ed or whoever you feel appropriate? ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>