----- Forwarded by Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron on 09/25/2000 08:56 AM -----

	Harry Kingerski
	09/25/2000 08:54 AM
		 
		 To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J 
Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Re: PG&E strategy

More feedback from Dennis .... I think this requires some 
scrutiny/scrubbing.  Also, I don't think it adheres to the "compromise" that 
was struck among EES participants in the earlier discussion.   I will pursue 
conflict in EES.   Jeff - think we need another conference call soon?

----- Forwarded by Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron on 09/25/2000 08:48 AM -----

	Dennis Benevides@EES
	09/24/2000 09:36 PM
		
		 To: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Scott 
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES
		 Subject: Re: PG&E strategy



Please see comments on PG&E strategy.  I have made some modifications to be 
more consistent with the three main messages of the ISO MSC report dated 
9/6/00.  Any proposal should address the three messages of this report 1) 
Eliminate mandatory UDC day ahead purchase requirement from PX (this may 
allow generators to exercise mkt power during time periods of high demand) 
and allow utilities to hedge forward purchases in bilateral markets at 
shareholder risk, 2) Provide demand price signals in PG&E/SCE service 
territories ASAP but no later than 10/1/2001 and 3) eliminate incentive for 
large SCs to under schedule in ISO real time market (adopt ISO proposals for 
imbalances in excess of 250 MW per hour).

Dennis


From: Harry Kingerski@ENRON on 09/21/2000 02:18 PM
To: Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, James M 
Wood/HOU/EES@EES
cc:  
Subject: PG&E strategy

Let me know how this looks.  I'll be shopping it around Govt Affairs.