put this into the congestion redesign file if you haven't alread.
---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 08/08/2000 09:55 AM 
---------------------------


Susan J Mara@EES
05/16/2000 08:33 AM
To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Tim 
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:  
Subject: CAISO Congestion Model

Carl has been working with Enron and others and the ISO to develop a model 
that works for CA as well as for the Desert Southwest (which the ISO would 
then operate).  I think this summary explains the kinds of things were trying 
to get in congestion management reform.  I'll send a few other things to look 
at.
---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 05/16/2000 10:28 
AM ---------------------------

	
	Carl Imparato
	
	04/24/2000 12:49:26 PM
	
Sent by: Carl Imparato
To: zalaywan@caiso.com
cc: smara@enron.com, curt.hatton@gen.pge.com, jim.filippi@gen.pge.com, 
gackerman@wptf.org, alexp@eccointl.com, kewh@dynegy.com, skelly@iepa.com, 
jstremel@apx.com, bmspeckman@aol.com 
Subject: CAISO Congestion Model

Ziad:

Per our conversation this morning, attached is a summary of what I view to be 
the key attributes of a "reformed" zonal congestion model.  The document does 
not fully address all of the issues discussed at last Thursday's congestion 
reform meeting in Sacramento, but I believe that (other than for some 
details) it is consistent with what both the ISO and many of the market 
participants are proposing.

This summary does not necessarily reflect the views of my clients, who 
haven't yet had the time to review it... but I don't believe that it would be 
too far off.  

I am sending this summary to you to put into context the many comments that I 
offered at last Thursday's meeting and also to support my view that, if the 
ISO were to implement the CONG/ASM integration by DECENTRALIZING the process 
rather than CENTRALIZING the process, there would not be much difference 
between what I've been advocating in the Southwest and the CAISO's model.  
(The primary remaining differences would be: (i) the way the "hour-ahead" 
process works - i.e., continuously vs. one discrete time; and (ii) the way 
scheduling is done - i.e., the ISO would not act as the SC's representative 
in acquiring rights that could be made available through inter-zonal 
counterflows since the SCs would do this themselves.)  So there is a real 
possibility that, with some agreement on the ISO's longer-term plans (whether 
integration of transmission rights and ancillary services procurement will 
rely on decentralization vs. centralization), we could bring together the 
models for the region.  

Carl

[Sue, Curt, Jim, Gary, Alex, Kent, Steven, John and Barney: I'd appreciate 
any feedback... but if you want me to see it, be sure to send it to 
cfi1@tca-us.com, NOT the enron address from which this e-mail was sent.   
Carl]