Because WIO will be deciding issues involving the primary congested paths in 
the West, I believe the issues to be resolved by WIO may be very important.  
Accordingly, I have argued in-house (to anyone who will listen) that we 
should be arguing that WIO should be independent.  I don't believe that it is 
independent, it's a stakeholder board, like California and the WSCC, both of 
which we have had problems with. 

Historically, a number of people have worked on WIO.  Tom worked on it for a 
while.  Recently, I think Marcie Milner has been monitoring the meetings.  I 
think Steve Walton and DIck Ingersoll may also be following WIO to some 
degree.  Also Jim has suggested to Alan that he might want to be following 
"seams" issues.  A while ago Marcie asked me to review the governance 
structure.  I told her that I didn't like the lack of independence and 
suggested that we oppose it.  Nonetheless, I believe I was told that we had 
already agreed to it.  


From: Joe Hartsoe@ENRON on 12/04/2000 12:55 PM CST
To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Western Connection Interface (WIO)

Mary  -- Your thoughts?  Who has historically been in charge of the WIO 
effort?  Thanks Joe
----- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 12/04/2000 12:53 PM -----

	Christian Yoder@ECT
	12/04/2000 12:42 PM
		 
		 To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Western Connection Interface (WIO)

Elizabeth has not read this yet.----cgy
---------------------- Forwarded by Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT on 12/04/2000 
10:27 AM ---------------------------


Steve C Hall
12/04/2000 10:39 AM
To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Western Connection Interface (WIO)


---------------------- Forwarded by Steve C Hall/PDX/ECT on 12/04/2000 10:44 
AM ---------------------------


Steve C Hall
11/30/2000 05:17 PM
To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  

Subject: Western Connection Interface (WIO)

Christian,

Earlier this week you asked me to review a stack of documents (proposals and 
draft bylaws) relating to the proposed Western Interconnection Organization.  

Conclusion:  Based upon a quick review of the draft proposal, bylaws, and 
other materials, I see no major objections to Enron voting for the formation 
of the WIO.   The reason to vote for this organization would be to facilitate 
the development of uniform reliability standards and efficient electric 
markets in the Western Interconnection.  However, you should carefully 
consider the fact that the board of directors will be weighted towards 
transmission owners (who will have 8 of the 27 votes).  Power marketers, 
generators, and load-serving entities will only have 4 votes.  14 directors 
establish a quorum and the board only requires a majority vote of directors 
present, so it is conceivable that, for example, 15 directors show up, 8 of 
which are transmission owners, and the transmission owners are able to pass 
any resoultion they wish.  Related to this issue is the inability of one 
membership group, such as the power marketer's group, to be able to veto a 
proposal.  It will take three membership classes acting in unison, plus two 
other votes, to defeat a proposed action by the board.  Unfortunately, 
because I am not personally familiar with the internal dynamics of the WSCC 
membership, I am unable to offer any indication of the how much of a risk 
this presents.  

       Background and Overview
In General:  The Western Interconnection Organization ("WIO") will be formed 
by consolidating the Western Regional Transmission Association, the 
Southwestern Regional Transmission Association, the Northwestern Regional 
Transmission Association, and the Western States Coordinating Council (WRTA, 
SWRTA, NRTA, and WSCC, respectively) into one organization.  The WIO, a 
non-profit corporation, will assume and perform the functions of these 
organizations, and, eventually, those organizations will be disbanded.

The principal responsibilities of the WIO will be as follows:

 *The WIO will be the primary authority for promulgating regional 
reliability, operating, and procedural standards.
 *The WIO will work to resolve conflicting regional reliability standards, 
and work to develop compatible and efficient practices throughout the Western 
Interconnection.
 *The WIO will have no authority over commercial practices (but may work to 
promote compatible, efficient markets).
 *Provide a process for resolving disputes arising out of WIO functions and 
between WIO members.

Membership:

Any entity meeting the criteria for membership in one of the following 
membership classes may be Member of the WIO.  There are five classes of 
membership:  (1) Business entities owning more than 1000 miles of 
transmission lines, (2) Business entities owning less than 1000 miles of 
transmission lines; (3) Business entities that do not own, control, or 
operate transmission or distribution lines, e.g., power marketers, 
load-serving entities, independent power producers; (4) End users of 
electricity; and (5) Representatives of States and Provinces in the Western 
Interconnection.

 *Each class elects four (4) directors.
 *All of the classes select seven (7) non-affiliated directors, for a total 
of twenty-seven (27) directors.
 
Quorum:  A majority of all members, including a majority in at least three 
classes.  In the case of directors, there must be 14 directors.

Board Decisions:  A board decision requires a majority of the directors 
present.

Standing Committees:  There are three standing committees:  the Planning 
Coordination Committee, the Operating Committee, and the Market Interface 
Committee.  

Committee Voting:  For purposes of voting on recommendations to the board, 
committees are divided into three classes:  (1) transmission providers, (2) 
transmission customers, and (3) States and Provincial Members (which is Class 
5). In order to make a recommendation to the board, there must be a simple 
majority of votes from the transmission provider and transmission customer 
classes.

Termination:  The WIO can be terminated upon a vote of the majority of the 
members.