I may be too late, because I took a couple of days of vacation, but I will 
still respond.  I think with adjustments and broadening, there should be a 
proposal that Enron and Reliant could both support.  

1.  Under Reliant's plan, the customer is selling a call option for 
interruption, rather than a block of energy. This means the customer is not 
planning ahead to shift production, but waiting for the call to be 
exercised.  This doesn't do much for forward planning and it makes it 
difficult for an industry to plan ahead.  Some customers who cannot live with 
an interruption on call, can nevertheless move production on a planned basis 
to another day, another factory, or even give up production for a period.   
The best outcome is for the customer to be able to bid for either sale of a 
preplanned block of energy or sale an interruptible call option.  This is the 
broadening of the proposal I suggest.

2.  WSCC is the WRONG the absolutely WRONG place for the market to be 
organized.  They have no experience or infrastructure for handling market 
activity.  WSCC runs in terror whenever an economic issue is raised.  The 
utilities have way to much voting power.  The list goes on.  Under WSCC the 
proposal will be talked to death.  You need someone with infrastructure to 
run a market.  Why limit this to one market or marketer.  The key is getting 
the state tariff riders in place, then the utilities can place the orders 
with whatever vendor offers the best price.  If a neutral site for posting is 
needed, use APX or maybe even the WSPP bulletin board.  This centralization 
in a single market is not helpful.

Steve



	Richard Shapiro@ENRON
	04/12/2001 01:30 PM
		 
		 To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul 
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Reliant Negawatt proposal

Comments?
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 04/12/2001 
01:29 PM ---------------------------
From: Tom Briggs on 04/12/2001 11:46 AM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:  

Subject: Reliant Negawatt proposal

I have attached a proposal prepared by Reliant.  Reliant hopes that it is 
something that Enron can support (with any modifications).  Steve Walton has 
concerns about the role of the WSCC.  ELCON supports the concept with some 
other modifications.  I recognise that there are issues. Nonetheless, to 
respond to Barton's short term emergency measures, it would be usefule to 
know whther a negawatt program across the WSCC can be im[plemented by June.