Yes and no.  

They were supposed to call at 5am to see if they should come in at 700 (space 
permitting).  If no space is available, they are to go in at noon.  I'm 
guessing they went in at 7, since I think he would have called to say they 
haven't gone in.  Just a guess, though.  He has his computer at home, so I 
think if he was sitting around he would drop us a note.

Kay


   
	
	
	From:  Kathleen Carnahan                           03/29/2001 08:34 AM
	

To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: proposal to NMC

Ron has requested a CA in connection with discussions regarding the proposed 
project described below.  The site referenced as "Arpin" is the option we 
have in Wood County, Wisconsin.  Can you review it when I get it ready?

Any word from "Daddy Carlos"?

K-


---------------------- Forwarded by Kathleen Carnahan/NA/Enron on 03/29/2001 
08:24 AM ---------------------------


Ron Tapscott@ECT
03/29/2001 07:58 AM
To: Terri Clynes/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen Carnahan/NA/Enron@Enron 

Subject: proposal to NMC

Terri,

In preparation for our meeting tomorrow, Friday, March 30, I want to provide 
you background on the company we will be discussing --

 Nuclear Management Company Llc (NMC)
 joint venture between -- NSP, Alliant, WEPCO and WPS
 services provided -- manage the companies (noted above) 7 nuclear facilities 
(5 sites)
 The Facilities are as follows:
Point Beach Units 1&2, owned by WEPCO, located in east central Wisconsin (30 
miles SE of Green Bay), mW 523 and 500 mW respectively
Kewaunee, owned by WPS, located 27 miles SE of Green Bay, mW 511
Prarie Island Units 1&2, owned by NPS, located in Red Wing, MN, mW560 and 500 
mW respectively
Monticello Unit 1, owned by NPS, located 30 miles NW of Minneapolis, mW 536
Duane Arnold, owned by Alliant (IES Utilities), located 8 miles NW of Cedar 
Rapids, mW 515
Michigan nuclear facility (no details)


They are looking for a physical hedge (they suggested a 600 mW gas fired 
peaking facility) but may be receptive to a financial hedge (especially for 
the Michigan site) as well.  Or, a combination.  I would like to explore 
leveraging the Arpin site if we could.  They want ownership (percentage or 
all) of the gas fired facility.  Based on the geographic location of the 
facilities noted above.  The Arpin site should work well.  I would imagine 
they have firm service for those sites and if they are looking for the gas 
fired facility to take up the slack when these units are out, we should not 
have a problem with transport from the Arpin site (even though there is a 
west to east issue).

They would also like to market the gas fired facility when the unit is not 
needed as a backstop!  From a physical plant standpoint -- I would suggest 
that we carve out the development with a slight ownership that has a put 
option (for the equity we retain) at a future date (but retain a percentage 
of the marketing arrangement for sale of excess power in the market).  I 
think NMC wants complete control based on their view of deregulation in 
Wisconsin.  I believe their long term strategy is to have a PPA with the 
above Utilities for the offtake (firm output w/ firm price) and the ability 
to market the excess (from both the Nuclear Units and peaking facility) at 
market rates. 

This arrangement should be able to flange well with your financial insurance 
product (since the addition of the gas fired facility would provide more 
liquidity).

The contact at NMC is Greg Palmer (I believe he is ex -- ETS).  I have asked 
that we have a confidentiality agreement in place before we agree to discuss 
a proposal.  He agrees.  I will ask Kathleen Carnahan to prepare a draft 
agreement.  

I look forward to the discussion tomorrow.  Please call if you have any 
questions prior to the meeting.  Thanks, Ron.