Mary --

Did anyone file for rehearing to "include" LT contracts into the review 
process?

Jim





	Mary Hain@ECT
	03/12/2001 01:31 PM
		
		 To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com@ENRON, Susan J 
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Christian 
Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tracy Ngo/PDX/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: FERC Order and DWR

In the Staff Recommendation on Prospective Market Monitoring and Mitigation, 
March 2001, the FERC Staff stated that its proposed mitigation proposal is 
designed to apply only to approximately 5% of the market that remains in 
real-time and not to the bilateral and forward markets.  In addition, the 
December 15 order only established a reporting requirement for sales into the 
ISO and PX spot markets exceeding $150/MWh.  Under the order, the refund 
potential closes after 60 days of a utility filing its cost justification 
unless the FERC issues written notification to the seller that its 
transaction is still under review.  Note well that this does not entirely 
insulate EPMI concerning long term deals because the FERC's December 15 order 
is still pending rehearing and parties can appeal that order once the 
Commission rules.


From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 03/12/2001 12:00 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com, Susan J 
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Christian 
Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: FERC Order and DWR

Quick question to Joe and/or Christian, John and Mary:

I'm assuming that any deal we sign with DWR that falls below the $150/MWH 
soft cap is free and clear of the order FERC issued on Friday as well as any 
other refund risk associated with FERC's December order.  Is that correct? 
Thanks.

Best,
Jeff