Once Susan gets the last few pieces of info, either Steve or I should call 
ECS and try to resolve this.  Steve--you or me??  Its your call.  DF




Susan Scott
01/21/2001 12:45 PM
To: Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, James Centilli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew 
Fossum@ENRON
cc: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: ECS Gallup contract

Here are some bullet points based on our conversation Friday morning 
regarding the ECS Compression Service Agreement.  These bullet points 
summarize our position and are intended to be a starting point for a 
conversation between persons at TW and at ECS (who are yet to be determined) 
regarding the additional power costs incurred by Transwestern as a result of 
the lack of a system for monitoring peak loads on CDEC.  If you have 
additional comments, please let me know.  

We still need to decide who is going to call whom; I am going to leave that 
up to you, but do let me know if I can help. 

-  ECS is under an obligation to work in good faith with CDEC to establish a 
monitoring system that would automatically 
alert TW to peak loading conditions on CDEC's system.  

-  Rate No. 21 became effective in July 2000.  ECS did not obtain permission 
for TW to access the "Members Only" portion of CDEC's website (which contains 
load data) until January 2001.  Access to the information required a 
confidentiality agreement, which was executed in December.

-  ECS blames the delay on Tri-State/CDEC, who allegedly would not work on 
the confidentiality agreement until the merger was completed.   "Good faith" 
by ECS would reasonably include alerting TW to any such delay or any 
difficulty in getting access to CDEC's information.  TW was never contacted 
in this regard.  

-  Since Rate No. 21 contains a rebate for customers that avoid peak load 
times, we assume that CDEC is under an obligation to provide such customers 
with access to peak load information (I have not been able to verify this, 
but it makes sense).  If this is true, we should have been able to have 
access immediately upon the effectiveness of Rate No. 21.

-  Most if not all of the $325,000 peak load costs incurred by TW since July 
could have been avoided had TW had access to a monitoring system.  Because it 
did not alert TW to difficulties/delay in getting the necessary information 
from CDEC, ECS did not act in good faith in obtaining such access and should 
therefore take responsibility for its share of the consequences.

-  ECS needs to act without further delay to build an automated monitoring 
system to eliminate the need for someone to continuously monitor the 
website.  An estimated completion date should be provided.

I've left messages at CDEC to ask about access to the Members Only part of 
the website; I'll follow up.  The website states only that access is granted 
"on a case-by-case basis."  I hope to make contact on Monday and will let you 
know what I'm able to learn from them.