Are we sure we can live with everything else in the PJM Single RTO proposal?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Novosel, Sarah  
Sent:	Wednesday, September 05, 2001 6:36 PM
To:	Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Robertson, Linda; Presto, Kevin M.; Fromer, Howard; Allegretti, Daniel; Hoatson, Tom
Subject:	Support of PJM's Proposal to Implement Northeast RTO

As I mentioned to each of you today, we plan to sign Enron's name as a member of the "One RTO Coalition" in support of PJM's proposal for developing a single Norhteast RTO with a single day-ahead and real-time energy market in the Northeast.  PJM's proposal is attached.  As you may recall, I gave you a copy of PJM's proposal and we discussed it when I was in Houston a couple of weeks ago.  The main concern with PJM's proposal is its timing -- their time line provides for an implementation date of November 2003.  We have talked extensively with PJM about the need to speed up the implementation process, and PJM agrees that they will move aggressively, but they are unwilling to change their target date in their proposal.

Because we disagree with the PJM date, we propose to have Enron Power Marketing, Inc.'s name included on the list of supporters of the proposal, with the following footnote:

	While all of the members of the One RTO Coalition support the substance of PJM's proposal to implement a single energy market as described herein, Enron 	Power Marketing, Inc. dissents from PJM's date of November 2003 for implementing the single RTO in the Northeast.  Enron believes that the PJM proposal 	can and must be implemented by December 2002 and that extension of the implementation date past December 2002 is unnecessary and contrary to the 	Commission's RTO policy established in Order No. 2000.

This footnote will preserve our right to argue against PJM's timing in comments to the Commission after the Judge submits his report (due on September 17).  In those comments we can go into much greater detail about the need for quick implementation.

Please let me know if you have any suggested changes to the footnote or if you disagree with our proposed strategy.  We will address this issue on Thursday at mediation (I thought it was going to come up today, which is why I called each of you), so if you have any comments or concerns, please let me know as soon as possible. 

Thanks

Sarah

	 << File: PJM Market Design Proposal.pdf >>