I think it's a fair statement that Enron doesn't currently support the Barton language.  On this issue, I would argue that any penalty imposed should remain the purview of FERC and its procedures.

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Perrino, Dave  
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09, 2001 11:13 PM
To:	Nicolay, Christi L.; Shelk, John; Steffes, James D.; Novosel, Sarah
Subject:	RE: Chairman Barton's Draft

Christi,

No, my concern was more of an organization like "NERC" imposing financial penalties on a grid user.  I thought our postion was that an RTO through its tariff rules or FERC could impose any penalties, but not a reliability organization. 

Thanks,

Dave

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nicolay, Christi L.  
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09, 2001 12:48 PM
To:	Shelk, John; Perrino, Dave; Steffes, James D.; Novosel, Sarah
Subject:	FW: Chairman Barton's Draft

I do have a concern from the standpoint that users are ultimately at the scheduling mercy of the operator.  The operator can cut our schedule.  Perhaps this is referencing something like reserves, where a user/load serving entity may have gone under the reserves and it gets some penalty?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Perrino, Dave  
Sent:	Monday, October 08, 2001 3:42 PM
To:	Nicolay, Christi L.
Subject:	RE: Chairman Barton's Draft

Christi,

Does 

"Section 216(e)(1) authorizes an electric reliability organization to impose a penalty on the user or owner or operator of the bulk power system if it finds, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, that the user or owner or operator violated a reliability standard.  Section 216(e)(2) provides for notice to FERC of penalties imposed by an electric reliability organization, and authorizes FERC to affirm, set aside or modify any penalty imposed by an electric reliability organization.  Section 216(e)(3) authorizes FERC to assign enforcement of reliability standards to regional transmission organizations.  Section 216(e)(4) authorizes FERC to enforce reliability standards and impose penalties on user or owner or operator of the bulk power system if FERC finds, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, that the user or owner or operator has violated or threatens to violate a reliability standard and this action affects or threatens to affect reliability of the bulk power system.  Section 216(e)(5) authorizes FERC to take such action as is necessary or appropriate against an electric reliability organization" 

Give us heartburn? 

Just wondering,

Dave


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nicolay, Christi L.  
Sent:	Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:43 PM
To:	Lindberg, Susan; Comnes, Alan; Perrino, Dave; Walton, Steve
Cc:	Shelk, John; Steffes, James D.; Hueter, Barbara A.; Guerrero, Janel; Novosel, Sarah
Subject:	FW: Chairman Barton's Draft

Susan --Can you check with Ben Jacoby and Fletcher Sturm on the TVA parts and with Rogers Herndon on the retail consumer aggregation parts.
West guys--BPA is discussed in this.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shelk, John  
Sent:	Wednesday, September 26, 2001 12:37 PM
To:	Nicolay, Christi L.; Lindberg, Susan
Subject:	Chairman Barton's Draft



Attached are: (1) highlights summary; (2) section-by-section summary; and (3) almost 150 pages of leg text (PDF doc) on Chairman Barton's draft electricity restructuring bill.  The RTO and bundled/unbundled sections will be provided "soon" (they day) (I am meeting with Mr. Barton's staff in a half hour), but there are "voluntary RTO" provisions in the incentive pricing section since they lifted that language from Burr-Sawyer legislation.  Mr. Barton has publicly said his addedum will mandate RTO participation at some point; I should know more after the meeting.  The draft below addresses a variety of issues, including TVA, BPA, etc., among others, that we also care about.  There is a retail consumer aggregation feature toward the end.  If you could look at the summary and section-by-section and let me know particular areas of interest/concern for further review that would be helpful.  Barton is taking comments through this week and next week.

 << File: BartonDraftHighlights092101.doc >>  << File: BartonDraftSecBySec092101.doc >>  << File: discussion draft september 21.PDF >>