Message-ID: <18050010.1075840888200.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:09:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: tim.belden@enron.com
To: f..calger@enron.com, louise.kitchen@enron.com
Subject: RE: EES @ Silicon Valley Power (City of Santa Clara)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-From: Belden, Tim </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=TBELDEN>
X-To: Calger, Christopher F. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ccalger>, Kitchen, Louise </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Lkitchen>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \ExMerge - Kitchen, Louise\'Americas\Portland
X-Origin: KITCHEN-L
X-FileName: louise kitchen 2-7-02.pst

Another little adder to this concept.  Whether it's wholesale or retail, th=
e offer for this product would come from me -- either by way of Badeer on t=
he wholesale side or Richter on the retail side.  I have no interest in get=
ting short in Silicon Valley.  We don't have transmission to get to this hi=
ghly congested area.  There are huge risks associated with redefining NP15 =
into separate zones and large congestion charges associated with getting to=
 the SF penninsula.  This area looks a lot like Zone J in New York.  Not a =
place you want to be short.

 -----Original Message-----
From: =09Calger, Christopher F. =20
Sent:=09Friday, July 27, 2001 12:06 PM
To:=09Kitchen, Louise
Cc:=09Belden, Tim
Subject:=09FW: EES @ Silicon Valley Power (City of Santa Clara)

Just a little noise from the field offices...no need to do anything but I t=
hought you should be aware of a little skirmish.  Ader's version is differe=
nt -he says he only precluded Mike and Laird's involvement after receiving =
a lot of negativism from them about the EES concept.  Also, he thinks that =
SVP liked the product offering.   My opinion is that this a wholesale custo=
mer/opportunity. =20

Chris Calger
503-464-3735

 -----Original Message-----
From: =09Dyer, Laird =20
Sent:=09Thursday, July 26, 2001 10:33 AM
To:=09McDonald, Michael; Calger, Christopher F.
Subject:=09EES @ Silicon Valley Power (City of Santa Clara)

Mike & Chris,

I received a phone call from Wayne Ware of Silicon Valley Power ("SVP") thi=
s morning.  Apparently, EES met with SVP on Tuesday, July 24th to discuss t=
he sale of power and services through the City to targeted end-use customer=
s on an exclusive basis.

Based upon Wayne's comments, SVP staff's response was not favorable.  Ware =
offered the following comments:

1)  SVP dismissed the exclusivity element at the outset.
2)  EES's product is perceived to compete directly with SVP's core competen=
cy - provision of a fixed priced, load followed product.  SVP indicated tha=
t it currently offers term (up to 5 years), fixed priced, load followed pow=
er to its customers.  According to Wayne, over 100 MW's (20% of SVP's load)=
 is served this way.
3)  Ware opined that EES does not understand what SVP does or offers its cu=
stomers.  SVP was perplexed by this given that Wayne Truxillo (the EES rep.=
) worked for SVP and set up many of the fixed price programs that are curre=
ntly in place.
4)  SVP views EES's offering as a wholesale product.
5)  SVP also had concerns about EES's reputation and history in California =
citing the University of California fiasco.  SVP didn't think an EES produc=
t would be well received among its customers.

What is disturbing is that Mike and I asked both Truxillo and Ader if we co=
uld be included in these meetings or, at a minimum, be given the opportunit=
y to talk with our customers beforehand.  EES excluded us from this process=
.  Mike indicated that Ader was worried I would sabotage EES's efforts; tha=
t I would tell SVP that EES's proposal is a wholesale product replicating S=
VP's core competency of delivering a fixed priced, load followed product.  =
Mike and I had a somewhat heated discussion with Ader about their product o=
ffering.  Ader characterized the product as retail on the basis that it wou=
ld be sold one customer at a time and involved load following.  That the pr=
oduct is to be sleeved through SVP (actually sold to SVP for re-sale) and t=
herefore is a wholesale product was dismissed.  Ader also indicated that EE=
S would be offering behind the meter demand related services, which further=
 characterized their product as retail.  What is clear is that EES is searc=
hing for physical power sales.  They can offer behind the meter solutions w=
ithout the help or involvement of SVP.  Their product offering, once the de=
corations are removed, is a physical power sale.

As was our concern, we will now have to manage this issue, reacting to EES'=
s actions.

Ugh!!!

Laird