RE: BOT Support for the ESC and Sector Voting ,
 Seems reasonable to me that we tell NERC they can't "make a land grab".  How about EPSA and ELCON signing a letter together to the Chairman of NERC Board?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Rodriquez, Andy 
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 11:33 PM
To: Steffes, James D.
Cc: Steffes, Darla
Subject: FW: BOT Support for the ESC and Sector Voting


Oops - sorry Darla.  I hit enter when I should have hit down arrow.

Jim, my apologies.


Andy Rodriquez
Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp.
andy.rodriquez@enron.com
713-345-3771 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rodriquez, Andy 
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 11:31 PM
To: Yeung, Charles; Bestard, Jose; Steffes, Darla; Shapiro, Richard
Subject: RE: BOT Support for the ESC and Sector Voting


Charles, Jose, Jim, and Rick, 

I would like to send the letter below out to the ESC.  Before I do so, do you have any objections?  I would like to put some fire under this issue, as the "new sector weighted voting model" seems to be yet another way to preserve the power of the traditional utility.  However, I don't know if we will compromise any of our other positions by stirring this particular pot.  Thoughts?

Andy



Gordon,

When did the ESC vote to adopt the  "new sector weighted voting model?"  Has the ESC been absorbed into NERC, and is the NERC Board ordering them to use this new model?  If so, is the ESC a new standing committee?  Do they report directly to the board? Just where would the ESC fit in NERC?

Unless the ESC votes to change their charter to say they are a group under NERCs control, I don't see how this can move forward as written.  The ESC has never been a NERC group, but instead a industry collaborative which NERC has assisted with administrative matters (facilitation, meeting schedules, etc...).  If I recall correctly, there was a significant number of people that specifically did not _want_ the ESC to be a NERC group, (APPA, ELCON, EPSA, and a few others, if I remember correctly).  This was why the NERC ESTF became the non-NERC ESC.  I expect several entities will have comments to make before just handing the keys to NERC.  

Of course, those comments may have already been made at the Board, and may have been addressed there.  But I seriously don't think NERC can just "annex" the ESC without the ESC voting to be annexed.  

Other members of the ESC - do you share this concern?

Andy Rodriquez
Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp.
andy.rodriquez@enron.com
713-345-3771 

-----Original Message-----
From: Gordon Scott [mailto:Gordon.Scott@nerc.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:55 AM
To: Electronic Scheduling Task Force
Subject: BOT Support for the ESC and Sector Voting
Importance: High


Dear ESC,

Attached are two documents from the recent NERC BOT meeting: 1.  Board
Resolutions; 2. Initial Voting Sectors and Criteria Model.

In the Board Resolution document please note items 7, 8, and 9 as they
deal directly with the ESC.

Thanks, Gordon.

		 <<Board Resolutions on Items 20 21 22.doc>> 	 <<FINAL
SCRTF Initial Sectors and Criteria 092701.doc>>
andy.rodriquez@enron.com, charles.yeung@enron.com, jose.bestard@enron.com