Looks like Duke agreed to a FERC-type confidentiality provision ,
 Duke Energy Asked to Allow Release of Data
Power: Senator says the generator is refusing to make public some information 
crucial to the price-gouging probe. Firm says it's complying.
CARL INGRAM
TIMES STAFF WRITER

July 10 2001

SACRAMENTO -- The chairman of a Senate committee probing suspected price 
gouging during the California energy crisis charged Monday that Duke Energy 
is refusing to allow him to make public information key to his investigation.

Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana) said Duke has made the price bidding information 
from its Chula Vista plant available to committee members and staffers. But 
under a federal confidentiality rule, the data cannot be made public without 
Duke's consent.

The documents concern the Chula Vista plant, which former employees have 
alleged was ramped up and down to drive up power prices during three days in 
January. However, state records show that the agency overseeing the 
electricity grid ordered those gyrations to keep the power flowing throughout 
the state. Dunn said Duke's refusal thwarts the committee's investigation and 
efforts to enact possible remedial legislation because the confidential 
information cannot be shared with others in the Legislature or the public.

Dunn said Duke cited a rule of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that 
gives the company the authority to decide which records it makes public and 
which stay secret.

"The only one who can release the data is Duke. We agreed to be bound by what 
is provided in the FERC tariff, nothing more or less," he said.

Former Employees Tell of Maneuvers

Dunn noted that the committee is considering trying to obtain the information 
elsewhere and "release it over Duke's objections."

Three former workers at the Duke plant near Chula Vista testified last month 
under oath that the plant, among other things, was ramped up and down in what 
seemed to be an effort to maximize revenue during the Jan. 16-18 emergency.

But Duke countered immediately that it had merely obeyed orders of the 
California Independent System Operator, which keeps the state's electricity 
grid in balance. Duke later provided Cal-ISO documents backing up its 
explanation.

Duke executives insisted that the former employees failed to provide a full 
picture of the plant's operation during the three days.

But Dunn, chairman of the select Senate committee on alleged price gouging, 
said Monday that by refusing to authorize release of all the subpoenaed data, 
Duke was guilty of the same tactics.

"Duke is trying to draw the impression that it has [provided] the full 
picture. But they are fully aware that we cannot draw any final conclusions 
until all that data has been released. That hasn't occurred," Dunn said.

To make a determination whether the Chula Vista power was withheld to drive 
up prices, Dunn said, the committee must publicly examine "the bids Duke 
submitted from which the ISO issued orders to the plant." They include the 
expensive hour-ahead and day-ahead markets, he said.

Duke, a North Carolina-based wholesaler that operates several plants in 
California, noted that it considers the information proprietary and 
off-limits to legislators not on the committee.

Duke spokesman Tom Williams insisted that the generator is attempting to 
comply with the committee's demands. But he was unable to say whether Duke 
would agree to make the bidding documents public along with other records the 
committee plans to turn over.

"We are complying now," Williams said. "There is some suggestion that we are 
leaving stuff out when we have not had a chance to testify. . . . I don't 
know what we are ultimately going to do."

The committee had threatened to cite eight wholesale generators unless they 
provide pricing and bidding documents by Wednesday. Six, including Duke, have 
said they would comply to avoid a contempt citation. Two, Enron and Mirant, 
were cited.

Dunn said the committee on Wednesday likely will give companies that are 
trying to comply an extra week to do so, but others probably will be formally 
charged with contempt in a report to the full Senate. The upper house is the 
final arbiter of such issues.

Although there is scant precedent for levying penalties against those cited 
for contempt, Dunn said he favors imposing severe fines. In 1929, the most 
recent case, a cement company executive was sent to jail. 
Copyright 2001, Los Angeles Times 

Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
richard.shapiro@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com, mark.palmer@enron.com, 