Posted on 01/12/2002 9:35:48 AM PST by vmatt
Nothing here has been deleted and by far most posts have been measured and intelligent.
"You think you are really smart about this. Better check out which party controls FERC. Very few of Bush appointees have been approved for anything thanks to daschle and if you bothered to do research bet you will find that very few if any have been appointed to this Commission by President Bush. This is another one of these you may not like what you find."
Check the May 2001 PBS Frontline interview with (now) former FERC Chairman, Curtis Hebert (a Bush appointee, BTW).
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blackout/interviews/hebert.html
Excerpts below:
Frontline: "Mr. Lay made no secret with us about his close relationship with the president and the White House and so on. We've been told that he in fact says things like, "I'll help you with what you need politically, let's say, staying on as chairman of the FERC, if you'll go along with me on this policy issue." Did that ever happen?"
Hebert: "I would never make that trade. "
Frontline: "Did he ever propose such a trade?"
Hebert: "I would just say that I would never make such a trade."
...
Frontline: "Our sources tell us that in fact he offered to talk to the president on your behalf if you would go along with what he wanted."
Hebert: "I don't think there's any doubt he would be a much stronger supporter of mine if I ... were willing to do what he would want me to do."
Frontline: "If I were to tell you that he has told the governor of California, for instance, in a private meeting which the governor then reported, that you're history, you're going to be replaced. Does that surprise you?"
Hebert: "Nothing that comes out of California at this point would surprise me. It's not secret that Governor Gray Davis asked for the previous chairman under President Clinton of this agency to be fired. I know for a fact that he has asked for me to be fired as well. I'm not sure what the litmus test is for Gray Davis. And if there is some relationship between Gray Davis and Ken Lay, I find that very curious."
Frontline: "Our information is that Ken Lay told the governor, "Keep your powder dry. Hebert is going to be out of there soon. Pat Wood will be in his place." It sounds like he's confident that you're history."
Hebert: "Well, I think the president will make that call, and not Ken Lay. "
Frontline: "I called the vice president. I've talked to the vice president. He says Pat Wood will be the new chairman. It sounds like Ken Lay is getting his way."
Hebert: "He might. This will be the first knowledge I've had if Pat Wood is in fact to be chairman."
...
Frontline: "Other people we've spoken to say that if you don't please Ken Lay and Enron, you don't wind up on the FERC as a nominee."
Hebert: "Obviously, I'm here until 2004 regardless of what happens now. If at some point the president decides he would like to have someone else as chair, that is certainly his opportunity and ability to do so as president of the United States, and I would honor that."
Three months later, Hebert "resigned," and Pat Wood replaced him. So, I guess we do know who was running FERC then...Ken Lay.
Barbara H.
Thanks and wow.
Kenneth Lay’s new lawyer: “No, sir, it’s 10b5, sir, Rule 10b5. It’s a securities rule.”
Kenneth Lay (Texas Bidniss wizard): “Ten be five? Yew sayin me and my boys is goin to prison cuz we dint know dat ten be five?”
Kenneth Lay’s new lawyer: “Yes, sir, I’m afraid that’s correct, sir.”
Kenneth Lay (Texas Bidniss wizard): “Where’s GW? Did he know dat ten be five?”
Kenneth Lay’s new lawyer: “I assume so, sir. The President went to Yale, sir, and I’m confident that he didn’t commit any securities fraud. ”
Kenneth Lay (Texas Bidniss wizard): “Why dint GW tell us dat ten be five?”
My take: This Enron mess is just a sneaky way to get more Federal funds for Texas schools.
... eight hundred pound gorilla on their shoulders called 'Eight Years of The Clinton Administration'.
First of all it allows market based prices, and second, there was a thirty day period allowed for any protest to be raised. Obviously, no one complained, therefore, what's the point?
I am not an expert on these matters, but it is my guess that these waivers are fairly routine, and allow for quicker price changes in a volatile market. faster price changes can work either way for the consumer, depending on which way the market is moving.
According to your source, it was allegedly California Governor Gray who said Hebert was going to be replaced.
Funny how you and this reporter casually twisted that around.
If Gray was running the nation's energy policy, as you would evidently reason, you should ask your congressman to investigate IMHO.
It says here that they applied for the blanket approval. Can we be sure that they got it?
How many new issuances of securities did Enron make in 2001 after this blanket approval? This would tell us when and how many times they would have had to get a new approval.
Did they ever receive blanket approval at any other time in the past? Do they have to re-apply for it every year, or is it permanent?
Couple of things. These bureaucrats at the DOE are not financial analysts. They would have deferred "financial stability" to the SEC and to the corporations independent Certified Public Accountants. Said Certified Public Accountants are in a world of hurt as they signed off on the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements and then proceeded to destroy documents. This is a story about fraudulent company management and incompetent independent auditors. While a very bad deal, it just doesn't touch the political realm.
You are correct. However, a waiver for a company in Enron's ilk absolutely could not operate without one and without the waiver would have been required by regulation to disclose facts about their fiscal situation that would have exposed them.
Would you like to offer some backup to that {a Bush appointee, BTW}?.. Any good url, article, congressional record will do..............
Now President Bush did name Mr. Hebert [a republican] as Chairman in Jan. 2001, but Mr Hebert was appointed by President Clinton in 1997............
That said, note that this is not the first time Enron or its partnerships applied for blanket approval under 18 cfr part 34.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Enron Energy Services Power, Inc. ) Docket No. ER98-13-000
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF ORDER
(December 11, 1997)
Enron Energy Services Power, Inc. (Enron Energy), is a power marketing affiliate of Enron Corporation and Portland General Electric Company. It also is an affiliate of Enron Power Marketing, Inc., another power-marketer with market-based rate authorization. Enron Energy filed an application for authorization to sell electric energy and capacity at market- based rates, and for certain waivers and authorizations. In particular, Enron Energy requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liabilities by Enron Energy. On November 26, 1997, the Commission issued an Order Conditionally Accepting For Filing Proposed Market-Based Rates (Order), in the above-docketed proceeding.
The Commission's November 26, 1997 Order granted the request for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to the conditions found in Ordering Paragraphs (D), (E), and (G):
(D) Within 30 days of the date of issuance of this order, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the Commission's blanket approval of issuances of securities or assumptions of liabilities by Enron Energy should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214.
(E) Absent a request to be heard within the period set forth in Ordering Paragraph (D) above, Enron Energy is hereby authorized, pursuant to section 204 of the FPA, to issue securities and assume obligations and liabilities as guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issue or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Enron Energy, compatible with the public interest, and reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
(G) The Commission reserves the right to modify this order to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued Commission approval of Enron Energy's issuances of securities or assumptions of liabilities. . . . - 2 - Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to intervene or protests, as set forth above, is December 29, 1997. Copies of the full text of the Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. </font face>
Zond Development Corporation ) Docket No. ER97-2532-000
Zond Minnesota Development ) Docket No. ER97-2904-000
Corporation II )
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF ORDER
(July 28, 1997)
Zond Development Corporation (Zond) and Zond Minnesota Development Corporation II (Zond Minnesota) are subsidiaries of Enron Corporation and are now affiliated with Portland General Electric Company. Zond and Zond Minnesota have filed applications requesting that the Commission authorize them to engage in wholesale power sales at market-based rates, and for certain waivers and authorizations. In particular, Zond and Zond Minnesota requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liabilities by Zond and Zond Minnesota. On July 17, 1997, the Commission issued an Order Conditionally Accepting For Filing Proposed Market-Based Rates (Order), in the above- docketed proceedings.
The Commission's July 17, 1997 Order granted the request for blanket approval under Part 34, subject to the conditions found in Ordering Paragraphs (F), (G), and (I):
(F) Within 30 days of the date of issuance of this order, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the Commission's blanket approval of issuances of securities or assumptions of liabilities by Zond and Zond Minnesota should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214.
(G) Absent a request to be heard within the period set forth in Ordering Paragraph (F) above, Zond and Zond Minnesota are hereby authorized, pursuant to section 204 of the FPA, to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issue or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Zond and Zond Minnesota, compatible with the public interest, and reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
SCC-L1, L.L.C. ) Docket No. ER99-1914-000 )
SCC-L2, L.L.C. ) Docket No. ER99-1915-000
) SCC-L3, L.L.C. ) Docket No. ER99-1942-000
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF ORDER
(April 26, 1999)
SCC-L1, L.L.C., SCC-L2, L.L.C., and SCC-L3, L.L.C. (collectively, Applicants) filed respective applications requesting that the Commission accept market-based rate tariffs, power purchase agreements (PPA's), and Interconnection Agreements (IA's). Under the PPAs, the Applicants will make wholesale power sales at market-based rates to Enron Power Marketing, Inc.(EPMI), a power-marketer. In addition, under the tariffs, the Applicants requested blanket authorization to sell at market-based rates electric energy generated in excess of the amounts scheduled by EPMI, and for certain waivers and authorizations. In particular, Applicants requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liabilities by Applicants. On April 15, 1999, the Commission issued an Order Conditionally Accepting For Filing Proposed Market-Based Rates (Order), in the above-docketed proceeding.
Et cetera...
Yes I know. There was ample opportunity for the FERC to do their damn job in the interest of the American people. They failed miserably.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.