Motion/Notice of Intervention and Comments of Calpine Energy Services, L.P. under RP03-41.

# UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Complaint of e prime, inc. ) Docket No. RP03-41-000 vs. ) PG&E Transmission, Northwest Corporation) MOTION TO INTERVENE AND COMMENT OF CALPINE ENERGY SERVICES, L.P. On October 25, 2002, pursuant to Rule 206 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("Commission"), 18 C.F.R. * 385.206, e prime, inc. ("e prime") filed a complaint against PG&E Transmission, Northwest ("GTN"). Pursuant to Rule 214 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Commission, 18 C.F.R. * 385.214 Calpine Energy Service, L.P. ("Calpine") moves to intervene and comment. I. BACKGROUND In the complaint filed on October 25th ("the Complaint"), e prime, a firm shipper on GTN, states that it has met all of its payment obligations under its service agreement with GTN on a timely basis. Furthermore, e prime states that it has consistently met the creditworthiness criteria set forth in GTNs FERC Gas Tariff for receipt of service. However, recently, as a precondition to continuing to provide service to e prime, GTN demanded that e prime provide GTN with a letter of credit or a prepayment for an amount equal to one year of reservation charges for the subject contract.[1] E prime notes that due to the short time allowed by GTN, e prime was not able to identify a commercially reasonable alternative to its service on GTN, and therefore had no choice but to accede to the pipelines demands and provide the collateral support.[2] More specifically the Complaint states the GTNs demand for collateral is in violation of its tariff, Commission policy and Section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act ("NGA").[3] Accordingly, e prime is requesting an immediate return of the cash deposit, inclusive of interest. Calpine has reviewed the Complaint filed by e prime. To the extent that GTN is requiring collateral support beyond what is required by its tariff, beyond the actual business risk included in its rate of return or on a discriminatory basis, the complaint has merit, and the relief sought by e prime should be granted with GTN further required to revise its business practices and tariff. For this reason, and those discussed herein, Calpine hereby submits a Motion to Intervene and Comment in this proceeding. In support of this effort Calpine states as follows: I. COMMUNICATIONS Communications concerning this filing should be addressed as follows, and the following should be ...