| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - In its request for no-action relief, EPMI argued that the contracts, books and records and other materials underlying its power marketing activities were not facilities used for the generation, transmission, or distribution of electric energy for sale (see PUHCA ?? 2(a)(3)), that the power market subsidiary was therefore not an electric utility company for purposes of PUHCA, and Enron was thus
|
