Subject: RE: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 15:59:10 -0700 (PDT)

Let's look some more.  I don't think there's anything that would disqualify any plants.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bolton, Stacey 
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:57 PM
To: Bryson, Jesse
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: CA RPS proposal & potential impact

I should have copied you on my original email.  My apologies.  I'm copying in Jeff Dasovich to get his read on potentially changing this requirement.  Jeff, what are your thoughts for affecting this language?
Stacey Bolton
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
713-853-9916 direct 
713-303-2632 cell 
[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryson, Jesse 
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 5:48 PM
To: Bolton, Stacey
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact

 
Stacey,
It occurred to me that I should have copied you in on this email to Elliot. We may want to see if we can change the language on this point. Let me know what you think.
 
Jesse
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryson, Jesse 
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 3:42 PM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
 
Elliot-
 
Take a close look at the language in this bill regarding the RPS. On page 7, lines 29-33, the bill states that all power must be under a direct contract to a retail seller. While this does provide us potential opportunities for scheduling and commodity management as Stacey pointed out, it also prevents merchant plants from qualifying as renewable. This would eliminate our service customers such as Delano, Wheelabrator, and Shasta. The link to the bill itself is:
<http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sbx2_78&sess=CUR&house=S&site=sen>
 
What do you think? Do you read it the same way?
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mainzer, Elliot 
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:35 PM
To: Bryson, Jesse
Subject: FW: CA RPS proposal & potential impact

-----Original Message-----
From: Bolton, Stacey 
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:21 PM
To: Belden, Tim; Richter, Jeff; Mainzer, Elliot; Ring, Richard; Hammond, Pearce; Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan; Keene, Patrick
Cc: Terraso, Michael; Keeler, Jeff; Schoen, Mary
Subject: CA RPS proposal & potential impact
All -
Wanted to make you aware of a couple of bills before the CA legislature that would place a renewable purchase obligation on all retail sellers in California if enacted.  The attached document provides a comparative analysis of both bills (which are quite similar in language) and the resulting commercial implications.   One bill in particular has momentum in that is it attached to the SCE bailout.  Jeff Dasovich and Sue Mara have their finger on the "pulse" on the movement of these bills, so as far as status please contact them.  
 
Regards,
Stacey Bolton
Environmental Strategies
Enron Corp
713-853-9916 direct 
713-303-2632 cell 
[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>