Message-ID: <15612394.1075851970232.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: nicholas.o'day@enron.com
To: richard.shapiro@enron.com
Subject: EPower regulatory review
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-From: Nicholas O'Day
X-To: Richard Shapiro
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Richard_Shapiro_Nov2001\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: SHAPIRO-R
X-FileName: rshapiro.nsf

Rick, I attach a copy of a report the regulatory group prepared for John=20
Sherriff on EPower's projects.=20

The conclusions reached are consistent with our initial estimates. EPower h=
as=20
adopted best case scenario timelines for their projects. The likely scenari=
o=20
is that unless there are significant and immediate changes to the current=
=20
regime for power plant development in Japan, EPower's greenfields projects=
=20
may not come on line before 2011. The brownfields sites avoid some of the p=
re=20
development issues, but in other respects are no less problematic.
The paper sets out 9 possible steps to assist EPower to reduce the time and=
=20
costs associated with the approval process and transmission access.
The first is one previously mentioned  - leverage existing relationships=20
within METI, with local Governors and within senior levels of the LDP to fo=
rm=20
a central organization with responsibility for coordinating and streamlinin=
g=20
the regulatory process for new entrants. We would anticipate that the centr=
al=20
organization would have delegated representatives in local METI branches an=
d=20
prefectural governments.
Others include lobbying for equal status for independent power projects und=
er=20
the Electricity Law and looking at the possibility of inviting utilities to=
=20
participate as project equity partners in some or all of EPower=01,s projec=
ts.


kind regards