|
|
Enron Mail |
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/19/2001 10:13 AM -----
Andy Brown <ABB@eslawfirm.com< 03/16/2001 06:19 PM To: "'Julee Malinowski-Ball'" <jmball@ns.net<, Susan McCabe <smccabe@mccabeandcompany.net<, Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com<, Ron Tom <thackbarth@govadv.com<, Robert Ross <robbiz@cwo.com<, Rina Venturini <rventurini@teamgsi.net<, Phil Isenberg <Isenberg@HMOT.com<, Mike Monagan <mrmonagan@aol.com<, Maureen OHaren <Oharen@HMOT.com<, Marie Moretti <mmoretti@mccabeandcompany.net<, Kassandra Gough <kgough@calpine.com<, Jamie Parker <jparker@hmot.com<, Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com<, DJ Smith <djsmith@smithandkempton.com<, Delany Hunter <dhunter@smithandkempton.com<, Chuck Cole <ccole@advocation-inc.com<, Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com<, Anne Kelly <kelly@hnks.com<, Fred Pownall <fred_pownall@ka-pow.com<, Mark Nobili <mnobili@cal-lobby.com< cc: Jean Munoz <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com<, Greg Blue <gtbl@dynegy.com<, Jack Pigott <jackp@calpine.com<, Jeff Dasovich <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com<, Joe Ronan <joer@calpine.com<, John Stout <john_h_stout@reliantenergy.com<, kent Palmerton <kent.palmerton@williams.com<, "Larrea, John" <John.g.Larrea@williams.com<, Lynn Lednicky <lale@dynegy.com<, Paula Soos <paula_soos@ogden-energy.com<, Richard Hyde <rwhyde@duke-energy.com<, Roger Pelote <roger.pelote@williams.com<, Sandi McCubbin <smccubbi@enron.com<, Stephanie Newell <stephanie-newell@reliantenergy.com<, Steve Ponder <steve_ponder@fpl.com<, Sue Mara <smara@enron.com<, Jan Smutny Jones <smutny@iepa.com<, Steven Kelley <steven@iepa.com<, Katie Kaplan <kaplan@iepa.com<, Chris Ellison <CTE@eslawfirm.com<, Doug Kerner <runwithmee@aol.com<, Andy Brown <ABB@eslawfirm.com<, Nam Nguyen <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com< Subject: Confidential: Follow-up re Action Items from 3/15 IEP Lobbyist Ca ll and 3/16 drafting meeting on 60x This email is a follow-up to yesterday's lobbyist conference call and today's meeting re potential language changes on 60x. Attached are two sets of draft amendment language that were discussed today consistent with a general strategy on the bill that was discussed yesterday. That strategy, generally speaking, keys off an expected Calpine meeting with Hertzberg on Monday, and is as outlined again below. Comments / concerns with language and/or general strategy should go to Julee for IEP by Monday COB for consideration in next steps as mentioned in the action items. The anticipated approach with the Hertzberg will be: A) Persuade him that the "California First!" notion as presented in this bill (and elsewhere) is not a good policy approach and that the bill should be killed because: it will be interpreted as protectionist by other states and will lead them to retailiate; it will isolate California from existing supplies elsewhere that could help serve California loads; it could deny CA access to new generation built in other states that could help CA; it will slow CA projects "in the pipeline"; it will undermine existing commercial arrangements that developers have _with_ California entities from CA projects in the pipeline, etc. If this does not happen, then ... B) Persuade him to change the bill into something else (as in carrot/incentive and not a stick that increases commercial and development risks); if this does not work and he will consider alternate language which does not disrupt existing arrangements, then ... C1) Take the more extensive "bulletproof" language, attached as "C1", which protects any existing commercial arrangements and provides a method to bring buyers and sellers together via a notice to interested purchasers maintained by the CEC; if that does not work and he will consider alternate language on another approach which will not disrupt existing arrangements, then ... C2) Take the "offer to negotiate" language, attached as version "C2", which was the language developed and circulated yesterday (with the addition of irrigation districts to the list of folks to whom the offer to negotiate is extended), and if that doesn't work, then D) he wants to disrupt existing commercial relationships and he wants to adopt a protectionist "California First!" policy which we cannot fix or support. Option C1 = file = C1_010315_IEPrev3b_abx1_60_bill_20010312_amended_asm.doc Option C2 = file = C2_010315_IEPv3_abx1_60_bill_20010312_amended_asm_.doc ABB Andrew B. Brown Ellison, Schneider & Harris, LLP 2015 H Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 447-2166 Fax: (916) 447-3512 mailto:abb@eslawfirm.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any accompanying document(s) are confidential and privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender at the internet address indicated or by telephone at (916)447-2166. Thank you. -----Original Message----- From: Julee Malinowski-Ball [mailto:jmball@ns.net] Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 3:26 PM To: Susan McCabe; Scott Govenar; Ron Tom; Robert Ross; Rina Venturini; Phil Isenberg; Mike Monagan; Maureen OHaren; Marie Moretti; Kassandra Gough; Jamie Parker; Hedy Govenar; DJ Smith; Delany Hunter; Chuck Cole; Bev Hansen; Anne Kelly; Fred Pownall; Mark Nobili Cc: Jean Munoz; Greg Blue; Jack Pigott; Jeff Dasovich; Joe Ronan; John Stout; Kassandra Gough; kent Palmerton; Larrea, John; Lynn Lednicky; Paula Soos; Richard Hyde; Roger Pelote; Sandi McCubbin; Stephanie Newell; Steve Ponder; Sue Mara; Jan Smutny Jones; Steven Kelley; Katie Kaplan; Chris Ellison; Doug Kerner; Andy Brown; Nam Nguyen Subject: Action Items from Today's Lobbyist Call ACTION ITEMS from today's IEP member company lobbyist conference call: AB 60x (Hertzberg) - Calpine will attempt to get a meeting with the Speaker on Monday regarding his interest in other "California First" avenues, and report the results to IEP. - In anticipation of using Plan B, there will be a drafting meeting on Friday (3/16) at 11am in IEP's office to fine-tune the current IEP proposed amendments (attached). - All available lobbyists will push the Speaker's office to hold off on moving the bill until IEP has had an opportunity to present language. - E+M will schedule a follow-up conference call on this issue early in the week. - IEP will explore the possibility of an editorial campaign regarding the poor direction of this "California First" issue, tying it to long-term contracting. SB 6x (Burton) - Review IEP proposed amendments to soften the eminent domain language (attached). - All available lobbyists will make contact with the Pro tem's office to support the IEP amendments. AB 8x (Migden) - Review IEP comments that mitigate the EOB's authority in the coordinate of operation and maintenance scheduling (attached). - All available lobbyists will make contact with Assembly Member Migden's office to support a stakeholder meeting taking place, because IEP would like to make this bill work. SB 39x (Speier) - IEP will explore the possibility of including in its PR efforts on maintenance and outages, the IOU- and labor-run nuclear facility being down for an extended period of time. PLEASE SHARE ANY INFORMATION YOU GET WITH ME FROM YOUR CONTACT WITH ANY OF THE ABOVE-NAMED MEMER'S OFFICES. THANKS. < Julee Malinowski-Ball < Senior Associate < Edson + Modisette < 916-552-7070 < FAX-552-7075 < jmball@ns.net < < - C1_010315_IEPrev3b_abx1_60_bill_20010312_amended_asm.doc - C2_010315_IEPv3_abx1_60_bill_20010312_amended_asm_.doc
|