|
|
Enron Mail |
Dan Watkiss argues that FERC has no authority to override the state, even
though the rules go far beyond what is critical or necessary. Per Christi's thoughts, we may want to gauge Congressional interest in pushing something as an add-on to EPAct '92 that allows only safety / public interest reasons for an EWG to be restricted in its siting by a State. Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 04/19/2001 06:58 PM --------------------------- From: Christi L Nicolay@ECT on 04/19/2001 09:10 AM To: Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: FLORIDA Matters I talked with Dan briefly about this to verify my conclusion that FERC would not get involved at this point. The Florida issue seems similar to California (or any other state that has idiosyncratic siting issues) in that FERC has encouraged California to speed the siting of generation, but has not ordered it. What I am not sure about is whether the possible DOE or Congressional emergency electricity legislation that Jim sent out yesterday (on demand side management payments) could also include language that would allow the federal government to override the certain state generation siting issues, such as the Florida law. ---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 04/19/2001 08:59 AM --------------------------- "Dan Watkiss" <dwatkiss@bracepatt.com< on 04/19/2001 08:15:45 AM To: <Christi.L.Nicolay@enron.com< cc: Subject: Re: FLORIDA Matters Christi, the Florida certificate process controls siting and licensing of generators. Both are topics over which FERC has no authority. Consequently, FERC would have no authority to override the state. <<< <Christi.L.Nicolay@enron.com< 04/18/01 05:45PM <<< ---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 04/18/2001 04:45 PM --------------------------- From: Marchris Robinson@ENRON on 04/18/2001 09:58 AM To: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: FLORIDA Matters Christi: Does FERC have the authority to act per question no. 2? Please advise. MR ----- Forwarded by Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron on 04/18/2001 09:57 AM ----- James D Steffes To: Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, 04/18/2001 Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT 09:47 AM Subject: FLORIDA Matters Marchris -- Some things on follow-up from Ken Lay's call with Jeb Bush (could you have answers by End of Week) - 1. What is the process post the FL Supreme Court decision. Did anyone appeal to the Federal Courts? Outcome of that action, if taken? 2. Is it possible for the FERC to simply act to waive the CCN need? Did we ever discuss with FERC counsel the ability for that agency to "override" the CCN for any filing EWG? What would they need to do? Would FERC need to take on the FPSC or Fla Supreme Court? A state should have the right to worry about safety and reliability, but not interfere with wholesale competition. 3. Have we calculated a "back of the envelope" $ value for the margin the Utilities (FPL, TECO, FPC) will obtain by transferring generation at book? I would think that nuke should be at book (this is a gimme) with the fossil analyzed as the difference between average book ($/kw) and market value ($/kw - see Ben Jacoby). What is the total $? My understanding is that Steve Kean is heading into Florida to meet with Sect of Environment next week. We need to try and get a read from the Utilities on how much $ would they be willing to give back in rate decreases as a Generation Stranded Benefit to see this deal through before the meeting. Thanks, Jim
|