|
|
Enron Mail |
I can discuss for about 10 minutes. See below.
=20 Stacey Bolton Environmental Strategies Enron Corp 713-853-9916 direct=20 713-303-2632 cell=20 stacey.bolton@enron.com <mailto:stacey.bolton@enron.com< =20 -----Original Message----- From: Ring, Richard=20 Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 10:55 AM To: Bolton, Stacey Cc: Mainzer, Elliot Subject: RE: ma rps Stacey, =20 Elliot and I would like to discuss a few issues with you regarding the MS R= PS Comments. What time do you think that you will have to discuss? =20 =20 <http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/documents/index.html#greenpower<; =20 =20 =20 F-1: Need to require that all current renewable facilities, including all = current existing boimass facilities are certified prior to the start date R= PS - i put that in the comments, however MA might have a really hard time = certifying any renewable facilities outside of MA that don't submit an appl= ication.=20 =20 F-5: Not sure that I understand the issue surrounding compliance on a prod= uct level - let's discuss - Product v. Company. If it's a straight company requirement, you could theo= retically roll all of your RPS requirements into one product and sell for p= remium. Further, not all MA customers would show that they are getting ren= ewables.=20 =20 F-7: While we are very pleased with the Division's inclusion of banking, w= e do not understand the need to restrict the limit on how much Supplier's a= re allowed to bank as the shelf life for Renewable Energy Credits is alread= y limited to the two compliance periods immediately following. We would al= so ask that you not limit the ability for Suppliers to transfer banked Rene= wable Energy Credits during the allowed compliance periods. We feel that t= he Division should encourage as much liquidity as possible in the Renewable= Energy Credit market. We understand the Division's concern regarding tran= sferable banking and potential problems with market power, however, we feel= that the GIS Administrator is charged with closely monitoring potential ma= rket power situations. We would prefer that the Renewable Energy Credit ma= rket be allowed to operate as indicated above from the beginning and if it = is determined that market power issues exist then appropriate changes to th= e market can and should be implemented. We feel that markets operate best = with few restrictions. Okay. Good. I'll substitute.=20 =20 F-9: Section 4. Not sure I understand the difference between the percentage= of sales versus the actual MWh's - let's discuss =20 F-9: Section 5. Not sure that this language makes sense - let's discuss=20 -----Original Message----- From: Bolton, Stacey=20 Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 7:17 AM To: Ring, Richard; Mainzer, Elliot; Rishe, Frank Subject: ma rps Importance: High all -=20 attached are the draft comments. pls get me comments by noon. frank, got = your vm. yes, we are submitting it as supplement to our oral comments tomo= rrow. richard, can you please attach the CEC website. I'm have awful diff= iculties with my dial up. =20 thanks, stacey
|