Enron Mail

From:richard.ring@enron.com
To:stacey.bolton@enron.com
Subject:RE: ma rps
Cc:elliot.mainzer@enron.com
Bcc:elliot.mainzer@enron.com
Date:Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:54:44 -0700 (PDT)

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
=20
F-5: Not sure that I understand the issue surrounding compliance on a prod=
uct level - let's discuss
=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. =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