Enron Mail

From:mday@gmssr.com
To:llawner@enron.com, smccubbi@enron.com
Subject:SB 78X
Cc:jsteffe@enron.com, jdasovic@enron.com, hkingers@enron.com, smara@enron.com
Bcc:jsteffe@enron.com, jdasovic@enron.com, hkingers@enron.com, smara@enron.com
Date:Fri, 4 May 2001 06:55:00 -0700 (PDT)

Lelie: I saw your note about AB 78X, and have been in touch with the staff
of the author's office about the bill. Its scope is very narrow, and does
not change the rights of the existing utilities to construct facilities
using eminent domain. The gas and electric utilities were already exempted
from the requirement of PU Code 625 to hold an additional eminent domain
hearing. This exemption applies to all of their transmission and
distribution facilities. Essentially, the existing law only requires the
extra hearing for independent storage companies, like Wild Goose (also a
client of mine) and Lodi, or someone who wants to build a CPUC
jurisdictional intrastate pipeline. Interstates are, of course, FERC
certificated and derive eminent domain authority elsewhere than in the PU
Code. So this bill merely places the independent storage providers on the
same footing as the utilities. I do not see any competitive disadvantage
vis a vis marketers such as Enron. Please let me know if you have any
further questions.

Mike Day