Enron Mail

From:linda.robertson@enron.com
To:
Subject:Re: Administration Energy Plan: Next Steps
Cc:james.steffes@enron.com, john.shelk@enron.com, mark.palmer@enron.com,pat.shortridge@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, sarah.novosel@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, tom.briggs@enron.com
Bcc:james.steffes@enron.com, john.shelk@enron.com, mark.palmer@enron.com,pat.shortridge@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, sarah.novosel@enron.com, steven.kean@enron.com, tom.briggs@enron.com
Date:Thu, 7 Jun 2001 08:19:00 -0700 (PDT)

This is an update of the Email below. With respect to DOE efforts to draft
electricity legislation, a list of potential items for the bill are being
discussed this afternoon with Secretary Abraham. DOE hopes to have a draft
bill submitted to the White House by Friday, June 15, for consideration by
the VP Task Force. Similar to efforts other private sector parties are
undoubtedly taking, I would like to submit to DOE our suggestions for the
legislation. As mentioned below, this bill will not include open access, but
there are issues related to access which we may want to submit to DOE such as
how to deal with non-jurisdictional entities. Other topics on which we may
want to submit legislative language are PUHCA (the reporting requirements),
interconnection, reliability, negawatts, RTO ownership issues, and eminent
domain. DOE seem very willing to deal with the non-jurisdictional entities,
either in the rulemaking context or by legislation. Tom Briggs will be
following up with appropriate folks on this project. If you have any other
ideas for this effort, please let us know ASAP.





Linda Robertson
06/07/2001 12:03 PM

To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron, Pat
Shortridge/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: (bcc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron)
Subject: Administration Energy Plan: Next Steps





(Please do not circulate or discuss the information on this Email outside the
parties listed here.)

Debate within the Administration on implementation of its energy plan appears
to be settled. This debate was prolonged because of change in control of the
Senate. The Administration has decided to transmit to Congress by mid-June a
comprehensive letter containing an inventory of energy plan recommendations
requiring legislative action. I understand that legislative language will
not be transmitted in connection with this letter. Soon after receipt of the
letter, the President will host a meeting at the White House of bipartisan
congressional leaders and some key committee chairs and ranking Members. The
purpose of the meeting will be to convey to Congress the imperative of acting
quickly on the President's plan and it will serve as an official launch of
the legislative effort and the Administration's efforts to work with Congress
on the plan.

In the meantime, the Departments and Agencies are already drafting parts of
the energy plan. For example, we have been told by DOE that they are
presently drafting an electric restructuring bill. I have calls into DOE to
find out more about their efforts and the specific provisions to be included
in such legislation. We have learned that "open access" will not be in this
legislation, as the President's report instructs FERC to undertake the
project. Thus, the Administration continues to believe that legislation is
not needed for the core open access provisions and that this is a matter they
understand will be at the top of Pat Wood's agenda. Among other items, one
question we will probe with DOE is whether the electricity legislation will
contain access provisions pertaining to entities presently outside FERC's
jurisdiction.

At present, it does not appear that the various provisions being drafted by
the agencies will be bundled into single transmission from the Administration
to the Hill. Instead, the VP's task force intends to have these legislative
drafts ready to provide relevant committees at the appropriate time. This
part of the implementation plan, of course, could change.

As for Pat Wood, we continue to receive confirmation from Hill and Executive
Branch sources that the White House intends to designate Mr. Wood as FERC
Chair. Timing of the switch remains unclear. Our latest information
suggests it could be September 1. Many parties are suggesting to the White
House that the change should take place earlier than that date.

We have efforts underway to structure our position on a possible open access
rulemaking. A few folks on this email will be talking with Dan Watkiss today
about such a proposal.