|
|
Enron Mail |
John --
On this bill, I would think that as far as our competitive businesses go, we should work through EPSA. Better to have the industry speaking with one voice. To that end, do we know where EPSA is on this - Reliant and Mirant will have a much larger impact. Finally, we probably will need this ability for our Control Area operators. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 8:04 AM To: Robertson, Linda; Novosel, Sarah; Fulton, Donna; Nersesian, Carin; Shortridge, Pat; Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Alvarez, Ray; Briggs, Tom Subject: Energy Infrastructure Security Legislation Senator Schumer's office sent over a copy of the Chairman's Mark that will form the basis for a hearing tomorrow and a mark up Wednesday in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on energy infrastructure security legislation. Pat is working with the pipeline group on how it affects them since it clearly applies to natural gas pipelines. It would also clearly apply to PGE and to physical power plant assets we operate. The main impact here would be in the area of criminal background checks, including fingerprinting, for employees in categories to be determined in DOE implementing regulations. The background check data would be shared with law enforcement. The legislative language says that the background check regulations will "enable entities" operating "critical energy infrastructure facilities" to have these background checks. "Enable" is an odd choice of language because it could mean "authorize" only or it could mean "require." We should assume that the background checks will be mandatory despite this odd language. The definition of "critical energy infrastructure facilities" would NOT appear to pick up our trading and other energy services businesses beyond pipelines, power plants and PGE. The definition is "a facility for the generation or transmission of electrical energy, or the production, refining, transportation, or storage of petroleum, natural gas, or petroleum product, the incapacity or destruction of which would have a debilitating impact on the defense or economic security of the United States." If there is some reason why we would want other facilities included in the definition in order to obtain authorization for background checks, please let me know. It should be pointed out that the current draft does not contain explicit legal immunity for employers who provide information about employees to authorities. John
|