Thanks very much Mike.  The sense of urgency for getting this in "the mix" is not as high as it was yesterday, though we'll still need to introduce it at some point very soon.  Thanks very much.

Best,
Jeff




	MDay <MDay@GMSSR.com> 07/06/2001 01:12 PM 	   To: "'Bev Hansen, Enron lobbyist'" <bhansen@lhom.com>, "'Hedy Govenar, Enron Sacto lobbyist'" <hgovenar@govadv.com>, "'Scott Govenar, Enron lobbyist'" <sgovenar@govadv.com>  cc: "'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'" <jdasovic@enron.com>  Subject: FW: Amendment to Sher Bond bill	



FYI   Here is the language I gave Jeff to propose for an amendment to the
Sher Bond bill  which will make sure Direct Access customers don't pay for
DWR power costs through the bonds EXCEPT for power they actually used that
was purchased by DWR.  Houston has to ok this and then Jeff has to sell it.

I also strongly recommend that the next to the last sentence of Water Code
Section 80110 be repealed in the bill.  That would leave direct access in
place and force DWR to come to us to get a bill that would have reasonable
exit fee provisions.  Without a change like this, the bill would simply
reaffirm the ban on direct access and that could cause us to lose at the
Commission.  There is nothing else in the bill which explicitly tells the
PUC to not suspend direct access.

Mike Day

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	MDay
> Sent:	Thursday, July 05, 2001 12:40 PM
> To:	'Jeff Dasovich  Enron SF'
> Subject:	Amendment to Sher Bond bill
>
>  <<X25946.DOC>>
>
> Here is the very short amendment for the Sher Bond Bill.  Mike Day

 - X25946.DOC