Please respond to It is my understanding that Hertzberg and Keeley would like to bring this up
in the Assembly Energy Committee tomorrow, and perhaps Appropriations and
the floor on Sunday.  The Assembly will be in this weekend under the guise
of working on the budget, however the MOU is a more likely topic.  I do not
know where the Senate stands on this proposal.  Byron Sher had circulated a
Senate alternate MOU earlier this week which was supposedly far less SCE
friendly then the Assembly version.

-----Original Message-----
From: MDay [mailto:MDay@GMSSR.com]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 11:11 AM
To: 'Bev Hansen, Enron lobbyist'; 'Harry Kingerski'; 'Jeff Dasovich
Enron SF'; 'Jim Steffes, Enron'; 'Leslie Lawner, Enron'; 'Scott Govenar,
Enron lobbyist'; 'Sue Mara at Enron SF'; 'Rick Shapiro, Enron Houston'
Subject: abx2_82_bill_20010712_introduced
(http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0051-0


 I just saw this monster bill on the Senate website.  It is a
Keeley-Hertzberg bill that looks like it is intended to be the Hertzberg
version of the MOU.  It was just introduced yesterday.  Does anyone have
info on what the story is with this bill?  I have not finished reviewing it
but it does prohibit additional direct access until January 2003.  It
clearly does not have our recommended DA language in it.  Mike Day


http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0051-0100/abx2_82_bill_20010712_intro
duced.pdf
 <<abx2_82_bill_20010712_introduced.url>>