The following are summaries of legislation that we worked on this year:

AB995/SB1194
In their original form these bills would have:
Codified existing utility responsibilties for the distribution grid without 
ensuring ecquivalent protection for customers' existing rights to 
interconnect their own facilities to the distribution grid and to invest in 
cost effective facilities that they allowed to build and use today
Limited the CPUC's pending rulemaking on dg and dc before there was adequate 
discussion of the important and controversial policy issues
Borrowed language from 1890, reciting only the language which supports 
utility control of the dg while omitting the portions that state customers 
and competitors should have open and comparable access to the dg
provided no mechanism to ensure increased reliability for electric consumers
Included an inaccurate "laundry list" description of all the things that 
utilities and ESP's shall continue to be responsible for

All of the above was iriginally drafted in language expanding the utilities' 
rights and franchise authority, and provided greater certainty of cost 
recovery in situations where the utilities have traditionally borne 
significant risk

As amended, the bill only codified the CPUC's existing jurisdction and the 
utilities' existing tole as to facilities owned by the utilities, and  
included numerous restrictive clauses to prevent expansive interpretation of 
the statute in favor of the utilities


AB2290

This bill would have done the following:
capped electric rates in San Diego at the same level required under 1890 
which would have created as much as $1 billion in undercollection
provided that the same customers who recive the benefits of the rate cap 
today may not necessarily have to pay back the undercollection, thereby 
promoting cost shifting.
limited the CPUC to implementings steps which allow the utility to fix the 
wholesale markets problem without prividing similar opportunites to non 
utilities
required the CPUC to petition FERC to find that wholesale rates from this 
summer were not just and reasonable and to seek means to force power 
marketers and generators to disgorge excessive profits


AB265

This bill which became the final vehicle contained a simplified version of 
AB2290, but patterned on the Wood decision

Enron helped dissuade the authors from accepting the following amendmants
provided that the rate cap would ahve applied to all customers of all three 
utilities
Provided that all classes of customers be included in the bill
provided that it would be a freeze and not a rate cap
we advocated for a reduced term to the cap and it was reduced to two years, 
as opposed to the original proposal for 3-4 years


AB970

Enron helped make the following amendments to the bill

Labor and environmental interests sought to include stricter definitions 
related to air quality under the federal act and to limit the operations of 
peaking plants to stage II alert situations.  These were deleted from the bill
Labor sought to include rate regulations of the output of expedited peaking 
plants.  This provision did not make it into the bill
Renewable providers sought a cleanest first processing priority of all CEC 
applications..this was deleted
The Electricity Oversight Boars was irignally designated as the entity with 
whom peaking plants had to contract with.  This was amended to give the EOB 
only consultive authority to contact the ISO regarding peaking agreements and 
with the CPUC regarding interconnection issues
A limit of 500 hours of operation per year was deleted from the bill
Language drafted by Enron was inserted to clarify that local gov had to 
sibmit final comments/determinations within 100 days of filing an expidited 
peaking application
Language clarifing that an expedited peaking platn could be taken out of 
service in lieu of converting to a combined cycle plant after three years was 
taken at our request
language regarding the recovery of transmission upgrade or expansion project 
costs was clairified to ensure that no transmission related costs were 
included in utility distrbution rates
We kept the bill to be voluntary, in lieu of existing processes

SCE/PGE proposal

Lobbied against their legislative proposal which would have extended the rate 
freeze and continued CTC collection indefinitely.  The proposal would have 
also provided a mechanism to recoup increased wholesale costs for electricity 
which exceeded the frozen rate charged to customoers.  We were successful in 
keeping them from finding an author

SB1622

Helped defeat a bill that would have authorized the CEC to develop 
regulations, retroactively, relating to power plant siting and environmental 
justice

SB1345

Enron sought and obtained deletion of provisions which would have restricted 
dg plants from obtaining improved interconnection or standby service unless 
they were prohibited from selling power off-site.  The bill merely limited 
the funding of state grants to DG projects which do not sell off site.