Message-ID: <23850057.1075842567342.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:50:00 -0800 (PST) From: drew.fossum@enron.com To: mary.miller@enron.com Subject: Re: Request to intervene and reply to Indicated Shipper and Dynegy's Request for Rehearing, Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., Docket No. CP95- 218-003 Cc: shelley.corman@enron.com, dave.neubauer@enron.com, kent.miller@enron.com, steve.kirk@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: shelley.corman@enron.com, dave.neubauer@enron.com, kent.miller@enron.com, steve.kirk@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com X-From: Drew Fossum X-To: Mary Kay Miller X-cc: Shelley Corman, Dave Neubauer, Kent Miller, Steve Kirk, Glen Hass X-bcc: X-Folder: \Drew_Fossum_Dec2000_June2001_2\Notes Folders\'sent mail X-Origin: FOSSUM-D X-FileName: dfossum.nsf I agree. DF From: Mary Kay Miller 01/31/2001 06:18 PM To: Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Request to intervene and reply to Indicated Shipper and Dynegy's Request for Rehearing, Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., Docket No. CP95- 218-003 Shelley, we want the opinion to be upheld, so if this may help, I'd say yes let's participate. MK Dassistant on 01/31/2001 02:55:59 PM To: "Anna V. Cochrane (E-mail)" , "Anne Bomar (E-mail)" , "Brian White (E-mail)" , "Carl Levander (E-mail)" , "Catharine Davis (E-mail)" , "Chris Kaitson (E-mail)" , "Claire A. Burum (E-mail)" , "Claudio Urencio (E-mail)" , "Cyril Zebot (E-mail)" , "Daniel Collins (E-mail)" , "David Reitz (E-mail)" , "Jake Hiatt (E-mail)" , "James Peterson (E-mail)" , "Janet Place (E-mail)" , "Janice Alperin (E-mail)" , "Jeffrey Bruner (E-mail)" , Joan Dreskin , "Judy Neason (E-mail)" , "Keith A. Tiggelaar (E-mail)" , "Kristine Delkus (E-mail)" , "Lenard G. Wright (E-mail)" , "Marc A. Halbritter (E-mail 2)" , "Marsha Palazzi (E-mail)" , "Mary Kay Miller (E-mail)" , "Michael E. McMahon (E-mail)" , "Paul Diehl (E-mail)" , "Peggy Heeg (E-mail)" , Penny Ludwig , "Randall Crawford (E-mail)" , "Richard J. Kruse (E-mail)" , "Richard Smead (E-mail)" , "Robert D. Jackson (E-mail)" , "Robert Kilmer (E-mail)" , "Rodney E. Gerik (E-mail)" , "Scott Turkington (E-mail)" , "Shelley Corman (E-mail)" , "Stephen R. Melton (E-mail)" , "Todd Rushton (E-mail)" , "William Grygar (E-mail)" cc: "Curtis Moffatt Esq. (E-mail)" , "David G. Mengebier (E-mail)" , "Denise Simpson (E-mail)" , "Marsha Palazzi (E-mail)" , "Marshia M. Younglund (E-mail)" , "Michael D. Moore (E-mail)" , "Nancy Bagot (E-mail)" , "Scott P. Anger (E-mail)" , "Sharon J. Royka (E-mail)" , "Steven E. Tillman (E-mail)" Subject: Request to intervene and reply to Indicated Shipper and Dynegy's Request for Rehearing, Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., Docket No. CP95- 218-003 MEMORANDUM TO:???? ??????? Regulatory Policy Commission FROM:?? Joan Dreskin DATE:?? ??????? January 31, 2001 RE:???? ??????? Request to intervene and reply to Indicated Shipper and Dynegy's Request for Rehearing, Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., Docket No. CP95-218-003. ??????? On January 16, Indicated Shippers and Dynegy took rehearing of the Texas Eastern order that held that pipelines do not need preapproval from FERC to acquire capacity on other pipelines.? Indicated Shippers and Dynegy took rehearing on the following grounds: (1) The Commission order is procedurally defective in that it repeals a Commission regulation, 18 CFR o 284.242, without following a notice and comment rulemaking procedures; (2) The old Texas Eastern policy has been effective, and has deterred the conduct it was intended to preclude; (3) The Commission order ignores crucial "rate impacts" associated with off-system capacity acquisition; and (4) The Commission's references to the ability of a pipeline acquiring offsystem capacity to release that capacity under the acquiring pipeline's tariff are unclear. ??????? Although the Commission's regulations do not provide for answers to rehearing requests, Dominion and Duke have asked that we intervene and respond to Indicated Shippers and Dynegy's request for rehearing in order to help the Commission formulate its decision.? As you may remember from INGAA's marketing affiliate comments, the Commission's December 14 order has a lot of excellent language in it, such as statements that holding offsystem capacity does not favor marketing affiliates, that INGAA wants to support. ??????? If Chairman Hebert wishes to keep his promise to do away with tolling orders, this rehearing would need to be acted on by Wednesday February 14, 2001.? Accordingly, if INGAA wishes to be heard it must do so quickly. ??????? Please let me know by COB tomorrow whether you support INGAA responding to Indicated Shippers and Dynegy's request for rehearing.? If you agree, then I will proceed to get our Board of Directors' approval.