Message-ID: <19535333.1075842451637.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 09:23:00 -0800 (PST) From: mary.miller@enron.com To: drew.fossum@enron.com Subject: Re: TW Cc: maria.pavlou@enron.com, susan.scott@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com, mary.darveaux@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: maria.pavlou@enron.com, susan.scott@enron.com, glen.hass@enron.com, mary.darveaux@enron.com X-From: Mary Kay Miller X-To: Drew Fossum X-cc: Maria Pavlou, Susan Scott, Glen Hass, Mary Darveaux X-bcc: X-Folder: \Drew_Fossum_Dec2000_June2001_1\Notes Folders\All documents X-Origin: FOSSUM-D X-FileName: dfossum.nsf The anwser is no, we didn't respond to 637 nor did we respond to this- just see what FERc does with it- MK From: Drew Fossum 12/05/2000 05:18 PM To: Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: TW Should we respond to PNM's protest of the dollar valuation of imbalances prior to netting and trading? Did we already respond to this issue when they filed their protest of the 637 filing? DF