Message-ID: <22685078.1075853794818.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 03:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: chris.germany@enron.com
To: victor.lamadrid@enron.com
Subject: Re: Iroquois Gas
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Chris Germany
X-To: Victor Lamadrid
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Chris_Germany_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: Germany-C
X-FileName: cgerman.nsf

Thanks for pointing this out.  To my knowledge we have never even tried to 
overlap the contract or do any segmenting.  


   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  Victor Lamadrid                           08/10/2000 08:58 AM
	

To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Goodell/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dan 
Junek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Hendrickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robin Barbe/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Kate Fraser/HOU/ECT@ECT, Farzad Farhangnia/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dick 
Jenkins/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Hodge/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angie Zeman/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Robert Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Iroquois Gas

Any concerns to forward to Becky Cantrell by Friday the 11th of Aug.???? We 
currently only have a 2017 dkt/d term contract #125005, a 35,465 dkt/d term 
contract #125008, an IT contract and a parking and loaning contract to handle 
our Canadian term supply.  We typically transport to markets off Iroquois, to 
Tennnessee pipeline and CNG pipeline.  That is a simplified summary of our 
daily activity on Iroquois.  If you need any information, please let me 
know.  
---------------------- Forwarded by Victor Lamadrid/HOU/ECT on 08/10/2000 
08:37 AM ---------------------------
   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  Rebecca W Cantrell                           08/09/2000 07:39 PM
	

To: John Hodge/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT, Victor 
Lamadrid/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Iroquois Gas

As noted in the Order 637 summary you received a couple of weeks ago, 
Iroquois Gas is proposing to limit overlapping nominations on segmented 
capacity.  Shippers will only be able to overlap segments to the extent the 
overlapped segment is within the path of both the releasing and replacement 
shipper.  Iroquois has made a number of arguments (some persuasive, some not) 
about why any other procedure is operationally infeasible.  For instance, 
they state that they would have to eliminate umbrella accounts because the 
process of reviewing contracts for interrelated releases would be too lengthy 
to complete within GISB timelines.

Is this issue of major concern to any of you in transacting daily business on 
Iroquois' system?  Have we tried to do any segmenting outside of the paths?

Please give me a call at X.35840 by Friday morning if we should file comments 
on this issue.  I did not see anything else of significance in their filing.

Thanks.