Message-ID: <13737813.1075858257805.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 05:25:00 -0800 (PST)
From: phillip.love@enron.com
To: souad.mahmassani@enron.com, victor.guggenheim@enron.com, 
	bruce.mills@enron.com, andres.balmaceda@enron.com, 
	sladana-anna.kulic@enron.com, chuck.ames@enron.com
Subject: mich/cons vs. mich_cg-gd
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Phillip M Love
X-To: Souad Mahmassani, Victor Guggenheim, Bruce Mills, Andres Balmaceda, Sladana-Anna Kulic, Chuck Ames
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Phillip_Love_Jun2001\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: Love-P
X-FileName: plove.nsf

FYI-
We need to be more careful with which of the two curves above we use for 
physical deals.  We have had some substantial OA for Jan 01 production 
because the basis curves for these two locations were .30 different.  Usually 
these are less than .05 different.  If you have a physical mich physical it 
should be Mich_cg-gd in tagg(which is michigan consolidated pipe in sitara), 
if it is consumers power, it will be mich/cons and cec pipe in sitara.  Any 
questions, ask.  Thanks.
PL