Subject: Re: PNM tech. conference
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 03:34:00 -0700 (PDT)

If that's all we need commercially, I'm fine with it.  I'd be more 
enthusiastic if we thought that their removal of the protest would clear up 
all FERC's issues and result in cancellation of the tech. conf. and prompt 
approval of the filing, but I suspect that is too much to ask for.  DF 

   

	From:  Susan Scott                           06/13/2000 02:50 PM

To: Drew Fossum@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen 
Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: PNM tech. conference

Phil Richardson and Sarah Tomalty of Dynegy say that they would probably 
(i.e. subject to management approval) withdraw their protest if we would 
amend our proposed tariff language to limit the quantity of capacity we can 
acquire from PNM to 20,000/day.  Their chief concern is to prevent TW from 
becoming simply a broker for another pipeline's capacity (which has never 
been our intention).  Lorraine is discussing this with Steve to see whether 
this is something we could live with.  The Commission has expressed the same 
concern in the past, so this might make them more comfortable with our 
proposal too.  Comments?  let me know.