Subject: FW: Quick update on El Paso capacity allocation conference
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 06:05:22 -0700 (PDT)

-----Original Message-----
From: 	Bagot, Nancy  
Sent:	Tuesday, August 28, 2001 4:07 PM
To:	Hyatt, Kevin; Kilmer III, Robert; Hass, Glen; Miller, Mary Kay; Kirk, Steve; Hartsoe, Joe; Corman, Shelley
Subject:	Quick update on El Paso capacity allocation conference

Today's technical conference (RP00-336) was not the snazzy show we perhaps expected.  With El Paso having done 5 studies on different allocation scenarios, shippers requested four more, showing seasonalization impacts and the difference between CD and Full Requirements shipper Coincidental and Non Coincidental Peaks.  

Though there were some FR vs. CD shippers discussions, they did not reflect the battle we see going on in the two complaints filed this summer by 
the TX, NM and AZ FR shippers and Aera Energy (CD shippers).  There was also no mention of converting FR shippers to CD service.

The primary issue here ended up being procedural, with the decision still up in the air if this should be set for hearing or a merits decision from the Commission (or settlement, though that seems very likely -- merits decision is the most likely case).

Also never mentioned were the CD and FR complainants proposals that El Paso dedicate currently proposed expansions to existing shippers or requiring mainline system expansion for existing service (RP01-484 and 486).

The procedural schedule has been set:
	El paso further studies and answers to questions posed at conference or in writing:   Sept. 24
	Initial comments (on all capacity allocation issues and procedural recommendations): Oct. 15
	Reply comments:  Oct. 26

I'll send a more detailed report, but wanted to get the quick info. out to those most interested.