Subject: Re: Final Late Exhibit Draft
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 05:07:00 -0700 (PDT)

Marcel -- your last clarification would be fine -- it's the truth, the
upstream volumes can flow into any of the downstream takeaway capacity.

----- Original Message -----
From: Marcel Hawiger <[email-masked]>
To: Tom Beach <[email-masked]>; Cherry, Brian - TPBKC
<[email-masked]>; Norman A. Pedersen <[email-masked]>
Cc: 'Pocta, Robert M.' <[email-masked]>; Cherry, Brian - TPBKC
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; 'Gileau, Patrick L.'
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; Betonte, Robert - TP2RSB
<[email-masked]>; Brill, Thomas R. <[email-masked]>; Follett, B.
David - TPDBF <[email-masked]>; Harrigan, James P. - TP1JPH
<JHarrigan@soca
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Final Late Exhibit Draft

> At 6/16/2000, Tom Beach wrote:
> >On behalf of Watson and Vernon, I strongly object to the removal of the
data
> >on the takeaway capacity to other markets besides the SoCalGas system, as
> >Norman apparently proposes in his draft exhibit.  Without the data on
> >takeaway capacity to other markets, the exhibit suggests that all of the
> >upstream interstate and PG&E capacity is designed to serve just the
SoCalGas
> >market.
>
>
> The question is not what is designed to "serve" the SoCalGas market, but
> what is the upstream capacity flowing to SoCal's interconnection points
> that could theoretically serve SoCalGas if there was no limitation on
> SoCal's takeaway capacity.  Based on this, Norman's exhibit seems OK
unless
> there is some physical system constraint (besides SoCal's takeaway) that
> would limit potential inflow into the SoCalGas system.
>
> The problem with SoCal's last exhibit is that there is still no
> clarification of whether the upstream gas could flow into ANY ONE of the
> take away pipelines.  Maybe this could be clarified somehow (in a
footnote)?
>
> Marcel
>