Message-ID: <16522576.1075852503646.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 06:11:37 -0700 (PDT) From: d..steffes@enron.com To: l..nicolay@enron.com, w..cantrell@enron.com Subject: FW: NURF Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Steffes, James D. X-To: Nicolay, Christi L. , Cantrell, Rebecca W. X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \JSTEFFE (Non-Privileged)\Steffes, James D.\Sent Items X-Origin: Steffes-J X-FileName: JSTEFFE (Non-Privileged).pst Becky -- FYI. Does EGM have any past advocacy on NURF? Jim -----Original Message----- From: Nicolay, Christi L. Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 11:04 AM To: Steffes, James D.; Novosel, Sarah; Lindberg, Susan Subject: FW: NURF NURF (Non-Uniform Rate of Flow) is a proposal currently being discussed at GISB to have hourly firm service on pipelines. It becomes a cost allocation issue as to who pays for the extra compression etc that may be necessary. -----Original Message----- From: Corman, Shelley Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Nicolay, Christi L.; Hartsoe, Joe Subject: RE: NURF The paper is, for the most part, a fair representation of the NURF discussions ( I'd part with a few of the statements made in 6, 7, & 8). While the ETS pipelines participated in the development of the outline to ensure that the principles were sound, we do not have any present plans to file a NURF service. When and if we have real customers that want to contract for NURF service, we will make a filing. Even though we don't plan any immediate NURF service, I think the dialogue was still useful in making sure that generators understand the operational challenges of serving hourly swings. -----Original Message----- From: Nicolay, Christi L. Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 5:35 PM To: Corman, Shelley; Hartsoe, Joe Subject: NURF I read a paper on NURF (from Dynegy attorney). What is our pipeline position? Thanks