Message-ID: <30123729.1075860894963.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 09:07:32 -0800 (PST) From: lynn.blair@enron.com To: terry.kowalke@enron.com, john.buchanan@enron.com, kimberly.watson@enron.com, richard.hanagriff@enron.com, darrell.schoolcraft@enron.com Subject: RE: Sid Richardson Fuel OBA issue Cc: steve.january@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: steve.january@enron.com X-From: Blair, Lynn X-To: Kowalke, Terry , Buchanan, John , Watson, Kimberly , Hanagriff, Richard , Schoolcraft, Darrell X-cc: January, Steve X-bcc: X-Folder: \Kim_Watson_Mar2002\Watson, Kimberly\E-mail Bin X-Origin: Watson-K X-FileName: kwatson (Non-Privileged).pst FYI. Is everyone comfortable that we are NOT creating an imbalance with Sid Richardson due to fuel? Just want to be sure we should not check out any additional information. Terry, thanks for your prompt reply. Thanks. Lynn -----Original Message----- From: Kowalke, Terry Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 11:03 AM To: Blair, Lynn; Buchanan, John; Watson, Kimberly Subject: Sid Richardson Fuel OBA issue In the OBA meeting held today 01/03/02. Is the fuel being nominated or not at the Sid Richardson point #500395 or L.E. 8729? Yes it is and has been nominated as far back as I can retrieve information in TMS. The point came active in 12/1995 and remains active today. It is also part of their main OBA contract #21758. According to the information in CBS it was nominated and scheduled back then also. If there is more information or questions, please let me know. Thank you. Terry Kowalke