Subject: RE: TW Negotiated rate with USGT
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 05:39:08 -0800 (PST)

Yes,  we will prepare a answer to the protests and I believe that Maria is working with Bill Rapp on this-  still haven't seen whether IS filed, but I can't believe they didn't.  The FERC should issue an order by the end of Nov so we need to get the answer in quick-  MK

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Watson, Kimberly  
Sent:	Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:37 PM
To:	Miller, Mary Kay
Cc:	Lohman, TK; Harris, Steven
Subject:	RE: TW Negotiated rate with USGT

Mary Kay,

What is the usual process on something like this?  Do we get a chance to respond to the protest before the FERC makes a decision on whether to hold a Tech Conf?  What is the timeline for any other protests to come in?  What is the timeline for FERC to decide?  

Thanks, Kim.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Miller, Mary Kay  
Sent:	Wednesday, November 14, 2001 10:18 AM
To:	Fossum, Drew; McCarty, Danny; Harris, Steven; Lohman, TK; Porter, Gregory J.; Pavlou, Maria; Watson, Kimberly; Lokey, Teb; Kilmer III, Robert; Hartsoe, Joe
Subject:	TW Negotiated rate with USGT

For your info, we have received a protest and or reguest for Tech Conference or hearing from the CPUC regarding the USGT transaction starting Nov 1, 2001.  they raise the market power issue, the pricing, the volume, the policy of market based rates.  We expect a similar protest from IS, and also the issue regarding the alternate point use.  The volume on this transaction is for 400,000 per day with the negotiated rate provision only relating to the alternate path to Calif.   More to come.