|
|
Enron Mail |
I agree - we will just need to get information via normal intervention.
-----Original Message----- From: Tycholiz, Barry Sent: Mon 8/13/2001 10:58 AM To: Miller, Stephanie Cc: Cantrell, Rebecca W. Subject: FW: Kern River 2003 Expansion Project Steph, as you know we are not a shipper in this expansion, and I do not foresee any issues related to Enron other than the primary delivery point service that Kern continues to put into Wheeler ( although ) kern maintains this is a takeaway issue, not delivery. I do not see us filing on this issue however, do you? Pls advise if you have a different opinion, but I see no reason for ENA to intervene. BT -----Original Message----- From: Cantrell, Rebecca W. Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 10:48 AM To: Miller, Stephanie; Tholt, Jane M.; Tycholiz, Barry; Grigsby, Mike Cc: Lawner, Leslie Subject: Kern River 2003 Expansion Project This project has been noticed by FERC (CP01-422). Adds 906,626 dth/day (845,500 Mcf) of capacity from Opal, WY to delivery points primarily in California. Service commencing 5/1/2003. Incremental rates and fuel. Seventeen shippers have signed 18 long-term agreements (10 or 15 years) and 95% has primary delivery points in California, mostly for existing and new power generation. Any issues? Are we a shipper? Comments and interventions are due Aug. 29th. Since I will be in D.C. that week, need your input by Aug. 23rd. We are downloading a copy of the filing (392 pages). Let me know if you would like a copy.
|