The dial-in details for next Monday's conference call are listed below. Please note the new number and participant code as they have changed. Dial-in number: 877/696-8492 Participant Code: 140339 International Dial-in number: 712/421-6080 Mona Petrochko Director Government Affairs - The Americas
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: EBS GA Conference Call
We are currently discussing several potential approaches for a "Phase VII" expansion project. We have preliminary work underway on several potential scenarios, some of which might involve Gulfstream as an upstream transporter. As part of these discussions, Gulfstream has inquired about FGT's interest in providing a capacity lease for backhaul service (approximately 20-30 miles - they did not identify the specific market). My questions are: (1) Backhaul capacity lease with an interstate pipeline - Do you see any problems/issues? The lease arrangement would be with Guflstream Pipeline. (2) If this backhaul lease capacity is used by Gulfstream to provide deliveries to an electric generator, would the FP&L Favored Nations Clause be triggered?
Answer: Capacity Lease (Backhaul) - Gulfstream
Here is an email: It looks like we are done on the new Citizens deal effective July 1. I have sent original contracts for execution. We now have to put the deal in the system. This is a little complicated. The attached spreadsheet indicates how this deal will work, using June as an example. The only differences between June and future months are: 1) In the future, we will collect a $.09/MMBtu demand charge with $.02/MMBtu of this going to EAMR (ENA gets $.07/MMBtu) 2) In the future, the PG&E discount is $.10, not $.25. Some of the complicated booking issues are: 1. We need to show the John Cogan commission as a separate deal and a cost to ENA 2. We need to show the payment to EAMR as a separate deal and a cost to ENA 3. We will continue to bill Citizens for the TW Mainline cost on our utility deal 1 and 2 above are pretty straight forward and should not create any deal entry difficulties other than someone will have to enter the deals. Number 3 is more difficult. The complexities relate to where we are making the sale and what costs should be included. Can you get with the folks who can help us here and have them come up with a recommendation on how this deal should be booked? Let me know if you have questions. I also believe I can add value in speaking with Darren Giron or others. I guaranty their initial recommendation will not be 100% workable. Thanks!
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Citizens Gas Deal
Q: Mike: We'd talked about getting together to discuss the bills for the case. We'd originally agreed to a flat fee of $13, 500 (if memory serves) with a bonus for coming in under the cap. You've sent me bills (as of August 17 according to my records) for over $25,000. As you recall, we had a very lengthy discussion regarding the magnitude of the work associated with the hearings and associated briefs. I stressed that $13.5 was what I'd spend and that we'd have to do the best we could within that constraint, which is why I pressed for a flat fee arrangement at the outset. With that in mind, I believe that it's important to honor the arrangement. However, in light of the particular circumstances in this case, I'm willing to exceed the previous arrangement for a total of $15,000, but can't go above that. If you'd like to discuss it further, I'd be happy to talk about it. Let me know. Best,
Propose a subject line
A: Bills for Gas Restructuring Activities
IN: Rex: I have an article to fax to you please send me your fax #. I hope all is well in Amarillo. Longhorns look good, this weekend will be a good test for them. Tiff and the kids are great. Both kids are very excited to be in school, lets hope that this enthusiasm last for another 16 years. Brad

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Gas Prices
IN: This is an email
Jeff, Please accept my apologies for the slight delay in getting back to you on the message board regarding this week's API forecast. I'd like to take a minute of your time to highlight what we are doing to address all our concerns over our forecasts and how we are actively seeking to produce better results that we are all comfortable with and that provide useful insight and tradable information to our colleagues on the trading desks. As I am sure you know, forecasting the API's is not as scientific as other industry data such as the AGA's. The API is not consistently clear as to how it measures crude demand and this week's data is a clear example of this in that there is a discrepancy of 1.2 million b/d between crude runs and the demand figure shown by the API. Each week the basis of measuring crude demand changes slightly. To address this we are looking at finding ways of predicting what we call the API Curve Ball Factor through a variety of regressions / moving averages analysis. The second area we are in the process of perfecting is imports data. We are working closely with IT and Net Works to scrape real time shipping information in order to give us a better handle on crude coming in to the country. We are also recruiting a Quants PhD from Vince Kaminski's group who will be able to bring a slightly more scientific skill set to our team of business / economics skill sets. Please be assured that this issue is one we are giving the utmost priority to addressing. Having only recently taken on responsibility for the crude and products fundamentals team I have not had much opportunity to discuss issues with you. Please be assured that I am available at any time to discuss this, or any other, issue with you. Best regards,

What is the subject?

OUT:
API Forecasts