QUESTION: Summary Though this conference was scheduled to review all issues related to El Paso's capacity allocation method (including those in the pipeline's Order 637 proceeding), and with two complaints filed this summer regarding problems with the pipeline's allocation, major substantive issues were not covered at this conference. For instance, the battle between Full Requirements (FR) shippers and Contract Demand (CD) shippers came up marginally, but not in terms as substantive as the proposed conversion of FR shippers to CD contracts. Procedurally, there was also no decision on whether to proceed with a hearing, merits decision from the Commission or settlement, though it looks like a merits decision is the likely avenue for a decision. Staff did not discuss case merits or ask pointed substantive questions. Allocation Studies (Models) El Paso opened the conference with a presentation/interpretation of seven capacity studies they have done to illustrate how its allocation proposal (March 27) would allocate the system's receipt and delivery points based on different scenarios. For nominations, receipt and delivery points were specified and ranked by shippers, and the model used 20 pools. The scheduling model looked at where constraints occurred (based on those shipper-supplied preferences), solved the largest constraints first, then ran second and third iterations to complete allocation. There were questions on the studies, what they show, what the assumptions are, etc., and in the end shippers believe they need information not shown by the completed studies. Shippers have requested six more allocation studies, showing possible impacts of seasonalization (winter and summer) and the difference between CD and Full Requirements Coincidental and Non Coincidental Peaks (winter and summer, 1995 - 2000). El Paso interprets its studies as showing that the proposed capacity allocation method is workable, and in fact results in 247 MMcf/d of unallocated capacity (230 MMcf coming from the Line 2000 expansion proposal, and an extra 17 MMcf). Shippers were skeptical of the "slack capacity" finding. Other Issues ? Pooling: There was a small amount of discussion on the impact of moving from six to 20 pools. It was noted that this should be addressed with Order 637 issues, expeditiously after capacity allocation method is resolved. ? FR vs. CD: Though there were some FR vs. CD shippers discussions, they did not reflect the battle we see going on in the two complaints filed this summer by the TX, NM and AZ shippers (FR) and Aera Energy (CD shippers). There was also no mention of converting FR shippers to CD service. Note: never mentioned were the CD and FR complainants' proposals that El Paso (1) dedicate currently proposed expansions to existing shippers or (2) requiring mainline system expansion for existing service (RP01-484 and 486). ? Release shippers: Shippers contracting for released capacity were concerned about how they would be allocated, as well as those shippers picking up turnback contracts from the pipeline (which would have receipt and delivery points already allocated). ? Receipt Point Designation: The question was asked if shippers could designate specific receipt points rather than pools. When asked what Commission policy is on pools vs. receipt points, both shippers and Staff clarified that they are neither mutually exclusive nor to serve as substitutes for one another - both should be available. However, Staff noted that in the flexibility vs. reliability debate, it could be argued that El Paso should return to receipt point designation to maintain reliability. Procedure Going Forward The primary issue here ended up being procedural. The procedural schedule is as follows: ? El Paso further studies and answers to questions posed at conference or in writing: Sept. 24 ? Initial comments (on all capacity allocation issues and procedural recommendations): Oct. 15 ? Reply comments: Oct. 26
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: FERC conference on El Paso capacity allocation (RP00-336)

QUESTION: Attached is the referenced list. The Bakersfield California is approved to only do newsprint commodity swaps and options. Therefore, I have turned them down to trade the current products we have available online. As our product base expands, we can send them through again as an amended counterparty if we offer newprint commodity swaps and options online.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Click Paper Approvals for 7/25/00

QUESTION: BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS East Power Origination On Friday, June 15, the Development Review Committee for Deerfield Beach, Florida, unanimously approved the 510 megawatt peaking power plant proposed for their city. This approval followed on the heels of approval of the Developer's Agreement by the Deerfield Beach City Commission on Thursday, June 14. Enron Industrial Markets On Friday, June 8 Enron Industrial Markets closed transactions with Huntco Inc. under which EIM will provide inventory management services and will eventually provide more than 600,000 tons per year of hot-rolled, cold-rolled and galvanized steel products to Huntco Steel. The EIM project team developed a creative, 15-year structure that enhances Huntco's liquidity, reduces working capital requirements, and hedges their inventory position against directional price risk. In addition, EIM structured the acquisition of Huntco's cold mill and certain coil pickling operations. A special purpose vehicle funded by third party equity now owns the assets, which continue to be operated by Huntco under an O&M agreement. As part of the transaction, EIM purchased a 20-year call option on capacity at the cold mill located in Blytheville, Arkansas. These transactions with Huntco signal a fundamental change in the way steel is bought and sold in the United States. They give Enron immediate access to physical steel and position Enron geographically to serve the steel industry in a variety of ways. Consummation of the Huntco transactions would not have been possible without the contributions of multiple Enron groups who enhanced value to Enron while significantly mitigating risk. IN THE NEWS "Mario Max Yzaguirre, a former Enron executive, was appointed Wednesday by Gov. Rick Perry to the state agency that is overseeing electricity deregulation in Texas. Yzaguirre was named to replace Judy Walsh on the three-member Public Utility Commission of Texas. Yzaguirre, of South Padre Island, recently resigned as president of Enron's Mexico operations. He formerly worked as a lawyer at Houston's Vinson and Elkins." -- Houston Chronicle, June 14
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS:
EnTouch Newsletter