Message-ID: <27113758.1075844023920.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 04:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: susan.scott@enron.com
To: christine.stokes@enron.com
Subject: Re: TW IOS Posting PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL
Cc: jeffery.fawcett@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, kevin.hyatt@enron.com, 
	lorraine.lindberg@enron.com, tk.lohman@enron.com, 
	michelle.lokay@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: jeffery.fawcett@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, kevin.hyatt@enron.com, 
	lorraine.lindberg@enron.com, tk.lohman@enron.com, 
	michelle.lokay@enron.com
X-From: Susan Scott
X-To: Christine Stokes
X-cc: Jeffery Fawcett, Steven Harris, Kevin Hyatt, Lorraine Lindberg, TK Lohman, Michelle Lokay
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Michelle_Lokay_Dec2000_June2001_1\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: LOKAY-M
X-FileName: mlokay.nsf

Christine, see the attached.  I've changed paragraph 8 to be like our last 
posting, and added in a sentence saying ties will be decided by lottery (but 
omitted reference to the lottery provisions of our tariff this time).

My only other comment is that I think the group needs to discuss beforehand 
how a shipper's request for alternate points is going to be treated.  As 
currently drafted, this notice prohibits shippers from conditioning bids on 
use of alternate points at the bid rate, which calls into question our 
granting the winning bidder use of alternate points at a discount.  If we do 
intend to let the winning bidder shippers use alt. points at a discounted 
rate, we should take this statement out (end of paragraph 5).  

If we're still living in a max. rate world, though, this really is not much 
of a concern since use of the alternate points would also be at max. rate.

Any questions -- give me a call.

S.





Christine Stokes
08/03/2000 09:26 AM
To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: TW IOS Posting

Susan, please review the following IOS posting.  Thanks.



