Thanks for the clarifications.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Donoho, Lindy  
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 2:29 PM
To:	Ratner, Michael
Subject:	RE: Slide #11

You are correct.  I've got my units confused - the amount on slide #11 should be 110 MMcfd.  

On the San Juan slide #14, I've left out a phrase from the report.  The report reads " total basin wellhead production peaked in 1999 at 4.3 Bcf/cd and is expected to decline almost 22%,  about 2.4% per year, to 3.4 Bcf/cd by 2010".  In the tabular information of the study, 1999 begins with 4,306 MMcf/d and 2010 ends with 3,351 MMcf/d.


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ratner, Michael  
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 2:03 PM
To:	Donoho, Lindy
Subject:	RE: Slide #11

My question on slide 11 may be an issue of units.  If the increase is from 6400 MMcfd to 7500 MMcfd, should the increase amount be 110 MMcfd vs 110000MMcfd?

Separately, on slide 14, can you tell me how the 2.4% decline is calculated?  If it is based on the 4.3 Bcfd down to 3.5 Bcfd shouldn't it be a 1.8% decline?

Thanks,

Michael

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Donoho, Lindy  
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 12:59 PM
To:	Ratner, Michael
Cc:	Harris, Steven
Subject:	Slide #11

The note "need to verify" appears on this slide, after the bullet "110,000 MMcfd annual average increase".

I calculated this average annual amount from the first bullet "CA's natural gas use will increase from 6,400 MMcfd in 2000 to 7,500 MMcfd in 2010".  The first bullet and the third bullet are from the same source as the graph, The California Energy Commission.  Specifically, it's from their "California Natural Gas Analysis and Issues" Staff Report, dated November 2000.  The CEC's more current report from October, 2001, did not include specific long-term demand projections (it is focused on infrastructure issues).

That's the source of the numbers on this slide.