Danny, I'm resending as I had the same problem Cindy did.  I'll give you a 
call later today after I've talked to Harris to discuss the various Gallup 
scenarios to make sure you and I are on the same page.   The plan that makes 
the most sense in my mind is to ram the 10,000/d  project through asap, with 
no firm contracts to preserve our options on a NEWCO structure.  We'll 
simultaneously implement a new approach on San Juan fuel transport if 
possible and then throw the big expansion into the hopper at FERC in January 
as Stan suggested.  I hope that timetable is doable--it all depends on 
planning/ops deciding what they want to build and then clearing our financial 
hurdles.   DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 12/19/2000 
09:31 AM ---------------------------


Mail Delivery Subsystem <Mailer-Daemon@postmaster.enron.com> on 12/19/2000 
09:14:48 AM
To: <Drew.Fossum@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: enron: host not found)


The original message was received at Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:14:48 GMT
from [172.28.10.37]

   ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -----
<Danny.McCarty/ET&S@enron>

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 <Danny.McCarty/ET&S@enron>... Host unknown (Name server: enron: host not 
found)

   ----- Original message follows -----

Return-Path: <Drew.Fossum@enron.com>
Received: from nahou-msmsw01px.corp.enron.com ([172.28.10.37])
 by postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id PAA28509
 for <Danny.McCarty/ET&S@enron>; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:14:48 GMT
From: Drew.Fossum@enron.com
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (unverified) by 
nahou-msmsw01px.corp.enron.com
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id 
<Tac1c0a255093193855@nahou-msmsw01px.corp.enron.com> for 
<Danny.McCarty/ET&S%Enron..@enron.com>;
 Tue, 19 Dec 2000 09:14:47 -0600
Subject: Re: Gallup Mods
To: Stanley.Horton@enron.com
Cc: Danny.McCarty@Enron, Phil.Lowry@enron.com, Steven.Harris@enron.com,
        Mary.Kay.Miller@enron.com
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 09:14:52 -0600
Message-ID: <OF81D15B0D.93531BF9-ON862569BA.00529275@enron.com>
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.4 |June 8, 
2000) at 12/19/2000
 09:14:30 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


I agree with Danny's email that the key timetable issue for the incremental
10,000/day appears to be lead time on fabrication and delivery of the
15,000hp motor.  It was my understanding that the long lead time items were
going to be ordered shortly (if they haven't been already) and that we'd
take the financial risk.  If that is our approach, the regulatory approvals
won't be the critical path item they usually are.  I've reviewed the FERC
application and we should be able to file it shortly, perhaps with a
request for temporary emergency certification if we decide that would
expedite things.  Additionally, we are looking at transactions that would
allow us to avoid physically hauling the 20,000/day of fuel down the San
Juan lateral.  If we could unload our fuel requirement from the San Juan,
the additional horsepower at Gallup might provide some additional
flexibility or additional capacity.   I'll talk to Steve today to make sure
we are doing everything possible to expedite these efforts.  DF




Stanley Horton
12/19/2000 07:25 AM

To:   Danny McCarty/ET&S@Enron .
cc:   Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON

Subject:  Re: Gallup Mods  (Document link: Drew Fossum)

I believe that Phil Lowry is looking at ways to get some additional
capacity out of the system as well.  We want to expedite these efforts
too..  I would like to see an application filed filed by January 31st to
get 30 to 50 MMCF/D.

Steve Harris and Phil Lowry should have the lead to get this done.  I am
willing to construct at risk but want to see the financials as well.