sorry--left you out of the distrib.  df
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 06/26/2000 
05:27 PM ---------------------------
   
	
	
	From:  Drew Fossum                           06/26/2000 05:30 PM
	

To: Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, FKelly@gbmdc.com, SStojic@gbmdc.com 

Subject: PG&E

I need you guys to jump back into your files on the Topock issue asap.  Tony, 
I assume Lou briefed you on the situation.  I think the most recent liquids 
sample had pcbs in excess of 50 ppm.  That is well in excess of the 
contractual limit that I recall to be 1 ppm.  Our research a few months ago 
was about options to force the interconnect back open above 250 mm/d if the 
samples came back clean.  Now, the issue is, given dirty samples, what can we 
do to keep PGE from slamming the interconnect shut.  We need to complete our 
research/thinking immediately and have a spectrum of options ready to 
discuss.  Seriously, I am reviewing with Lou the option of a preemptive shut 
down of the interconnect, but that looks like an unwise strategy so far.  ALL 
ideas are worth considering.  Frank, Steve, and Maria, anything in your 
memory banks on TW or FERC jurisprudence that would prevent a Hinshaw from 
refusing to schedule transport volumes through a point even if the Hinshaw 
seemed to have clear contractual rights to refuse to schedule volumes based 
on gas quality/contamination concerns?  I don't think TW's tariff has a 
specific PCB spec.   DF