Shonnie/Gerald,

We are still pursuing the opportunity with Kinder Morgan to move gas from 
Glenrock to Lost Creek.  Our current deal looks like this....

Currently, KMI takes approx 25,000 MMCFD from the tailgate of the Beaver 
Creek Plant into their interstate pipeline on behalf of their shippers for 
long haul service to the midcontinent.  KMI can easily displace this gas with 
the Glenrock interconnect.  KMI is offering to give us a transportation 
service with the physical points listed as Glenrock for receipt and Beaver 
Creek Plant for delivery (which is really only a receipt pt.) .  (The 
interstate transportation agreement would not have Lost Creek as the delivery 
point.)  When we nominate on the agreement, KMI would physically direct their 
Beaver Creek tailgate volumes directly into Lost Creek in exchange for the 
Glenrock volume.  The gas volumes that Lost Creek takes would never touch KMI 
interstate facility.  This arrangement would be extremely valuable over the 
next 15 months due to our capacity constraints on Medicine Bow.  

How much regulatory jeapordy does this present to Lost Creek's 
nonjurisdictional status?  If there is any,  couldn't ENA do this anyway in a 
post 20/20 environment?  

KMI is aware of our sensitivity to this issue and their regulatory folks have 
told us there should not be a problem with this type of an arrangement.  I 
told them that didn't give me a lot of comfort.