FYI - Please ask me if you have any questions.
---------------------- Forwarded by Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron on 
12/05/2000 01:19 PM ---------------------------


Ramona Betancourt
12/05/2000 11:02 AM
To: Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

Linda,
Sorry it took longer than I thought to get back with you. Marketing had 
several issues come up last week.

Here are the answers to your questions.

Item 1. Is this a contract waiver? I talked with Lorraine and here is what 
Marketing wants: They would like the request form to be at a shipper level 
(LE Level) that applies to all their new, current and future LFT contracts. 
Since it will be a manual process, can you keep an LFT waiver log/book that 
is at a LE level, then place a copy of this signed overrun request form in 
each LFT contract file & change the flag to Yes on each active LFT contract 
for that shipper?
Item 2. Can they change their mind on the waiver-if so would this require an 
amendment to the contract? Answer - Yes they can change, so the field needs 
to be date effective, but would like it to be an administrative amendment 
with new request form signed by the shipper ( not an amendment through the 
contract). This would be a change for all their LFT contracts since marketing 
wants to keep it simple at an LE Shipper Level.
Item 3. Can the waiver be date sensitive? Answer -  Yes, Susan Scott will 
review the request form and make any changes needed. I will forward a copy of 
the draft I did to you and marketing and Susan to review.
Item 4. Is the contracts group suppose to be the keeper of the waiver? Answer 
- Yes, Marketing suggested that a LFT Waiver book be set up, then also they 
would like a copy of the signed request form to be in each LFT contract file.
Item 5. When is the shipper suppose to submit the waiver - at request time? 
Answer - Yes at the time they are executing their first LFT contract. When we 
have the system changes in production, I will let marketing know, & they will 
advise the shippers of this new waiver.
Item 6. Where will the waiver reside? With the request, on the Web under 
blank forms? Answer - Yes, on the web, under Contracts-blank forms for  TW. 

Please let me know if you have any other issues.
Thanks Ramona






Linda Trevino
11/20/2000 10:28 AM
To: Ramona Betancourt/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

Have you heard back from anyone of the below?



Ramona Betancourt
11/10/2000 03:20 PM
To: Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David Duff/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes

Lorraine,
I talked with Linda Trevino this morning about  the LFT waiver & from what I 
could remember we  decided to send the  form letter for the waiver  with the 
LFT contract so it would be effective for the time frame of the LFT 
agreement. The system should default to no waiver which means the LFT shipper 
would be scheduled to zero when we call an LFT day at their point. If we have 
the waiver, then the flag will be set to yes. During scheduling we will 
schedule their LFT as overrun if capacity at the point was available. I do 
not have a draft waiver form, but I can get a copy of one that NNG uses.  You 
may want to address these issues from Linda. See her questions below.


Thanks Ramona

---------------------- Forwarded by Ramona Betancourt/ET&S/Enron on 
11/10/2000 02:39 PM ---------------------------


Mary Darveaux
11/10/2000 01:34 PM
To: Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ramona Betancourt/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

Thats more than a couple ?s.  I guess I would suggest that we talk to Ramona 
and whichever TW Marketer sponsored LFT.  I guess I didn't see it as any more 
than an interpertation of a nom as interruptible when LFT firm was not 
available, but I can tell that you have many more concerns. 



Linda Trevino
11/10/2000 11:00 AM
To: Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

Yes but I have a couple of more questions:

Is this a contract level waiver?
Can they change their mind on the waiver - if so would this require an 
amendment to the contract? 
Can the waiver be date sensitive - meaning yes today, no tomorrow?
Is there a draft of the waiver yet?
Is the contract group suppose to be the keeper of this waiver?  
When is the shipper suppose to submit the waiver - at request time?
Where will the waiver reside?  With the request, on the Web under blank forms?

Let me know.

Thanks

Linda



From: Ranelle Paladino on 11/10/2000 10:49 AM
To: Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes

Linda,
Does Mary's response give you enough information?
Ranelle
---------------------- Forwarded by Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron on 11/10/2000 
10:47 AM ---------------------------


Mary Darveaux
11/10/2000 10:46 AM
To: Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

NNG was included in this discussion prior to our rejection order.  No longer 
pertains to NNG -   I am familiar with this issue.  The situation was 
described to me as follows:   Shipper has a standing nom for a month.  i.e.   
a firm 100/day at a receipt point.  sometime during the month we call a LFT 
day at the receipt point,  the nom would automatically become an 
interruptible nom for the LFT which may or may not be scheduled,  but the key 
is that the Shipper does not have to watch the notice and make a specific 
nom.  Does that answer your questions?


From: Ranelle Paladino on 11/10/2000 10:30 AM
To: Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes

Mary,
Linda called asking about these enhancements--specifically why is NNG 
included in an LFT enhancement and did we know about this overrun provision 
on LFT days.  Are you familiar with this?
Ranelle
---------------------- Forwarded by Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron on 11/10/2000 
10:28 AM ---------------------------


Linda Trevino
11/10/2000 10:24 AM
To: Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes


---------------------- Forwarded by Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron on 11/10/2000 
10:23 AM ---------------------------


Ramona Betancourt
11/09/2000 12:53 PM
To: Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Gerry Medeles/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David 
Duff/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: TW's LFT changes  

Linda,

Here is the document. It posted out on the ET&S website for the Electronic 
Business Development unit under Enhancement Request In Progress Item # 523. 
The flag we must add to contracts is need when a shipper is granting us 
arthorization to schedlue their LFT firm gas as overrun on days when LFT 
service is not available.
Please review and get with me on Friday. Legal and regulatory have approved 
this scheduling of overrun volumes for LFT contracts for both NNG and TW so I 
think we will need to add the flag indicator to both contract systems.



Thanks Ramona