Dude,
Not seeing (either of) the comments directly, its hard to say what our 
position should be -- Mr. Dasovich, I'll leave that up to your good 
judgment.  However, it would appear that TURN is looking to roll back the 
clock on any progress we might have made in the GIR process to separate 
utility services and make them independently available to the marketplace.  
On that basis, I'd say you've got a reasonable argument to make.  

As far as Transwestern is concerned, I'd say that, as a general matter, we 
oppose any change in regulations that would attempt to repackage or rebundle 
utility services that gives the effect of reducing customer choice.  On the 
other hand, given the backdrop of a frustrated effort in the GIR proceeding, 
as long as they're leaving Hector Road alone, its hard for me to get too 
fired up about anything in California these days.  

Let us know if there is anything you'd like us to do here.  Ours is but to 
serve, my liege.

Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Dasovich, Jeff  
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 4:22 PM
To: Fawcett, Jeffery; Scott, Susan
Subject: FYI

Greetings Mr. Newlywed and Ms Bride-to-be!  (Shewt, I'm gettin' all choked 
up.)

I think I'll need to protest TURN's proposal.  You folks aware of this?  Care?

Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/20/2001 04:20 PM -----


	"Daniel Douglass" <Douglass@ArterHadden.com> 03/20/2001 03:37 PM 	   To: 
<Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <Vicki_Sandler@apses.com>, <berry@apx.com>, 
<dcazalet@apx.com>, <billr@calpine.com>, <jackp@calpine.com>, 
<Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>, <gavaughn@duke-energy.com>, 
<rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <gtbl@dynegy.com>, <jmpa@dynegy.com>, 
<jdasovic@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <Tamara_Johnson@enron.com>, 
<curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, <foothill@lmi.net>, <camiessn@newwestenergy.com>, 
<jcgardin@newwestenergy.com>, <jsmollon@newwestenergy.com>, 
<rsnichol@newwestenergy.com>, <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, 
<Curtis_L_Kebler@reliantenergy.com>  cc:   Subject: FYI


On 2/14, the Southern California Generator Coalition filed a petmod asking 
that the Commission amend winter balancing rules to allow customers to bring 
more gas into the system than the 10% imbalance rules permit and that 
customers be allowed to use the previous month's accumulated positive 
imbalance in lieu of flowing supplies.
 
The generator members of WPTF with facilities in southern California may be 
interested in knowing that TURN's 3/15 comments recommend instead that the 
Commission should rebundle the costs of storage for electric generators in 
their transportation rates and requires SoCalGas to store gas on behalf of 
those customers.
 
Let me know if you want to see the TURN comments.
 
Dan