Message-ID: <13069668.1075842531626.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:03:00 -0800 (PST) From: drew.fossum@enron.com To: keith.petersen@enron.com Subject: Re: Gallup Expansion Cc: mary.miller@enron.com, donna.martens@enron.com, maria.pavlou@enron.com, susan.scott@enron.com, lindy.donoho@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: mary.miller@enron.com, donna.martens@enron.com, maria.pavlou@enron.com, susan.scott@enron.com, lindy.donoho@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com X-From: Drew Fossum X-To: Keith Petersen X-cc: Mary Kay Miller, Donna Martens, Maria Pavlou, Susan Scott, Lindy Donoho, Steven Harris X-bcc: X-Folder: \Drew_Fossum_Dec2000_June2001_2\Notes Folders\All documents X-Origin: FOSSUM-D X-FileName: dfossum.nsf Great--the front running ideas now are (1) an operational sale in the San Juan of the 20,000 we recieve there and an offsetting operational purchase (less basis differential) at some other location (i.e., the permian) thus freeing up 20,000/d of physical space on the lateral; or (2) an exchange agreement under which a party takes our 20,000 in the SJ and gives us back the same amount, less basis differential, in the permian. The SJ 20,000 would still physically flow down the lateral, but it would have to move under someone's transport agreement--in other words it wouldn't be incremental to our 850,000/d of firm transport obligations. I don't know if this will work yet, but it was a creative idea by Keith and Donna. I'm eager to talk to Steve Harris and Susan about this because it sounds similar to a scenario that Susan researched a while ago and that Lindy explained to me--maybe there are problems or solutions yet to be considered. DF Keith Petersen 12/14/2000 04:07 PM To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Donna Martens/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Gallup Expansion Today we had meeting to discuss the filing for the 10 MMcf/d expansion. Donna covered her needs so that a filing draft can be sent out on 12/15/00. There was discussion on the possibility of having an Open Season. Drew covered his thoughts of not having an Open Season and building the project At Risk. Once we are ready to put the changes into service we would post the capacity. At this time Donna has received all of her information is putting into a draft. After our meeting this morning, we discussed the possibility of moving only the 850 MMcf/d on the San Juan lateral and not include the 20 MMcf/d of fuel. If we are to only move the 850 MMcf/d, the changing of horsepower may not be needed (I have a call into Ron Matthews for the answer). The reason we are asking this question is save capital dollars and speed up the in service date. Planning has said that any change we make at the Gallup station will not work for the main expansion. Drew and Maria are looking for a way to bring the fuel or a portion of the 850 MMcf/d in at another point (Drew to explain in more detail). The reason we are asking these questions is that engineering says the project will not be ready for service until the third quarter of 2001. We may miss an opportunity. I will be in early tomorrow or you can reach me at home tonight after 9:00 PM (896-1025), if have any questions. Keith