Message-ID: <23115651.1075842455507.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 03:33:00 -0800 (PST) From: drew.fossum@enron.com To: lee.huber@enron.com Subject: TW/Mewbourne Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Drew Fossum X-To: Lee Huber X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Drew_Fossum_Dec2000_June2001_1\Notes Folders\Discussion threads X-Origin: FOSSUM-D X-FileName: dfossum.nsf Lets defer to MKM's group on whether to seek a waiver on this. I don't see any real value to us of solving Mewbourne's problems for them. DF ---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 02/10/2000 11:32 AM --------------------------- Keith Petersen 02/09/2000 05:28 PM To: Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bob Burleson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Earl Chanley/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Cates/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rich Jolly/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ken Earl/ET&S/Enron@Enron cc: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ray Smith/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michel Nelson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rockey Storie/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michele Winckowski/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: TW/Mewbourne Earlier this afternoon, Mike Sheppard, the attorney for Mewbourne, called requesting that we file for a waiver for Mewbourne's two projects. He passed on how he had talked with FERC, Lee Huber and Shelley Corman about the new Landowner notification for both projects. He now realizes that TW is required to do Landowner notification, but has the ability to file for a "Waiver" from FERC. He wants TW to file for the Waiver to reduce the number of days before Mewbourne can flow gas. It is my understanding that the OGC was open to granting a waiver expediently in the event there is no ground disturbance. Mewbourne - Two Projects: Hemphill Co. Interconnect - Mike S. asked why we couldn't move ahead on filing for the Waiver for the Hemphill project. I told him that before we could move ahead we will need additional information. First, we would need the legal description of the location, line number of the line the interconnect was to be connected to and who is the landowner(s) that would be impacted. He said that he would forward the landowner's name to me. The one question that I did not have an answer for are environmental clearances required? Because we are to have the environmental approved dates prior to work commencing (required for Blanket projects). Another question Mike S. was not aware of; "to activate the valve does TW need to cross other private properties reach the site?" Information needed for the waiver: Location of Work (Legal Description)? Landowner's Name and Address (per the latest Tax Role)? Environmental Clearances - Are they required? SE New Mexico - On this project Mike S. was not aware that TW had to excavate to make the connection to Mewbourne. In this project, TW must inspect the valve and operator (tie-in point) for damage. Environmental must review to see if clearances are required for the required digging. Because there is ground disturbance, the landowner(s) will need to sign a waiver for the 30 day notice. This waiver by the landowner would be filed with FERC. Another question that Mike was unable to answer "is this project on Tribal lands?" Another question Mike S. was not aware of; "to excavate the valve does TW need to cross other private properties reach the site?" Location of Work (Legal Description)? Landowner's Name and Address (per the latest Tax Role)? Environmental Clearances - Are they required? Landowner "Waiver Consent" Michele, earlier had a conversation with Shelley on how filing for waiver may help the overall outcome of Landowner Notification ruling. By showing FERC how the rule is affecting not only the pipeline, but how it affects producers and landowners may help in changing the rules. Please review and give me you input. If we are to file for a Waiver, Certificates will all of the above information. Mike Sheppard is a persistent person and wants to flow gas as many of you already know. Thanks Keith