|
|
Enron Mail |
Cool--my law beanie is getting a little tight lately. Stan communicated to=
=20 Oneok that we want to keep the dialogue going and that arbitrating the=20 measurement issue is necessary so we can clear it out of the way and allow= =20 everyone to focus on bigger issues. I don't know if they bought it, but if= =20 we approach them (maybe at the Stan level) with potential business deals it= =20 will tend to validate the message Stan sent them. We haven't heard anythin= g=20 since we launched the arbitration on Friday, so I'm not sure if they are=20 ballistic or not. Given Stan's message to them (Kathy--pls forward Stan's= =20 letter to Jeff) I think he ought to either raise the West Texas line himsel= f=20 or else tee it up by calling his counterparts and letting them know what we= re=20 up to so there is no confusion. Maybe you or Harris could bring it up at t= he=20 Mon. meeting or sooner if necessary. Let me know if you want me involved = in=20 that conversation. Thanks. df From: Jeffery Fawcett/ENRON@enronxgate on 02/27/2001 02:54 PM To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: =20 Subject: Pemex-Enron Project Drew, Here's a chance to wear your honorary Marketing beanie. If you read the no= te=20 below, we're engaged in very preliminary conversations with PEMEX with the= =20 idea that maybe TW/NNG could offer a viable alternative to EPNG to move gas= =20 into Mexico through the Samalayuca lateral (commencement point located=20 approx. 50 miles east of the city of El Paso). New construction would=20 involve approx. 150 miles of pipeline and associated compression to tie int= o=20 the existing TW/NNG systems near Waha. Notwithstanding PEMEX's desire to= =20 move off EPNG for a portion of the load, I don't think the economics will= =20 work.=20 However, KN Energy (now Kinder) used to own a line they acquired through=20 Westar (they acquired it from El Paso Products Co.) that runs from Waha=20 westward to a point near the city of El Paso. It's primarily a 20" line, a= nd=20 it currently serves El Paso Electric Co. and several directly connected=20 industrial customers. As a KN operation, it typically didn't run full. I= =20 see the acquisition of this line as one possible way we could serve both th= e=20 existing markets as well as incremental volumes to PEMEX at a rate that mig= ht=20 work for them. I completely spaced on the fact that Kinder sold many of it= s=20 south system assets (including this West Texas line) to Oneok last year. I= f=20 we are to pursue this idea, then we're forced to dealing with Oneok. I know that we're in deep dog poo with Oneok right now regarding Bushton. = My=20 question is, are we in any kind of position to talk to Oneok about this=20 asset, considering the legal status of our dispute at Bushton? Also, does= =20 our desire (potentially) to own this asset create any kind of negotiating= =20 currency with Oneok on the Bushton issue? I'd appreciate your thoughts. We're due to have Pemex in our offices next= =20 week. Thanks! -----Original Message----- From: Fawcett, Jeffery =20 Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 3:19 PM To: Harris, Steven; Scott, Susan; Matthews, Ronald; Robertson, Audrey;=20 Schoolcraft, Darrell; Faucheaux, Eric; Gottsponer, Morgan Subject: Pemex-Enron Project Importance: High Pemex has approached Transwestern with the idea of Transwestern building an= =20 interconnecting pipeline between the current EPNG/Samaluyca interconnect at= =20 EPNG's Hueco compressor station and TW's facilties in West Texas. Pemex h= as=20 indicated they might move as much as 300,000 MMCf/d on the lateral, althoug= h=20 the email below shows increments to only 200,000 MMCf/d. Pemex is well awa= re=20 of the fact that the lateral will not be an inexpensive proposition, but th= ey=20 claim to see another supply option (other than EPNG) as necessary,=20 particularly in light of EP Merchant's behavior regarding their ownership o= f=20 the large 1.2 Bcf/d block of EPNG capacity. To this end, I've arranged a meeting (originally set for Mexico City, now i= n=20 Houston) to sit down face to face with Pemex and discuss this project. =20 They'd like us to be a specific as possible and set the email below to assi= st=20 us in our design considerations. I see this project being one of possibly two separate projects. First, we= =20 could re-establish a dialogue with Kinder Morgan to see if they'd be=20 interered in talking to us about an ownership position in their West Texas= =20 line. Secondly, we could build new pipe to TW/NNG. With respect to NNG, I think there's definitely an opportunity to promote t= he=20 use of the NNG South end as a potential supply/services source. Not only= =20 does NNG have a full range of storage and line pack services, but they coul= d=20 possibly bring Trailblazer gas from the Rockies down to serve this load. Audrey, if you would, please set us up for meeting here in Houston on Frida= y,=20 March 9, 2001 beginning at 9:00 a.m. We need a conference room for about 1= 0=20 people from 9-12. I'd like a coffee/juice/rolls setup for this meeting if= =20 possible. Also, check with me as time draws near and we can arrange a plac= e=20 to take them to lunch. I think we can finish our business with them at lun= ch=20 time and make plans for our next steps. -----Original Message----- From: jrojas [mailto:jrojas@gas.pemex.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 7:54 PM To: Jeffery.Fawcett Cc: lpadilla Subject: Pemex-Enron Project Importance: High Jeff, As we talk this morning we are interested on developing a new project with your company that could take gas into EPNG=01,s Hueco compressor station located in Hudspeth County, Texas. The preliminary information we can give you in order to move forward with the project is this: Receipt point: Transwestern and NNG Delivery point- Hueco Compress Station Delivery Pressure- 840 psi Volume 100,150 and 200 MMBTU/day Term 10,15 and 20 years. The information we would like to receive from you is: 1. Permissions you will need to get in order to build the interconnection FERC, RRC, EPNG, others (timing for those permissions) 2. Time to build the interconnection 3. As we understand, you as interstate pipeline need to post the capacity at the EBB, how much time would it take? 4. Rates and fuel charges that apply for all your system (Transwestern and NNG) 5. Estimated cost for the new interconnection facilities. 6. Supply areas that we can access 7. Storage Facilities We hope that with this information you can run your first numbers about how we can make this project work and we can have some distance walked for our upcoming meeting on march 9th, 2001 Thank you in advance for the help and if you have any question don=01,t hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely yours=01( Jorge F. Rojas Zepeda Natural Gas Marketing Transportation MGI Supply, Ltd. An affiliate of Pemex Gas y Petroqu?mica B?sica Phone: 525-232-59-87 mailto:jrojas@gas.pemex.com - WINMAIL.DAT
|