re : eog pronghorn location bob
dirk ellison with eog has contacted me twice this morning about the efm at
the location . he told me they planned to come on tuesday evening . i have told
him both times that we could not proceed until i receive word from you and
earl that all the agreements are in place . he had contacted jerry ball , who
contacted their marketing , and their reply was to tell us ( in the field ) to
proceed . i tried to explain that we needed that go - ahead from our folks , not
theirs . also , an issue came up on the operations conference call this morning
about quality equipment - h 2 s , h 2 o , sampler , gas chromatograph . the team had
told rich it was about a 20 mmcfd point , dirk indicated to me they were
looking at more like 16 mmcfd commercial power is about a mile away from the
location per the operations team and some of this equipment could require
power .
we have got lots going on this week , could someone explain the situation to
eog ?
thanks
mike
bob burleson
11 / 08 / 2000 06 : 29 am
to : earl chanley / et & s / enron @ enron
cc : mike mccracken / et & s / enron @ enron , darrell schoolcraft / et & s / enron @ enron ,
" laura j . kunkel " , perry
frazier / et & s / enron @ enron , michelle lokay / et & s / enron @ enron
subject : re : eog pronghorn location
if we bare any expense , eog is suppose to reimburse us , but getting money out
of them is like pulling teeth .
i suggest we complete the work at the site and have our facilities ready to
proceed when necessary . marketing is not in a position right now to pay the
cost of the efm . given that these volumes will flow under a " pooling
agreement " , there isn ' t any incremental revenue generated for tw .
we will get with eog to request payment for the efm before we proceed . any
idea how much the efm will cost ?
re : eog pronghorn location
bob
dirk ellison with eog has contacted me twice this morning about the efm at
the location . he told me they planned to come on tuesday evening . i have told
him both times that we could not proceed until i receive word from you and
earl that all the agreements are in place . he had contacted jerry ball , who
contacted their marketing , and their reply was to tell us ( in the field ) to
proceed . i tried to explain that we needed that go - ahead from our folks , not
theirs . also , an issue came up on the operations conference call this morning
about quality equipment - h 2 s , h 2 o , sampler , gas chromatograph . the team had
told rich it was about a 20 mmcfd point , dirk indicated to me they were
looking at more like 16 mmcfd commercial power is about a mile away from the
location per the operations team and some of this equipment could require
power .
we have got lots going on this week , could someone explain the situation to
eog ?
thanks
mike
bob burleson
11 / 08 / 2000 06 : 29 am
to : earl chanley / et & s / enron @ enron
cc : mike mccracken / et & s / enron @ enron , darrell schoolcraft / et & s / enron @ enron ,
" laura j . kunkel " , perry
frazier / et & s / enron @ enron , michelle lokay / et & s / enron @ enron
subject : re : eog pronghorn location
if we bare any expense , eog is suppose to reimburse us , but getting money out
of them is like pulling teeth .
i suggest we complete the work at the site and have our facilities ready to
proceed when necessary . marketing is not in a position right now to pay the
cost of the efm . given that these volumes will flow under a " pooling
agreement " , there isn ' t any incremental revenue generated for tw .
we will get with eog to request payment for the efm before we proceed . any
idea how much the efm will cost ?