re : big cowboy for august mary :
is the issue below confirmed volumes versus actual flow ? the large variance
between confirmed and actuals began in june 2000 where 30 mmbtu was scheduled
for dix ranch and zero for the big cowboy and big cowboy # 2 wells . it
appears that the volumes for these wells were scheduled at despain where
985 , 350 mmbtu was confirmed . this well has never flowed this much volume ,
and in june 2000 it flowed approximately 320 , 000 mmbtu . do we actually have
support ( i . e we talked with someone or have a nom sheet ) for the 985 , 350
mmbtu that was entered into mops as confirmed ? this trend of " nothing " being
confirmed at these three wells continued until july 2000 . in august 2000
this scenario changed and 612 , 388 was confirmed at dix ranch and nothing was
scheduled at the big cowboy and big cowboy # 2 wells .
from reading your memo below it also appears that more volume is flowing at
these wells that we expected . if the issue is an actual increase in the
volumes flowing at these wells , i would suggest that you call our gas
measurement department and ask them to audit coral ' s charts . coral may be is
calculating the volumes incorrectly .
this could also be an allocations issue . the allocation as it is in the
system today closely agrees with the allocation statement that i receive
monthly from karen lambert at tejas . the only differences between the tejas
schedule and what is in mops are the acock production and gain or loss which
are not scheduled and therefore not allocated . i know that you are working
on the acock production and tom acton and i are working on the gain / loss .
tom will tell me how to path the gas so that i can set up accounting
arrangements for april 1999 forward . scheduling will have analyze and
possibly rework january through march 1999 because these months were
originally set up in pops .
i want to help , so if i have missed the issue ( s ) would you please clarify it
or them for me and let me know if i need to do anything for you .
thanks ,
fred
tom acton @ enron
09 / 28 / 2000 08 : 10 am
to : fred boas / hou / ect @ ect
cc :
subject : big cowboy for august
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by tom acton / corp / enron on 09 / 28 / 2000 08 : 09
am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
mary poorman
09 / 27 / 2000 03 : 56 pm
to : daren j farmer / hou / ect @ ect , tom acton / corp / enron @ enron
cc : clem cernosek / hou / ect @ ect , howard b camp / hou / ect @ ect
subject : big cowboy for august
daren & tom ,
beginning with august production , i noticed that big cowboy , into king ranch
appeared to be flowing approximately 9 m over the nomination / day . per a
conversation i had with fred boas today , i discovered that two wells with
zero noms flowed a considerable volume .
they are as follows :
rocher big cowboy ( 27002 ) - 42 , 000 approx .
big cowboy # 2 ( 27003 - 84 , 000 approx .
total flow : 126 , 000 mm ' s , more or less
i think that this may be part of the production increase which we are trying
to account for , in addition to the acock production at the briscoe well which
came on in august . please let me know what you think . i would like to make
sure that we are capturing our purchases correctly for both accounting and
our economics .
thank you ,
mary
re : big cowboy for august
mary :
is the issue below confirmed volumes versus actual flow ? the large variance
between confirmed and actuals began in june 2000 where 30 mmbtu was scheduled
for dix ranch and zero for the big cowboy and big cowboy # 2 wells . it
appears that the volumes for these wells were scheduled at despain where
985 , 350 mmbtu was confirmed . this well has never flowed this much volume ,
and in june 2000 it flowed approximately 320 , 000 mmbtu . do we actually have
support ( i . e we talked with someone or have a nom sheet ) for the 985 , 350
mmbtu that was entered into mops as confirmed ? this trend of " nothing " being
confirmed at these three wells continued until july 2000 . in august 2000
this scenario changed and 612 , 388 was confirmed at dix ranch and nothing was
scheduled at the big cowboy and big cowboy # 2 wells .
from reading your memo below it also appears that more volume is flowing at
these wells that we expected . if the issue is an actual increase in the
volumes flowing at these wells , i would suggest that you call our gas
measurement department and ask them to audit coral ' s charts . coral may be is
calculating the volumes incorrectly .
this could also be an allocations issue . the allocation as it is in the
system today closely agrees with the allocation statement that i receive
monthly from karen lambert at tejas . the only differences between the tejas
schedule and what is in mops are the acock production and gain or loss which
are not scheduled and therefore not allocated . i know that you are working
on the acock production and tom acton and i are working on the gain / loss .
tom will tell me how to path the gas so that i can set up accounting
arrangements for april 1999 forward . scheduling will have analyze and
possibly rework january through march 1999 because these months were
originally set up in pops .
i want to help , so if i have missed the issue ( s ) would you please clarify it
or them for me and let me know if i need to do anything for you .
thanks ,
fred
tom acton @ enron
09 / 28 / 2000 08 : 10 am
to : fred boas / hou / ect @ ect
cc :
subject : big cowboy for august
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by tom acton / corp / enron on 09 / 28 / 2000 08 : 09
am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
mary poorman
09 / 27 / 2000 03 : 56 pm
to : daren j farmer / hou / ect @ ect , tom acton / corp / enron @ enron
cc : clem cernosek / hou / ect @ ect , howard b camp / hou / ect @ ect
subject : big cowboy for august
daren & tom ,
beginning with august production , i noticed that big cowboy , into king ranch
appeared to be flowing approximately 9 m over the nomination / day . per a
conversation i had with fred boas today , i discovered that two wells with
zero noms flowed a considerable volume .
they are as follows :
rocher big cowboy ( 27002 ) - 42 , 000 approx .
big cowboy # 2 ( 27003 - 84 , 000 approx .
total flow : 126 , 000 mm ' s , more or less
i think that this may be part of the production increase which we are trying
to account for , in addition to the acock production at the briscoe well which
came on in august . please let me know what you think . i would like to make
sure that we are capturing our purchases correctly for both accounting and
our economics .
thank you ,
mary