75 lines
5.6 KiB
Plaintext
75 lines
5.6 KiB
Plaintext
Message-ID: <14864700.1075861339002.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
|
|
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 08:17:46 -0800 (PST)
|
|
From: m..tholt@enron.com
|
|
To: jay.reitmeyer@enron.com, frank.ermis@enron.com, p..south@enron.com
|
|
Subject: FW: Western Frontier Project
|
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-From: Tholt, Jane M. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JTHOLT>
|
|
X-To: Reitmeyer, Jay </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jreitme>, Ermis, Frank </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Fermis>, South, Steven P. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ssouth>
|
|
X-cc:
|
|
X-bcc:
|
|
X-Folder: \FERMIS (Non-Privileged)\Ermis, Frank\Inbox
|
|
X-Origin: Ermis-F
|
|
X-FileName: FERMIS (Non-Privileged).pst
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message-----
|
|
From: Cantrell, Rebecca W.
|
|
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 1:28 PM
|
|
To: Miller, Stephanie; Tholt, Jane M.; Shively, Hunter S.; Lucci, Paul T.
|
|
Subject: Western Frontier Project
|
|
|
|
The FERC notice on this project has been issued and comments are due by November 21. Do we have any interests that would warrant more than a plain intervention? Let me know if you want a copy of the original filing, with maps, etc.
|
|
|
|
INSIDE FERC-October 29, 2001
|
|
WILLIAMS PUTS MEAT ON THE BONES OF WESTERN FRONTIER PROJECT DESIGN
|
|
Touting a need for more pipeline capacity linking the "prolific" supply basins of the central Rockies
|
|
and increasingly hungry Mid-Continent markets, The Williams Cos. Inc. last week took the next step by
|
|
filing for authorization to build and operate the Western Frontier project.
|
|
The sponsor has in hand four negotiated-rate deals for long-term service covering roughly two-thirds
|
|
of the 540,000 Dt/day of project design capacity, it told FERC in an Oct. 24 certificate application
|
|
(CP02-11). Williams wants to have the $366 million project up and running by Nov. 1, 2003; it
|
|
asked the commission to issue a final certificate by Dec. 11, 2002, so that it can commence construction
|
|
by the following April.
|
|
Williams unveiled initial plans for Western Frontier early last summer (IF, 9 July, 14) and held an open
|
|
season in June and July. To carry gas from the Power River, Big Horn, Wind River and Green River basins
|
|
- estimated to hold 173 Tcf of potential and recoverable reserves - the new 30-inch-diameter mainline
|
|
would run 398 miles, starting at the Cheyenne Hub and ending at an interconnection with the system of
|
|
affiliate Williams Gas Pipelines Central Inc. in Beaver County, Okla. Characterizing the Cheyenne Hub as
|
|
"a liquid point of supply," Williams asserted that "presently, supply capability to the hub has outpaced
|
|
transportation capacity away from the hub to market areas due to insufficient pipeline infrastructure."
|
|
Along the way, the Western Frontier mainline would make another interconnection with Williams
|
|
Central as well as with Northern Natural Gas Co., ANR Pipeline Co., Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America
|
|
and Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co., "thus providing multiple avenues for gas produced in the central
|
|
Rockies to be transported throughout the Mid-Continent using the existing pipeline grid."
|
|
To "further enhance its supply options," the sponsor wants to build a 9.7-mile lateral from the
|
|
mainline to the Wattenberg gas processing plant east of Denver to tap the Denver-Julesberg basin. Rounding
|
|
out the project design are two new compressor stations, the 10,000-horsepower Chalk Bluff station to
|
|
be constructed at the Cheyenne Hub and the 20,000-hp Denver station to be built in Adams County, Colo.
|
|
Following the open season, Williams hammered out precedent agreements with Marathon Oil Co.
|
|
(75,000 Dt/day), Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co. (200,000 Dt/day), Utilicorp United Inc.
|
|
(15,000 Dt/day) and Entergy Power Generation Corp. (75,000 Dt/day). The initial term for the deals is 10
|
|
years, except for Marathon which committed to a five-year term with an option to extend it an additional
|
|
two years, said the application.
|
|
"Other shippers have expressed serious interest for the remaining capacity on Western Frontier, and
|
|
active negotiations are moving forward with these potential shippers," said the application, adding that
|
|
Williams was "confident . . . that the remaining capacity will be committed in the upcoming months."
|
|
With the addition of compression, the project could "facilitate relatively inexpensive expansions to
|
|
accommodate future market growth," the sponsor told FERC. And that may well be necessary, it continued,
|
|
pointing to "stagnant to declining supply" in the Mid-Continent basins coupled with "projected demand
|
|
increases." As in many areas of the country, "much of the anticipated demand increase is attributed to
|
|
installation and operation of . . . gas-fired electrical generation," it said. The 11,439 Mw of "active winter
|
|
generating capacity" in the combined service areas of Western Frontier and Williams Central is expected to
|
|
more than double by 2004, said Williams.
|
|
The application seeks negotiated rate authority for the project operator, Western Frontier Pipeline
|
|
Co. LLC, and approval of initial recourse rates. The maximum daily reservation rate under schedule FTS
|
|
would be 35?/Dt for contract demand in Zone 1 and 79.4?/Dt in Zone 2.
|
|
Under the negotiated deals reached with the four "anchor" shippers, Utilicorp and Entergy would pay a
|
|
combined reservation and commodity rate of 25?/Dt at a 100% load factor for Zone 1 service to the
|
|
Williams Central Hugoton station in Kansas, while WEM&T would pay a combined rate of 30?/Dt for
|
|
Zone 2 transportation to the Williams Central system in Oklahoma and Marathon would pay 32?/Dt under
|
|
the shorter contract for Zone 2 service to interconnects with ANR, Panhandle and Williams Central in
|
|
Oklahoma. All transportation would originate at the Cheyenne Hub. |