Jim, 

Thanks for the question  -  we are covered by language of the sub-lease.  There there are standards for AEP's operation and AEP bears all costs/liability associated with repairs or upgrades (if any).

Regards,
Brian

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Schwieger, Jim  
Sent:	Thursday, June 07, 2001 4:17 PM
To:	Redmond, Brian; Gray, Barbara
Cc:	Lavorato, John; Martin, Thomas A.
Subject:	Bammel Lease Question

I was wondering if the Bammel lease to AEP contains any operating parameters to protect the integrity of the facility.  The question arises from the fact that Bammel  had about 24 BCF of remaining capacity when Enron turned the facility over to AEP.  We believe their plan is to max inject in June which would reduce the remaining capacity to around 12 BCF.  It could become a challenge to keep injections under the remaining 12 BCF level during the reaming 4-5 months of the injection cycle.  Enron always operated the facility with the understanding that a Gas In Place volume greater than 117.5 BCF could create a high enough pressure to jeopardize the safety of the wellhead casings and some of the abandoned wells.  We would not want the Texas RRC to question the safety of the Bammel facility.  From the other end of the perspective if the Gas In Place is taken below 65 BCF their is a high probability of watering out the outer wells and the facility itself.