The following volumes are capacities west of Station 1 that will result fro= m tie-in construction work slated for the Red Rock expansion. Tie-in assem= blies will be required on both the Mainline and Loopline at stations 1, 2, = and 3. New block and side valve assemblies for new compressor and scrubber= s will be installed on the suction side main and loop lines at each station= . The tie-in will entail blocking (isolating) a line segment within the st= ation yard on the suction side (each line done separately) thus creating a = dead leg back to the next upstream block valve crossover(s). Hence, all of= the flow will be forced into a single line when making tie-in on the adjac= ent pipeline line. The result of forcing all volumes into a single line wi= ll produce greater pressure losses in the operating segment to the existing= compression and reduce throughput due to lower suction pressure and respec= tive horsepower limitations. Discharge piping at the station having tie-in= work will be unchanged regarding valving configurations. Tie-in=09Schedule/Duration=09Capacity=09X-over Status CS 2 ML=09Oct '01 / 4 days=09960 MMcfd=09MLV 3010-open us/ds x-over; open u= s 30" x-over CS 2 LL =09Oct '01 / 2 days=09960 MMcfd=09MLV 3010-open us/ds x-over, open = us 30" x-over CS 1 ML=09Mar '02=09/ 4 days=09990 MMcfd=09MLV 2012 & 2011-open us/ds x-ove= r; open us 30" x-over CS 1 LL=09Mar '02=09/ 2 days=09990 MMcfd=09MLV 2012 & 2011-open us/ds x-ove= r; open us 30" x-over CS 3 ML=09Apr '02=09/ 4 days=091010 MMcfd=09MLV 4012 & 4011-open us/ds x-ov= er; open us 30" x-over CS 3 LL=09Apr '02=09/ 2 days=091010 MMcfd=09MLV 4012 & 4011-open us/ds x-ov= er; open us 30"x-over Notes: 1.=09Specific schedule dates are forthcoming 2.=09Schedules could be impacted by material deliveries and is based upon r= eceipt of construction permits 3.=09Durations consider working around the clock until completed
Answer: TW Capacity Affected for Red Rock Tie-ins
Here is an email: In anticipation of potential litigation involving TW's operational activities, please prepare an analysis for me of the reasons for TW's sale of excess natural gas at the California border. I am aware of several of these sales and have been informed that excess pressure at the border is the basic reason for them. I'd like a more specific explanation that includes the following information: 1. What are the specific pressures and volume considerations that could make it operationally necessary to sell gas at the California border? 2. What is the process that is followed to make such a determination? 3. Which individuals or groups are involved in determining whether an operational sale is necessary? 4. In what way have system operations changed since last year and how do those changes contribute to the increased frequency of such sales compared to previous years? 5. What alternatives to operational sales are considered before the decision to make a sale is reached? Thanks for your attention to this request. Please give me a call to discuss and please designate your response as "Privileged and Confidential, Attorney Client Privileged."
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE
Q: I have put this meeting on my calendar. You don't need to forward to anyone else. Chantelle should handle that for Brent's EGM team. Thanks.
Propose a subject line
A: EGM All Employee Meeting
IN: Valerie, Further to our conversation, please see the attached draft of the agreement discussed. Upon your review, please give me a call to discuss any issues or questions you may have. Regards,

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Agreement
IN: This is an email
POSREP HOEGH GALLEON, DATE: 26-May 12:00 10:00 (UTC) A) Position at noon: N 36 46 E 000 24 B) Dist. From last noon: 411 nm C) Dist. To go to next port: 283 nm D) ETA next port: ALGECIRAS 27 06:00 LT E) 1: Average sea/wind Sea: SW 3 Wind: SW 2 2: Average speed 17.13 kn RPM: 86.67 3: BOG 137 m3 5: F.O Consumed 33 m3 6: G.O. Consumed 0 m3 7: Average vapor press Average liq. Temp: Tk1: 0.124 bar -158.13 ?C

What is the subject?

OUT: POSREP 26 MAY
Bill you may want to sit in on this if you have time. It seems we have items of concern that were identified during the consolidated audit at Bakersfield which were tied into a previous agreement with Koch for which the action team did not know when the action items were prepared. The action dates are approaching and Scott and I are having a hard time getting clearification on how to initiate getting the the action items started due to the responsibility of Koch for some of the items. Ed, the attorney for EOTT, will be requested by Lou, to notify Koch concerning their responsiblity. If this sounds convoluted, then you know as much as I.....
Answer:
Conference Call