Warren County put itself in the running for a segment of a 270-mile natural gas pipeline project Monday with supervisors voting unanimously for a tax break.

The vote came after Monty Collins, a project manager with Duke Energy Gas Transmission, told the board that the company needed &#8220an expedited decision” far in advance of the project’s tentative 2007 start date. He cited long waits in ordering necessary materials, like steel.

The Houston-based gas pipeline development division of Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy is partnering with CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission to build the 36-inch Southeast Supply Header to connect in eastern Texas and north Louisiana to markets in the southeast and northeast.

The line passing through south Warren County would extend from a CenterPoint-owned hub in northeastern Louisiana to a hub in Mobile, Ala. partially owned by Duke Energy.

Reached later, Gretchen Krueger, director of communications for Duke Energy Gas Transmissions, said the path the pipeline would take is not final. Regulatory approval is expected in November, Krueger said.

District 4 Supervisor Carl Flanders, board president, said company maps show the pipeline running mainly through his district for about eight miles, including the Yokena and Cedars communities.

During the meeting, Collins said the company had not conferred with landowners in those areas whose property would be affected by the project.

In a statement, Krueger said Warren County has joined Copiah, Lawrence, Marion, Perry and Walthall counties in expressing support.

&#8220As we work to develop a route, we will continue to collaborate with affected stakeholders,” Krueger said.

The deal allows the company to pay one-third of ad valorem taxes for 10 years. Using a &#8220fee-in-lieu” of taxes, the company would still kick in $125,000 to Warren County and the school district in each of the first 10 years, then $375,000 per year in subsequent years, based on company estimates.

During the discussion, District 3 Supervisor Charles Selmon and District 2 Supervisor William Banks sought to delay a decision.

&#8220We have not really looked at alternatives to the tax (abatement) structure,” Selmon said.

Flanders said one alternative should be to offer the company a tax break that would require payment of half the tax bill.

&#8220We don’t need to be greedy,” District 1 Supervisor McDonald said in response. &#8220At least they’re not asking for a total tax exemption.”

When the vote was taken, it was 5-0. No figures were provided, but it appeared the exemption could be worth $2.5 million over the 10 years.

District 5 Supervisor Richard George, a supporter of the request from the beginning, said it was a chance to &#8220lower the rising cost of doing county business,” citing education funding as an example.

In other business, the board: