Enron Mail

From:victor.lamadrid@enron.com
To:rita.wynne@enron.com, sherlyn.schumack@enron.com
Subject:Re: HPL discrepancy
Cc:clem.cernosek@enron.com, jackie.young@enron.com, meredith.mitchell@enron.com,cynthia.franklin@enron.com, daren.farmer@enron.com, beverly.beaty@enron.com
Bcc:clem.cernosek@enron.com, jackie.young@enron.com, meredith.mitchell@enron.com,cynthia.franklin@enron.com, daren.farmer@enron.com, beverly.beaty@enron.com
Date:Thu, 14 Dec 2000 02:37:00 -0800 (PST)

Rita, Please help me with this. I have some questions regarding Enerfin.
Why are we re-allocating prior month volumes at Enerfin after we matched your
original numbers back in October? Can't this be fixed in the actualization
process?
The numbers for October between ENA-TETCO and HPL vary a good bit. Are we
your only customer at that point and why do we show volumes on days ENA had
no transactions with HPL? Can we simply put zero paths in UNIFY and extend
our existing deals in Sitara with zero volumes and have you guys actualize
these small volumes to handle this? We go round and round at this point
changing volumes two, three or more times. Call me if you have questions..
Thanks Victor
---------------------- Forwarded by Victor Lamadrid/HOU/ECT on 12/14/2000
08:50 AM ---------------------------
From: Meredith Mitchell on 12/14/2000 09:28 AM
To: Victor Lamadrid/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: HPL discrepancy

Victor,

The sitara ticket that we were using for the month of October is #421415.
TETCO shows that the volumes that HPL was allocated on October 6th and
October 19th, were 9 dths and 44 dths, respectively. Those volumes were
pulled off of our backhaul contract because there was no nomination in
place. This is the same problem that we have had over and over with them.
Also, we just found out on Tuesday, that the OBA did not go into effect until
December 1, 2000. We were originally told that they were putting the OBA in
effect retroactively to November of 1999. In fact, I thought that HPL had
made a lot of retroactive changes in the system to adjust for the OBA, do you
remember that? HPL told us that Ray Calles at TETCO is the one who decided
that the OBA would not be effective until December of 2000. Nobody even
informed us of this change, I stumbled upon it when researching a November
issue for Alfonso Trabulsi and Brenda Fletcher. In addition to all of this,
I received another email, which I will copy below, asking me to go in for the
month of October and adjust all of my estimated volumes in Unify to match
what HPL shows that we were allocated. I had been going in all month long
and matching to their numbers, and we were clean for the deadline at the end
of the month. I ran the allocation report from TETCO for the month of
October, and some of HPL's numbers were very different from TETCO's,
including the two days that I mentioned above. I sent Jackie Young an email
back showing her TETCO's numbers and I haven't received a response. I will
copy that email below as well, just to catch you up on what's been going on.



Jackie Young
12/12/2000 10:01 AM
To: Cynthia Franklin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Mitchell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Rita Wynne/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sherlyn Schumack/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Estimated Volumes for meter 98-0439 for (10/2000)

Cynthia/Meredith:

Please find below the estimates for the above referenced meter for 10/2000.
Once you're done placing these estimates on TETCO's side, can you please
apprise me so that volume mgt. can conclude their business?

Thanks
-Jackie-
3-9497

DAY VOLUMES
1 39647
2 40040
3 39643
4 39809
5 39702
6 18 dec. (str. gas)
7
8
9
10
11 29162
12 14689
13 40400
14 30599
15 30523
16 30394
17 30369
18 40547
19 88 dec. (str. gas)
20 10126
21 20167
22 20208
23 20502
24 40408
25 45721
26 30978
27 43142
28 9667
29 9536
30 10290
31







From: Meredith Mitchell 12/12/2000 11:37 AM



To: Jackie Young/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: October Volumes

Hi Jackie,

I ran a report from TETCO's system to show the volumes that Enron was
allocated for the month of October, and some of the volumes are very
different from the volumes that you show. I copied your numbers below and
copied TETCO's volumes below that (with the disrepancies in red). I was
wondering if you could double check the 3rd, 4th, 11th, 12th, 25th, and 27th
to see if you had purchases on those days from a counterparty other than
Enron North America at that meter. It looks like maybe the volumes that you
show are the total flow at that meter, but I think that only part of the gas
was actually allocated to us. I don't mind putting the allocated volumes in
path manager, but I'd like to make sure that on the above days, I am only
putting in the amount that Enron was allocated.

Also, on the 6th and the 19th TETCO shows exactly half of what you show,
which I thought was kind of strange. I am going to have to get TETCO's
permission to do a retroactive nomination for those two days at the volumes
you have requested, before I can put anything in Sitara or Unify. My manager
is out of the office and will be back tomorrow, but I would like for him to
double check the deal that we will have to create in Sitara for those two
days, since we are dealing with a prior month issue.



DAY VOLUMES
1 39647
2 40040
3 39643
4 39809
5 39702
6 18 dec. (str. gas)
7
8
9
10
11 29162
12 14689
13 40400
14 30599
15 30523
16 30394
17 30369
18 40547
19 88 dec. (str. gas)
20 10126
21 20167
22 20208
23 20502
24 40408
25 45721
26 30978
27 43142
28 9667
29 9536
30 10290
31



DAY VOLUMES
1 39647
2 40040
3 29732
4 24881
5 39702
6 9 dec. (str. gas)
7
8
9
10
11 19441
12 9793
13 40400
14 30599
15 30523
16 30394
17 30369
18 40547
19 44 dec. (str. gas)
20 10126
21 20167
22 20208
23 20502
24 40408
25 25401
26 30978
27 30099
28 9667
29 9536
30 10290
31