|
|
Enron Mail |
Daren you are correct in that this was only in MOPS for the 26th. It was
edi'd over to POPS from the 25th through the 31st populating all days with the 16,700 nom. The nom was never -0- out in POPS therefore the change notification process in POPS did not pick up a change at this meter. This meter is pathed by Kim and confirmed by me - it is extremely odd that this was missed in MOPS. The record would have been out of balance and someone, if not several people, normally would make a comment on this. Also - all of my records indicate that the 16,700 was good through the 31st except the MOPS entry. My confirmations with Koch didn't reflect the -0- ; the last report I have from Koch indicated the 16,700 stayed on, there was no record of a phone call indicating anything other than 16,700. It is very odd for this many checks and balances to fail. Also, the volumes were being sent back to MOPS which no one caught. I have spoken with Koch today and they agree that the 16,700 should have gone to -0- therefore I have removed the nom from POPS confirmed volumes and re-allocated the meter. The OBA has taken the hit and I am working off the imbalance now. Daren, I am sorry that you had to look into this when you feel this is my responsibility. Stella was trying to help me out in clearing up errors because I was buried in current activity, thus the e-mail to you asking for your help. If this doesn't answer all the questions, just give me a call. Thanks, Charlotte Daren J Farmer 02/14/2000 12:50 PM To: Stella L Morris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charlotte Hawkins/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Pat Clynes/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Sale to Shoreline Stella and Charlotte, I looked into this deal. We sold this gas for one day only. In MOPS, the path was nominated for 1/26 only. However, in POPS the path was nominated and confirmed for 1/26-1/31. This should have been showing up as a bridgeback error during the month. Also, someone should have identified that the path/nom in MOPS wasn't the same as the nom in POPS. This discrepancy should have been found before we closed out January. I researched this problem by reviewing both systems (looking at the path id in POPS, finding it in MOPS, and checking the audit on the path in MOPS). This type of issue should be researched and solved by the logistics group, who has all the necessary tools to find the problem. The resolution, not the problem, should have been presented to myself or the marketer, with an explanation of what happened. Some one still needs to find out how the gas was confirmed for the 27th-31st. Since the gas apparently flowed, we will have to apply the overflow to the OBA. Unless you can find a missing transport contract. D From: Stella L Morris 02/10/2000 02:26 PM To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Charlotte Hawkins/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Sale to Shoreline FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Stella L Morris/HOU/ECT on 02/10/2000 02:25 PM --------------------------- From: Sherlyn Schumack 02/10/2000 02:21 PM To: Joanie H Ngo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine Herrera/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Stella L Morris/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Sale to Shoreline Joanie, Logistics is waiting to hear from Daren on this issue. He will either need to extend the deal or maybe there should be another deal in place. This deal 155118 is valid on 1/26/00 only, but the rest of the volume you are looking for is scheduled on days 1/27 - 1/31. I am sure there is no pricing on those days. I will let you know as soon as I hear from them.
|