|
|
Enron Mail |
Gil,
This is the infamous Year 2 Telecommunications bill that was for the T-1 or T-3 line (?) for the website that was used for day-to-day operational communications between BUG and ENA. As we discussed last week, ENA verbally agreed to pay this bill over the term of the deal. The cost of the telecommunications service was not explicitly covered under either the Supply or the Asset Agreement. I am assuming that the settlement agreement will be covering this under the category of "issues and payments". Please let me know if you want me to address this directly with Ed. Ruth P.S. I am planning to take some vacation most of this week. Will be in on Tuesday for any additional questions you may have on this matter. From: "Edwin P Anderson" <eanderson@keyspanenergy.com<@ENRON Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:48 AM To: Gil Muhl; Ruth Concannon Cc: RICHARD MONTENES; MELISSA REGES; WILLIAM WALLACE Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: Enron Web Site Phone Charges]] Gill & Ruth I just heard from GSO who is in trouble with KS's accounting dept over this Enron arrears. KS ccounting says this was never paid. I remember being told by Enron that it had been paid. Gill- can I get a quick answer on this so we keep GSO out of trouble. Please advise, Ed PS- Is the draft settlement letter coming soon? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Fwd: Enron Web Site Phone Charges] Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 12:35:18 -0400 From: "Richard T. Montenes" <rmontenes@keyspanenergy.com< To: Edwin P Anderson <eanderson@keyspanenergy.com< CC: WILLIAM WALLACE <wwallace@keyspanenergy.com<, ANNETTE DELISO <adeliso@keyspanenergy.com<, RICHARD MONTENES <rmontenes@keyspanenergy.com< Ed, As per our phone conversation please see the attached e-mail denoting the moneys that the accounting area is claiming were never paid to KeySpan (Brooklyn Union). If this amount isn't paid by the end of November 2001, these charges will be booked against the Gas Control NY budget so that accounting can close out the year 2000. We would like to avoid this situation if at all possible. There was never any dispute from Enron regarding these charges and they were sent all the proper paperwork. If Enron claims that they paid us, I need proof from them to give to accounting. Please advise. Rich M Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: <rmontenes@keyspanenergy.com< Received: from keyspanenergy.com ([198.74.9.114]) by unix25.bug.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with ESMTP id AAA3DAE2; Tue, 16 May 2000 11:16:02 -0400 Message-ID: <3921665F.3B216B65@keyspanenergy.com< Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 11:16:47 -0400 From: "Richard T. Montenes" <rmontenes@keyspanenergy.com< X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruth Concannon <rconcan@enron.com< CC: Edwin P Anderson <eanderson@keyspanenergy.com< , THOMAS AMERIGE <tamerige@keyspanenergy.com< , WILLIAM WALLACE <wwallace@keyspanenergy.com< , RICHARD MONTENES <rmontenes@keyspanenergy.com< , ANNETTE DELISO <adeliso@keyspanenergy.com< Subject: Enron Web Site Phone Charges Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Ruth, I have finally gotten copies of the Web Site phone charges from July 1999, through March 31st, 2000. I Fed Ex'ed copies to you earlier in the day. As I see it the charges are as follows: 1535.99 - August 1, 1999 bill 1793.27 - September 1, 1999 bill 1597.49 - October 1, 1999 bill 1701.12 - November 1, 1999 bill 2134.67 - December 1, 1999 bill 2381.34 - January 1, 2000 bill 2440.00 - February 1, 2000 bill 2344.75 - March 1, 2000 bill 2436.24 - April 1, 2000 bill ______________________ $18,364.87 = Grand Total This total includes July 1999 through March 2000 We will be sending a sundry debtor notice to Enron shortly. Unless you designate differently, the notification will go through the same channels as it previously did. Rich Montenes
|