|
|
Enron Mail |
please review. check to make sure #250196 referenced below is booked
properly. ---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 10/04/2000 05:12 PM --------------------------- Tammi DePaolis@ENRON 10/04/2000 04:52 PM To: Cyndie Balfour-Flanagan/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe A Casas/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Alagasco Cindy, I think we may have a few things missing. This is what Alagasco shows we have regarding contract numbers and expiration dates: There are four old CES/ Bring cotracts which have been assigned over to ENA. They are: Bring reference number #10170, volume of 20471 expires 12/31/00 (has associated demand fees) Alagasco ref # -- ENA No. 2, Sitara #-250042 Bring Reference number #10055, volume of 10000 expires 11/30/00 (has associated demand fees) Alagasco ref # -- ENA No. 1, Sitare #-250050 These are the only two contract Alagasco wants to terminatein accordance with the expiration date. In additon we have two other old Bring/CES contracts that have expiration dates in 2001 and 2002 that they have no intention of terminating, unless however ENA would allow them to which we would not since they have demand fees with escalators associated with them. They are: Bring reference number #10219, volume of 5339, expires 10/31/01 (has associated demand fees) Algasco ref # -- ENA No. 3, Sitare #250196 Please note that in the system we have the termination date is correct but the volume is incorrect. It reflects 10,000 and you can see that the date ranges have been split each monthby Joe Casas, whom changes the volume in the scheduled section to 6,045 to account for fuel and what Alagasco is actually taking. This needs to be corrected. .Again, Alagasco has no intention of terminating this contract. Bring reference number #10326, volume of 10,000 during the winter only, months Nov - March , (has associated demand fees) Algasco ref # -- ENA No.4 This deals expires October 31, 2002. Sitara # --250186 This is the contract that allows Alagasco swing rights in which they have yet to exercise. AT one point Scott Neal had mentioned to try to work on taking this swing language out of the contract but I have not mentioned anything to them since they have yet to exercise those swing rights and I did not want to bring it to there attention. I do not know how much the demand fees are on this cotnract , but I would assume they are signficant. Alagasco has sent two termination letters to cancel the first two above contracts, only. i.e.-- Bring ref #'s 10170 & 10055. ENA does reflect these properly in the system so I believe we should be able to terminate these contracts. The other two contracts have nothing to do with the two termination letters Alagasco sent us. In additon, the two seasonal contracts that were done in Apirl & May 00 between Roger and myself, Sitara deals 242653 & 271301; Algasco would like to tie these contracts to the newly signed Enron Portfolio Master Firm Contract wlhich I also agree with. All deals look accurate in Sitara regarding term and volume except for Sitare # 250196, which I mentioned above. I do not know the demand fees associated with the contracts so I do not know if they are in the system accurately or if they are being billed accurately. Cindy, I think this information should be everything we need to clear up the confusion regarding Alagasco's pending terminaiton letter. Please get with me once you have a minute. Thank you.
|