Message-ID: <18306155.1075853837762.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 07:36:00 -0700 (PDT) From: chris.germany@enron.com To: richard.pinion@enron.com, marlene.hilliard@enron.com Subject: Re: National Fuel Says They Are Pathed Model Type Cc: beverly.beaty@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: beverly.beaty@enron.com X-From: Chris Germany X-To: Richard Pinion, Marlene Hilliard X-cc: Beverly Beaty X-bcc: X-Folder: \Chris_Germany_Dec2000\Notes Folders\'sent mail X-Origin: Germany-C X-FileName: cgerman.nsf Richard, according to Marlene, she needs to put in an IT request to change the National Fuel contracts from non-pathed to pathed. Does this sound correct to you? Please let me know. chris ---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 05/03/2000 02:28 PM --------------------------- From: Beverly Beaty 05/03/2000 02:14 PM To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: National Fuel Says They Are Pathed Model Type Per our conversation.... Bev ---------------------- Forwarded by Beverly Beaty/HOU/ECT on 05/03/2000 02:14 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Donna Greif 04/21/2000 12:44 PM To: Richard Pinion/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Beverly Beaty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diane E Niestrath/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: National Fuel Says They Are Pathed Model Type Richard, I trust you're on top of this.....let me know if you'd like my help! Thanks! dg From: Diane E Niestrath on 04/19/2000 06:23 PM To: Donna Greif/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Pinion/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Dave Nommensen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Beverly Beaty/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: National Fuel Says They Are Pathed Model Type DG & RP, National Fuel says they are 100% using the GISB pathed model type. Our Unify noms are non-pathed. 1) Can you look at the National Fuel invoice and verify that the accounting area will still work effortlessly if we change Unify to pathed. 2) If we elect to change Unify's model type to pathed, let's do it just like we did Southern Natural. And, I would like this done for May 1 noms in production and have the Scheduler (Beverly?) path in this new model type manner. We are suppose to be getting scheduled quantities in production starting tomorrow, unless ECOM prevents it, so you'll be able to see what the pipe expects in the pathed model type. 3) If we elect to NOT change Unify's model type to pathed, I guess we can't ever edi this pipe unless I can figure out some clever way to join up the noms. Beverly, Do you think it would be a problem to start entering the upstream k's and downstream k's when you path in Unify. The pipe told me this is mandatory data unless the nom is involved in the Appalachian area. If it is a problem, don't do, I don't want to slow you down since you have to enter the data twice today. If and when we do edi, we'll need the up/down k's entered at that time. Thanks, Diane x3-9931 ============================================================================== ======================= Email excerpt between Diane (in magenta) and Chris Zachary in IT Dptmt at National Fuel Gas Supply Corp (in blue) ===> >> 3) Please confirm that your model type is always "P" pathed from noms all the >> way down to invoices. Our model type is always "P" for pathed.