Message-ID: <17064116.1075854704138.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 05:03:00 -0800 (PST)
From: eric.bass@enron.com
To: heidi.withers@enron.com
Subject: Re: Additional Transport Expense on Entex meters
Cc: david.baumbach@enron.com, bryan.hull@enron.com, michael.walters@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: david.baumbach@enron.com, bryan.hull@enron.com, michael.walters@enron.com
X-From: Eric Bass
X-To: Heidi Withers
X-cc: David Baumbach, Bryan Hull, Michael Walters
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Eric_Bass_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: Bass-E
X-FileName: ebass.nsf

I don't know about meter 4486, but the other three are good.  In addition, 
meter 5792 is another meter that is serviced in the Lufkin-Diboll area.


   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  Heidi Withers                           03/14/2000 10:14 AM
	

To: Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bryan Hull/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael 
Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Additional Transport Expense on Entex meters

Eric, I am checking the process now for incorporating all transport revenue 
due Ed for delivery meters in the Texas region.  The following meters have 
transport rates attached to them which are above and beyond the matrix rates 
Ed quotes to Tom.  I believe that we are already capturing all Ed's 
revenue/Tom's expense for this gas at these meters, but want to be sure of 
that.   Would you let me know if these are the meters for which we are 
manually moving around money from Tom to Ed for the residential portion of 
the Lufkin-Diboll volume?



I believe that the industrial portion of this volume is included already as 
part of Ducote's deal, and I believe that the residential portion is volume 
which you determine and then move from Tom to Ed every month.

Is this right?


Heidi