Subject: Re: Entex Transport Reimbursement
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 01:31:00 -0800 (PST)

Your list of items is correct.  However, the entex related transport shows up 
on the P&L and the GL via transport expense from Tom to Ed.  This number is 
manually booked to the GL each month by Phillip.  Therefore, this revenue 
shows up en masse with all of the marketing desk's expense.

Eric

   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  Heidi Withers                           01/20/2000 09:01 AM

To: Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Entex Transport Reimbursement

Eric and Mick, does this match your understanding of how the money for 
transport related to the volumes that Entex pulls for Lufkin/Diboll 
residential volumes end up in Ed's P&L?  Also, do we do anything for the 
industrial volume?  I think we ought to let people know that we accomplished 
this (albeit that we did this a long time ago).  Please let me know.

Ed asked me to find revenue from Entex for transportation expense to 
Lufkin/Diboll for the residential part of the contract (Transaction 10).  
After checking into it, we have all found the following things:

1. Howard allocates the Lufkin/Diboll meters (7107/8/9) based on actuals.
2. Howard receives allocations from Entex for the industrial volumes, and 
then backs into the Transaction 10 (residential) volumes for Lufkin/Diboll.
3. Howard allocates the residential piece for Lufkin/Diboll to Transaction 10.
4. Kyle bills Entex for the residential volume, and applies the cash to the 
sales invoice.
5. Cassandra cuts an invoice to Co. 16 to get reimbursed for the transport 
expense going up to Lufkin/Diboll for the residential volume.
6. The money lands in Ed's P&L for the residential piece of the transport 
reimbursement.

Right now, at the end of the month, Eric Bass tells Mick how much the 
transport reimbursement is and Mick includes that money in Ed's P&L as 
revenue from a third party.  The actual money is reflected in Co. 12, and we 
just have to make sure that the money is reflected as revenue for Ed in the 
G/L rather than for Tom.