Message-ID: <21357744.1075853801532.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 05:20:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: chris.germany@enron.com
To: colleen.sullivan@enron.com, dan.junek@enron.com, judy.townsend@enron.com, 
	scott.goodell@enron.com
Subject: Re: Transport P&L
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Chris Germany
X-To: Colleen Sullivan, Dan Junek, Judy Townsend, Scott Goodell
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Chris_Germany_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: Germany-C
X-FileName: cgerman.nsf

We can use it as far as I'm concerned.  Have the reimbursements been 
addressed?


   
	
	
	From:  Colleen Sullivan                           05/16/2000 08:18 AM
	

To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan Junek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy 
Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Transport P&L

I need to know WHY you all are still uncomfortable using the service p&l, at 
least for demand charges.  Please advise.


---------------------- Forwarded by Colleen Sullivan/HOU/ECT on 05/16/2000 
08:18 AM ---------------------------
To: Colleen Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Transport P&L  


Colleen,

The main reason I am uncomfortable about using the service p&l is because 
Chris, Dan, and Judy are uncomfortable with it.  As soon as they are happy 
with it, we are ready to use it.

David



To: David Oliver/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Transport P&L  

David--
Why are you still not comfortable using the service p&l, at least for demand 
charges?
What system resources are you talking about?




To: Colleen Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Transport P&L  


Colleen,

I think the reason that they haven't moved has been one of timing.  Chris has 
not had time to pull them out of their spreadsheets and put them onto 
another.  This, of course, has led to the obvious point that we are still not 
comfortable using the service P&L from unify.  When Scott gets back next 
week, we will together with him and Dick to verify what needs to be moved and 
take care of it manually until system resources can handle it.

David



   
	
	
	From:  Colleen Sullivan                           05/03/2000 10:07 AM
	

To: David Oliver/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dick Jenkins/HOU/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Transport P&L

David
Is there some reason why we are not allocating demand charges for the market 
area pipes to the Market East p&l?  If the only reason is that you're not 
sure which ones to do, this is my suggestion.  It seems to me that there are 
only three pipelines where there is overlap and that would be Tennessee, 
Texas Eastern and Transco.  For now, why don't we leave all the demand 
charges for those three pipes, plus all others not listed below, with the 
East p&l, and move the following pipe demand charges to the Market East 
book:  Algonquin, Columbia Gas Transmission, Columbia Natural Resources, CNG, 
Cove Point, Equitrans, Gatherco, Iroquois, Marco, National Fuel.

Obviously you need to confirm this with Dick and Scott, but this seems to 
make sense to me.  Please advise.