Message-ID: <23927728.1075844009314.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 03:25:00 -0800 (PST)
From: matt.smith@enron.com
To: yan.wang@enron.com
Subject: West Desk Flow Summary Comments
Cc: tara.piazze@enron.com, chris.gaskill@enron.com, jay.reitmeyer@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: tara.piazze@enron.com, chris.gaskill@enron.com, jay.reitmeyer@enron.com
X-From: Matt Smith
X-To: Yan Wang
X-cc: Tara Piazze, Chris Gaskill, Jay Reitmeyer
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Matthew_Smith_June2001\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: SMITH-M
X-FileName: msmith18.nsf

Yan,

Based on my review conducted the morning of February 6th, here is a list of 
items that need to be addressed in the next version of the West Desk's Flow 
Summary sheet:

PGT - These numbers appear to be one day off.  The numbers in the Test Sheet 
for February 6th are identical to those used by the West Desk yesterday for 
February 5th.  I verified that they are the Cycle 2 numbers posted on PGT's 
website for the 5th.  Generally, we use the Cycle 2 numbers, however, 
sometimes only Cycle one is available for our morning meeting.

Northwest - None of these numbers match our flow sheet.  It appears the Test 
Sheet pulls Cycle 3 nominations, whereas we use Cycle 6.  However, the 
website we use to pull the flows is generally not available to use until as 
late as 7 am (we are not sure why).  I understand you may pull the numbers 
from a different place, so we should find out whether you can get the numbers 
earlier.

TW - TW numbers appear to be correct, except for the IB Link number.  We pull 
the IB link number from the El Paso Blanco I/C point reported by TW.  It 
looks like your sheet pulls the number from the El Paso INWPLBLA point.  They 
differ by about 5,000, but I don't know if one is more correct than the 
other.  To be consistent, though, we should probably change the Test Sheet.

PGE - The numbers also appear to be one day off.  The numbers for February 
6th are identical to our Feb. 5th numbers.  Is this a reporting or a 
scrubbing problem?  It is possible you are pulling the data from the website 
before they update it with the next day's data.  We manually type these 
numbers in.  If you pull from our spreadsheet, then the latest numbers would 
not be in when this report is run.

El Paso - Most of the numbers appear to be correct, except for the plant 
receipts.  The numbers are close, but we should compare our formulas because 
I don't think this is a cycle problem.

General - The "Difference" column of the Test Sheet compares the latest cycle 
for the current with the final cycle of the previous day.  This can cause 
intraday fluxuations in scheduled quantities to appear as day to day 
fluxuations.  Any "Difference" column should compare identical cycles.  I 
suggest that we add additional cycles to the Test Sheet for the current day 
and the previous day.  This way we can compare identical cycles as well as 
pick up any intraday fluxuations.

As we discussed, you'll let me know when you're ready to revise this report.  
These notes should give us a great place to start.  I look forward to getting 
this report ready to use.

Mat