Subject: RE: meter data documentation
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 08:23:02 -0700 (PDT)

Brenda,
Here are the events as I know them
1)	On 7/25/01 this item was brought to the attention of varies members of a team meeting for Project Ranger. At that point, it was  agreed that this item should be high priority and Robert Bailey offered to push it forward.
2)	On Friday(7/27/01) I got a call from John Rutledge asking if he is the person that is supposed to enter  the WIP to CSC. John had never had any dealing w/ filling out a WIP, plus he is unsure if he is the person to fill it out. (Ball drop number one)
3)	WIP is finally submitted on 7/30/01. I got a call from Jacqueline Johnson on 8/2/01 asking a bunch of questions about the work request that was submitted by John. At that point I ask why I am just now being contacted if the WIP was submitted on Monday(7/30/01). Jacqueline then goes on to tell me that she has not been in the office that week and is just now getting around to reviewing our WIP request. I then ask why she did not have a backup covering her during her absence and told her she needs to get this out the door ASAP. (Ball drop number two)
4)	Brenda sends out an e-mail on Friday asking for an update from Richard Miller on the CSC issue. Yesterday at about 11:30 I sent an e-mail to Richard asking for an up date on the e-mail that Brenda sent out. I then get a call from Richard and Steve Walker in which they both told me that this item is not showing as an emergency item to CSC. Both told me that it was never conveyed to them that this was an emergency item, but  they will now escalated it to such. (Ball drop number three)

In summary, John should have been given a lot more guidance in filling the WIP out and getting it submitted to CSC since he has no prior relationship with CSC. As far as the rest of the items listed, I am unsure of where the disconnect in communication occurred at this time. Lastly, where does Robert Gresch fit in all of this since he is the one that I conveyed my concern about this item not looking like it was escalated to emergency status(7/26/01)? 

							Chris Stokley
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Herod, Brenda F.  
Sent:	Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:38 AM
To:	Stokley, Chris; Miller, Richard
Cc:	O'Neil, Murray P.; Richter, Jeff; Ha, Kenny
Subject:	RE: meter data documentation

Richard and Bob,
What is the status?  It is my understanding that the work request was not even received until Monday, 7/30.  I also understand that CSC (Steve Walker) worked with John Rutledge to define the work request.  I would like some insight into Chris' comment on the "ball being dropped."  I know we were all clear internally that this was a priority.  

Has CSC escalated this?  What is their timeline to deliver?  Let me know ASAP.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Stokley, Chris  
Sent:	Monday, August 06, 2001 4:09 PM
To:	Miller, Richard
Cc:	O'Neil, Murray P.; Herod, Brenda F.; Richter, Jeff; Ha, Kenny
Subject:	FW: meter data documentation

Richard,
	This is the last e-mail that I got from Mr. Gresch. As you can see, I am asking if this has been escalated to something other than the normal process. From the conversation we just had, I guess the level of priority never made it's way to you. While I am not sure who dropped the ball on this item, the fact remains that it was dropped and another week of information that is crucial to the intramonth book was missed. From this point forward, I would like to know who I should be talking with when it comes to these types of issues so as to avoid this miscommunication in the future. 

								Chris

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gresch, Robert  
Sent:	Thursday, July 26, 2001 9:20 AM
To:	Stokley, Chris
Subject:	RE: meter data documentation

Chris, Richard Miller, Gregg Young and Brenda Herod are working on prioritization.

From:	Chris Stokley/ENRON@enronXgate <mailto:Stokley/ENRON@enronXgate> on 07/26/2001 10:07 AM
To:	Robert D Gresch/HOU/EES@EES <mailto:Gresch/HOU/EES@EES>, John Rutledge/HOU/EES@EES <mailto:Rutledge/HOU/EES@EES>
cc:	[email-masked]@SMTP@enronXgate <mailto:[email-masked]@SMTP@enronXgate>, Jacqueline M Jackson/HOU/EES@EES <mailto:Jackson/HOU/EES@EES>, Robert Bailey/HOU/EES@EES <mailto:Bailey/HOU/EES@EES>, Brenda F Herod/ENRON@enronXgate <mailto:Herod/ENRON@enronXgate>, Murray P ONeil/ENRON@enronXgate <mailto:ONeil/ENRON@enronXgate> 
Subject:	RE: meter data documentation

Bob,
	I am a little confused, my understanding was that you would be able to escalate these items to get a quick turnaround time in comparison to going the normal process. What you are recommending sounds like the normal process, am I incorrect on that conclusion?  When can I expect to get feedback from CSC with the process listed below? 

								Chris
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gresch, Robert  
Sent:	Thursday, July 26, 2001 7:28 AM
To:	Rutledge, John; Stokley, Chris
Cc:	[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>; Jackson, Jacqueline; Bailey, Robert; Herod, Brenda F.
Subject:	meter data documentation

John/Chris - I spoke to Steve Walker with Team Enron this morning about your request.  He'll be contacting you to help fill out the request form and get it submitted.  When the request is completed, it should be forwarded to Jacqueline Jackson in my group for submission to CSC.  With respect to your time for completion requirements, we'll need to work with CSC on prioritization if there are any issues.

Bob
---------------------- Forwarded by Robert D Gresch/HOU/EES on 07/26/2001 09:20 AM ---------------------------
   
??Z5??J/?3OI?yr??<M8.?__:/?s?:??