Message-ID: <14638423.1075841849229.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 06:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: kate.symes@enron.com
To: judy.dyer@enron.com
Subject: Real Time Discrepancy - 570892
Cc: kimberly.hundl@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: kimberly.hundl@enron.com
X-From: Kate Symes
X-To: Judy Dyer
X-cc: Kimberly Hundl
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \kate symes 6-27-02\Notes Folders\Discussion threads
X-Origin: SYMES-K
X-FileName: kate symes 6-27-02.nsf

Judy -
I just heard from Kim Hundl in Confirms that you had a discrepancy regarding 
a Short Term West Hourly deal entered for 4/4/01. Deal 570892 was originally 
entered as a buy of 5 MW for hour ending 11. Then the trader extended the 
deal, which is something Real Time traders do often, but when they do they 
rarely modify the deal in EnPower Deal Entry. They simply make the change in 
Scheduling. Because of that, unfortunately, you can only see the true total 
volume of the deal in our scheduling system.

At any rate, I've corrected the Real Time sheet for 4/4 to show the correct 
volumes for the correct hours; and I'm terribly sorry for the confusion. 
Please feel free to call me or e-mail any questions you have regarding EPMI's 
coverage of EES's load. I'm noticing that nine times out of ten, the 
discrepancies originate when Real Time is hurriedly sending spreadsheets to 
you guys and not making sure that they match the deals we have in EnPower. 
Also, I was wondering if you could tell me what database or report you're 
looking at to tie out our deals with your records. I think if I knew more 
about your perspective, I'd be able to help more efficiently.

Attached is the revised Real Time spreadsheet for 4/4. And again, please call 
with questions.

Thanks,
Kate