Message-ID: <27841433.1075863302430.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 12:09:51 -0700 (PDT) From: jim.reyes@enron.com To: bill.williams@enron.com, kate.symes@enron.com Subject: RE: Congestion/Enpower to CAPS variance Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Reyes, Jim X-To: Williams III, Bill , Symes, Kate X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Williams III, Bill (Non-Privileged)\Bill Williams III X-Origin: Williams-B X-FileName: Williams III, Bill (Non-Privileged).pst Darren was looking at an "old" report. We re-ran the report and it balanced, which makes sense. Thanks for your patience while Darren runs up the steep learning curve. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Williams III, Bill Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 8:59 AM To: Cavanaugh, Darren; Reyes, Jim Cc: Symes, Kate Subject: Congestion/Enpower to CAPS variance Jim and Darren, We relieved Path 15 congestion for HE 7 on Saturday morning. We flowed 10 mws from Malin to FC345. This resulted in the 10 mw "variance" in the report. I have added deals to Enpower to flatten the report, these deals are only necessary for the sake of the report. The identical variance in the north and south indicates a wheel or load shift. I prefer to not enter these extra deals. Please see me with questions if you do not understand why the report variance exists. Thanks, Bill