Tery, what did we do on this?  Thanks. Lynn
---------------------- Forwarded by Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron on 05/31/2001 07:39 PM ---------------------------
From:	Tammy Jaquet/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/17/2001 02:08 PM
To:	Terry Kowalke/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:	Randy Bryan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Callans/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, DL-ETS TMS Modification Group@/O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DL-ETSTMSMODIFICATIONGROUP@EX@enronXgate, Ramona Betancourt/ENRON@enronXgate, Legale Black/ENRON@enronXgate, Alma Carrillo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Draemer/ENRON@enronXgate, Toby Kuehl/ENRON@enronXgate, Maggie Matheson/ENRON@enronXgate, Gerry Medeles/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James Studebaker/ENRON@enronXgate, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Buchanan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Raetta Zadow/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject:	FW: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

Fyi - I received a follow up memo from Linda on the above subject.  Should we investigate adding validation to CMS?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Trevino, Linda  
Sent:	Thursday, May 17, 2001 8:03 AM
To:	Jaquet, Tammy
Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

Tammy - after further investigation I found that someone did activate a request on 4/25/01 that was effective for 4/1/01. There were two requests going on at the same time.  I don't know why it was activated on the 25th for the 1st - we normally do not do that - I will check into it.

Linda
---------------------- Forwarded by Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron on 05/17/2001 07:59 AM ---------------------------

 
Linda Trevino
05/17/2001 07:35 AM
To:	Tammy Jaquet/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:	Terry Kowalke/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Callans/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, DL-ETS TMS Modification Group@/O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DL-ETSTMSMODIFICATIONGROUP@EX@enronXgate, Ramona Betancourt/ENRON@enronXgate, Legale Black/ENRON@enronXgate, Alma Carrillo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Draemer/ENRON@enronXgate, Toby Kuehl/ENRON@enronXgate, Randy Bryan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maggie Matheson/ENRON@enronXgate, Gerry Medeles/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Raetta Zadow/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Buchanan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001   

The MDQ on this contract did not change on 4/25/01.  A change was made in the CMS system on 4/25/01 to change the MDQ EFFECTIVE 5/1/01to 53,000.  The MDQ for the entire month of April was 30,000.  
There were no retroactive changes made on this contract.

Linda


From:	Tammy Jaquet/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/16/2001 04:41 PM
To:	Terry Kowalke/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:	Nancy Callans/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, DL-ETS TMS Modification Group@/O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DL-ETSTMSMODIFICATIONGROUP@EX@enronXgate, Ramona Betancourt/ENRON@enronXgate, Legale Black/ENRON@enronXgate, Alma Carrillo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Draemer/ENRON@enronXgate, Toby Kuehl/ENRON@enronXgate, Randy Bryan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maggie Matheson/ENRON@enronXgate, Gerry Medeles/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Raetta Zadow/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Buchanan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

 Terry,

You raise an excellent point.  First, let me clarify that when the change to the point mdq was input on 4/25, it was made retroactive to 4/1.  The TMS revalidation caught the change and made the adjust on 4/25/01 because this is the day the change was made in CMS.   TMS doesn't currently have the functionally in place to retroactively change scheduled quantities because of a retro change made by the upstream system.  The question is why was this change allowed by the upstream system?  Is there any business reason why we are changing contract data retroactively?  Is the current policy working?    We should probably get Rick involved get some of these questions addressed.

Regards,

Tammy




 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kowalke, Terry  
Sent:	Wednesday, May 16, 2001 1:14 PM
To:	Jaquet, Tammy; Zadow, Raetta; Blair, Lynn; Buchanan, John
Cc:	Bryan, Randy; Callans, Nancy; DL-ETS TMS Modification Group; Betancourt, Ramona ; Black, Legale ; Carrillo, Alma; Draemer, Mary ; Kuehl, Toby; Matheson, Maggie; Medeles, Gerry; Nacey, Sheila; Studebaker, James 
Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

The revaildation worked for 4/25, but does not do anything to the prior days in the scheduling system,  unless we manual schedule it accordingly. Do we have any flags in the contract or scheduling system to keep us from back dating a contract to the first of the month, if prior days have scheduled volumes greater than the change made to that contract? In this case their were 13 days of 5,000 scheduled above the contract MDQ, which should be scheduled as overrun and billed at that rate.


From:	Tammy Jaquet/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/16/2001 10:54 AM
To:	Jill Setera/ENRON@enronXgate, Raetta Zadow/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TMS Production Support@ENRON, John Buchanan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Terry Kowalke/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:	Randy Bryan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Callans/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, DL-ETS TMS Modification Group@/O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DL-ETSTMSMODIFICATIONGROUP@EX@enronXgate, Ramona Betancourt/ENRON@enronXgate, Legale Black/ENRON@enronXgate, Alma Carrillo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Draemer/ENRON@enronXgate, Toby Kuehl/ENRON@enronXgate, Maggie Matheson/ENRON@enronXgate, Gerry Medeles/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James Studebaker/ENRON@enronXgate 

Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

  It looks like the revalidation process in TMS is paying off.  Thanks Jill.  

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Setera, Jill  
Sent:	Wednesday, May 16, 2001 9:23 AM
To:	Zadow, Raetta; TMS Production Support@ENRON; Buchanan, John; Kowalke, Terry; Blair, Lynn
Cc:	Bryan, Randy; Callans, Nancy; DL-ETS TMS Modification Group
Subject:	RE: K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

Raetta,

The pointMDQ was lowered on this contract on 4/25 at 10:07AM.  If you look at the Scheduled Quantity by Cycle Screen you can tell that the volume was lowered on the ID1 volume for 4/25 with a CQC reduction reason code (revalidation code).  They then changed their nom volume for the rest of the cycles.

If you have any questions, feel free to call me.

Jill
3-0664

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Zadow, Raetta  
Sent:	Wednesday, May 16, 2001 8:12 AM
To:	TMS Production Support@ENRON; Buchanan, John; Kowalke, Terry; Blair, Lynn
Cc:	Bryan, Randy; Callans, Nancy; Zadow, Raetta
Subject:	K#22585 (UTILICORP) APRIL, 2001

FYI, Could you let me know why Utilicorp could schedule 35,000 at POI 3054 from 4/12 thru 4/24 when their MDQ was only 30,000.


Thanks,

Raetta

 << OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) >> 











<Embedded StdOleLink>
<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>