I will check on this - also, keep me posted on Conexant and let me know how you want to set it up.  We are busy getting moved onto the new floor.  

Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Foster, Chris H. 
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 8:12 AM
To: Ward, Kim S (Houston)
Cc: 'Ewing, John'
Subject: RE: Enron Billing


Kim:

It sounds like there have been some changes in the settlements group that have resulted in a billing error for Smurfit.  My guess is they are using the spreadsheet rather than the SoCal Gas imbalance statement to set the volume.

Can you please check and get back to John?

C

Kim 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ewing, John [mailto:JEWING@SMURFIT.COM]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 5:17 PM
To: cfoster@ect.enron.com
Subject: Enron Billing



Chris,

Enron may have a new person in charge of SSCC Vernon's account now as there
are billing differences once again. Hannah Nguyen was kind enough to send
SSCC a bill for October 2001 for 68,243 mmbtu's of gas. The sum of the
delivered volumes from Southern California Gas for the accounts SSCC Vernon
is paying for seems to be closer to 108,975. Upon advising Houston of the
additional payment that would be received for the underbilling, SSCC Vernon
received a fax to the effect that actually 109,130 mmbtu's were due.

It may be unclear that SSCC Vernon pays for delivered gas volumes, or the
volumetric information SSCC faxed to Houston may not have been legible. In
any event, attached is the e-file used for the calculation for Enron's
review.

Best regards,
John Ewing

 <<ENRON BILLING 2001.xls>>