Message-ID: <11206198.1075858675204.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: d..steffes@enron.com
To: b..sanders@enron.com
Subject: FW: Status of Reconciliation of Receivables with PG&E
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-From: Steffes, James D. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JSTEFFE>
X-To: Sanders, Richard B. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rsander>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Sanders, Richard B (Non-Privileged)\Sanders, Richard B.\EES Neg CTC
X-Origin: Sanders-R
X-FileName: Sanders, Richard B (Non-Privileged).pst

FYI.

 -----Original Message-----
From: =09Curry, Wanda =20
Sent:=09Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:19 PM
To:=09Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet, Michael
Cc:=09Colwell, Wes; Steffes, James D.
Subject:=09Status of Reconciliation of Receivables with PG&E

Privileged and Confidential=20

Lisa and Michael,

I  talked with two representatives from PG&E today, Robert Orbeta and Fong =
Wan, regarding the reconciliation of amounts included in Enron's Proof Of C=
laim, which total almost $404 million dollars,  to the books and records of=
 PG&E.  Both Robert and Fong agree that 1) no significant differences have =
been found, 2) the total variance, including IBM,  is approximately $2 mill=
ion dollars, and 3) the reconciliation is substantially complete and theref=
ore, the results should not change materially.  Diann Huddleson will call h=
er counterpart, Mike Alexander,  this afternoon to request a schedule, by a=
ccount, of these variances.  As you know, Enron's Proof of Claim is a compi=
lation of charges/credits reflected on PG&E invoices, and therefore, the on=
ly differences should have been the result of omissions, duplications, or o=
ther query failures.  All things being equal, the reconciliation should hav=
e been a simple comparison, but at an account level.  The sheer number of a=
ccounts for several months of activity,  made this reconciliation a challen=
ge.=20

Both Robert and Fong made remarks regarding Enron's claim for the IBM dual =
bill accounts.  Mr.  Fong also commented that another outstanding item, in =
his opinion, was the "FERC refund case".   I suggested that these items be =
included on the agenda for the settlement discussions scheduled for next we=
ek.=20

Let me know if you need anything further.=20

Thanks,
Wanda