IN: This is an email
Mark, Tom, and Holden, In reference to the DPR impacts of $ 132,000 (WAPA) and $133,000 (SRP) that you were expecting, here is an explanation of why you will not be seeing that in your PMA's: The 2 deals listed below were put in as a MW month, each with 3 strips in the deal separating out April 1, April 2, and the rest of the month. The reason for the 3 strips was to catch the April 1 time change from PST to PDT. deal # 539126: 3 strips @ 2216 = 199,500 charge for the month in CARP (true value is - $66,500). deal # 538832: 3 strips @ 2180 = 196,200 charge for the month in CARP (true value is - $65,400) . Typically, I provide you with a report that tells you what $ amount to look for coming thru in your PMA's, according to the changes that I am making on the back end. You then see the change in DPR come thru on a PMA report that Risk provides for you. When these deals hit Settlements, we recognized that the CARP was calculating both deals at 3 times their monthly value (and since we are purchasing, that is a negative three times against your books). When the above + DPR impacts didn't come thru in your PMA's, we started looking at the deals to figure out why they didn't. Here is a discription of the Risk - Settlements process: Risk values a deal on the day of liquidation. Any intra-month changes, even if they happen after the day of flow, get trued up by Risk and changed in the DPR. Anything that gets changed after the end of the month, Settlements recognizes as a DPR variance and reports this to Risk and you see it affect your DPR as reported in the PMA report. So the question was: When it came to recognizing a variance in Settlements, why weren't we seeing a + amount back to your books for 2 of the strips that I zero'd out? Houston Settlements looked into it and were seeing that these deals were originally valued at ($66,500) and ($65,400), even though CARP was showing that they were calculating at ($199,500) and ($196,200) .... Heather Dunton and I did alot of searching for the answer and we found that: When Risk flashed these deals in April, they flashed them according to a single MW month charge. Regardless of how many strips there are, the deal is set up as a MW month and should, therefore, calculate as one single charge for the month. We found that CARP is reading these incorrectly and causing the confusion, (as I was seeing that the deals were calculating 3 times because that is how CARP and UNIFY were reading the deal). The IT people in Houston are now working on fixing that glitch. When it comes to DPR, your book originally recognized an impact of (66,500) and (65,400), which is correct. Since your April DPR was correct, you will not see an adjustment in your PMA's. I recognize that this is not gratification for the + DPR impact that you were expecting and I apologize for the confusion and mis-information that I gave you in my report. This has, however, helped us to hi-light a technical error that will save us alot of work in the future. Thanks for your patience while we figured this out. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks,

What is the subject?

OUT: DPR on your PMA's

IN: This is an email
Dear Mr. Kvetinskas, Per the instructions of Julie Gomez, I am forwarding you a marked version of the above referenced LOI containing the changes that Ms. Gomez discussed with you this afternoon. Please feel free to call me at 713-853-7238 with any questions regarding the attached. Steve Van Hooser

What is the subject?

OUT: ENA's suggested revisions to SSI's Draft of 11:54 today.

IN: This is an email
I'm waitlisted on the Continental flight so we may be traveling separately. I do, however, have a room reservation at the Sheraton Towers. Kaye can help you. I'm out of town tomorrow so let's regoup on Tuesday. SS

What is the subject?

OUT:
FYI