Q: Guys, I am really glad that the report generations were working fine during the period when I was away, thanks to the efforts of Kim, Lindon and Angela. But I am so sad that you don't have to have me around anymore for your reports ... Hereby I'd like to give you an update on a few issues we fixed/fixing. a) Code has been added to show the Storage balance in the historical report instead of average b) Because OLAP cube interprets Null as 0 value, we saw monthly average to be 0 but actually should be Null, we've added code to detect Null value so that "NA" will be shown for monthly average rather than 0. c) Some pipeline (e.g. PGE) broadcast forward (future) flow, so in the end of the month, the latest month in Time dimension of the cube does not indicate the correct one. For instance, today is May. 31, the latest month in Time dimension is already June, which cause problems in historical report. It has been fixed. e) Central historical reports have been made fit to one page, and extra sheets on the interactive ones have been removed. Matt: In order for the above items to take effect please verify with the executable Kim give you and let us know so that we can use it to replace the one currently used for report generation. Another thing I talked with Matt was the Maximum Capacity column. I understand that you'd like to remove that column for reports which do not report this value, however it involves big structure change to take one column away. I am wondering if we can put "NA" or use some other wording such as "not reported" instead to save coding time and structure change. I need your feedback on this. One last item is that I checked the log for both daily and historical report and noticed that there are still quite some points their report setting are not quite right. Please take a look at the attached, if it is a report you are responsible, make sure the settings are right so we don't see error in the log. Thanks, I'll try to write short email next time.
Propose a subject line
A: Log and others

Q: John, I jjust reviewed the interconnection memo from Claudia. Once again it is weak on the situation and our remedies. Can you help Jose try to pull this together.
Propose a subject line
A: Interconnection

Q: Kim, John Cogan and I had called asking for copies of three transaction agreements. I had not seen those yet so I wanted to send an e-mail clarifying which dates we are looking for. Could you please fax copies of the transaction agreements dated: 3/11/99, 11/28/00 & 6/1/01 to me at fax number 520-779-5338. Thanks very much for your help with this. Eileen Hamlin Procurement Analyst
Propose a subject line
A: Transaction Agreements

Q: Fallon has requested a DPR be prepared 2X a week for positions that we are executing on (active/live positions only, no terminations or deals we are not executing on). We have put together the shell of how this DPR will look. To start this process we are planning to present to him positions (column E) and PRM value (column X) as of 1/23. To do this, we have laid out the following steps: - we need to get the PRM values directly from you (column X) - we will run the benchmarks and need to work with you to ensure you are happy with the benchmark numbers we have pulled from RMS (the exception is gas, we need the gas risk group to provide the gas bench to us) - we need all of then exceptions/qualifications to your numbers - we will need the other information in the schedule to be reported to us starting next week, but not for this exercise Please confirm to me/Shona that you can get us this info by 230 pm today. Lastly, I am attaching the unofficialized book list as these books will not make it into the benchmarks and need you to confirm that there are no 3rd party positions in these books. Thanks in advance
Propose a subject line
A:
DPR reporting for 22nd trading due today - request by Fallon