|
|
Enron Mail |
Attached below is my approval of a bunch of capacity packages for sale on
EOL. As you can see, I think there is an important issue of contract language that we need to resolve at some point if we are going to get maximum mileage out of EOL. Please let me know what you think we ought to do about this--in my view, if we are going to sell long term capacity on a discounted basis, we ought to keep using the language we have historically used on what happens if our max rates are reduced and what happens if our rate design is modified. As to the old confidentiality paragraph and some of the other stuff, I'm not sure it is worth keeping and running the risk of FERC finding that we have overreached (i.e., the paragraph saying a customer can't ever challenge our discount adjustment). Lets talk. df ---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 02/13/2001 10:39 AM --------------------------- Drew Fossum 02/13/2001 10:38 AM To: Craig Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Craig Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jo Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/Enron@EnronXGate, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: EOL Routing/Approval - Urgent I am OK on selling these packages on EOL. This approval is based on my understanding that all of this capacity is currently posted, or, if not currently posted, will be posted for the appropriate amount of time prior to sale. Additionally, this approval is contingent on use of the webtext we have been using for other EOL deals (I feel the need to say the obvious because I don't believe Law will see anything on these packages again). I also assume that these will be short term deals--i.e., less than one year. Any long term discounted deals raise concerns that our "standard discount language" is designed to address, such as what is the effect of a new rate design or reduction in the max rate on the discounted deal. I think we can live without that language in short term deals for now, but we need to revisit this issue and come up with a solution before we sell any long term deals on EOL. ONe last thing, it is marketing's decision whether to include in the webtext the provision that says Northern gets the $$ if the shipper releases the capacity at a rate higher than the discounted rate. I think our approach in negotiated deals has been to get that agreement if we could (a basis run up could make it a very valuable right). If you have any questions, call me. DF From: Craig Buehler 02/12/2001 02:50 PM To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Craig Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jo Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: EOL Routing/Approval - Urgent *** EOL ROUTING *** Please send your approval by return email, to Craig Buehler, for the EOL packages listed on the attached spreadsheet. Each of the packages (22 in total) shows the path, sustainable capacity and proposed rate for each product. The rates are estimated to provide a measure for the dollar amount of the discount (per our current discount policy). These 22 products are the initial deals being offered; subsequent packages will be routed as they are developed. Please call Craig, at 713-853-6964, if you have questions. After approval by Legal, Reg Affairs and Marketing, the approvals and/or comments will be forwarded to Danny McCarty for review. Thanks, Craig
|