|
|
Enron Mail |
On the first point the reference to a "municipal plant" did not disclose
whether it was a legal body corporate. That fine if the check has been made. As far as the US$6m min asset level is concerned it does not specifically relate to Australia counterparties (ie those incorporated in Australia). It relates to companies with whom we trade Australian power irrespective of place of incorporation. Under our power trading licence requirements we are required to take reasonable steps to satisfy ourselves that we are dealing with non-retail type investors. There is a check list in the licence of requirements , the most relevant for companies not trading in Australia is the AUD10m (US$6m) in "tangible assets". Tana thank you for your offer. You are really doing an excellent job pulling together a huge amount of information in such an effective. I am loath to do anything that would make your job any more difficult. I think we can assume that a party which has sufficient assets to trade US power can also trade Australian power. As far as Australian incorporated companies are concerned we will be checking their suitability Australian power hopefully at the time we receive the password application. If not I will pick it up when I check your list. From: Tana Jones@ECT on 17-08-2000 09:10 CDT To: David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 Each legal trading group here in Houston checks on a relevant counterparty's ability to trade its products. So far the only physical trading area where a governmental counterparty appears to have problems is the power trading group where there are licensing requirements that may or may not have been obtained to trade power. For financial trading we do have to inquire into the relevant governmental entities' authority to enter into derivative transactions. In order to do that we look at statutory authority, any relevant local regulations, investment policities, etc., in addition to obtaining legal opinions on the subject, and with some counterparties hiring outside counsel to advise us. For most governmental entities if we do not have an ISDA Master in place and have already done such due diligence, I will not be approving them to trade financial products. As far as the financial test, for the US based counterparty list, I check with Credit on every counterparty to determine whether they meet the US eligible swap participant standards. As I'm sure you know, for most plain vanilla corporates and partnerships this means having total assets of $10mm or a net worth of $1mm. Pretty much, if I am turning down a counterparty to trade financial it will be because they do not meet the ESP test or they are a governmental or quasi-governmental entity. If what you are telling me is that the Australian counterparties have to meet a $6mm asset test to trade any products, then I will add this to my daily inquiry to Credit and turn down Australian counterparties if they do not meet this test. At your direction I will handle this in this manner. How would you like me to proceed? David Minns@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/16/2000 07:58 PM To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 Is this an incorporated entity? I assume its authority to trade a range of products has been checked out? In Australia this assumption can not be made for government entities Under our licencing requirements we need to make reasonable enquiries that a counterparty has (or is guaranted by someone who has) atleast USD6 million in assets. Can this assumption be made? From: Tana Jones@ECT on 16-08-2000 08:39 CDT To: David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 Tauton is ok for all products, except for financial products (it can do power). David, when I talk about this I am never including credit derivatives unless Credit specifically tells us in their spreadsheet that this is a credit derivatives counterparty. David Minns@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/15/2000 05:32 PM To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 Tana what can the Taunton Municipal Light Plant trade? Is it the same as Huntsville? From: Tana Jones@ECT on 15-08-2000 01:35 CDT To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy E Dickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Marie Heard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Robbi Rossi/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 ----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 08/15/2000 01:35 PM ----- Bradley Diebner 08/14/2000 05:27 PM To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe Global Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00 The EOL approvals for 08/14/00 are attached below. Regards, bd
|