|
|
Enron Mail |
No I was not. It was my understanding that Carol wanted to talk to me about
the contract to verify that she had addressed all of the issues which needed to be changed before the Master Physical Gas Contract would be used for on line transactions. Those issues revolved around PG&E being the sole confirming party, and default language being tied to specific Canadian driven pricing points. Carol indicated that she wanted to talk to me but other events took priority. Stacy E Dickson 07/31/2000 03:32 PM To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Pacific Gas & Electric Company Weren't you working on this issue with Carol before she went on maternity leave? ----- Forwarded by Stacy E Dickson/HOU/ECT on 07/31/2000 03:32 PM ----- Tana Jones 07/31/2000 02:48 PM 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: Pacific Gas & Electric Company I need to hear back from anyone whose group may be trading with this counterparty. Here's my issue. We have been negotiating an amendment to the Password Application with this counterparty. The absolutely refuse to see a GTC. I don't know if any of you are trading gas, crude or power with them, but if you are, do you have a master, or would the counterparty see a GTC. I'm trying to figure out what we have before we talk to them. Thanks!
|