|
|
Enron Mail |
Dave
Please see Harry's note below. I asked him to review the tariff for NIMO to validate their formula. It appears similar to the formula NIMO is using and discussed with us; however, could you please review. (especially the 75 heating degree days). Harry Dave and I have spoken with contacts at NIMO and have reduced the requirement to $3.6MM by removing a couple of counterparts which will come out of the pool Dec 1st. MDQ was validated by the desk. The real driver seems to be the requirement and the assumption of no gas delivery for 30 days by EES at the most extreme temperature. Thanks Molly -----Original Message----- From: Kingerski, Harry Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 9:16 AM To: Harris, Molly Cc: Steffes, James D. Subject: RE: NIMO Molly - here are the actual tariff conditions they can rely on - if a supplier does not meet the minimum requirements (and we don't), NIMO can call for security up to amount based on: (30 days x MDQ (Maximum Daily Quantity) x highest month's average daily NYMEX Henry Hub closing price) The MDQ is the maximum quantity that the marketer may deliver daily to the City Gate. It is based on historical usage patterns and expected weather conditions but must be less than the MPDQ. The MPDQ (Max Peak Day Quantity) is the max gas the customer can take on a winter day, based on a day with 75 heating degree days. Customers are assigned a MPDQ based on a "Base and Thermal Methodology", which calculates an expected peak day usage. SO the point here is that there is some latitude in how they define MDQ. Let's talk ASAP about how to get these details from them and perhaps negotiate the $4.3 million. -----Original Message----- From: Harris, Molly Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:00 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Leff, Dan Cc: Ogenyi, Gloria; Kingerski, Harry; Black, Don; Castano, Marianne; Keller, James Subject: NIMO And the winner is .............. "me" to coordinate. I have been leading with Legal and Trading. Legal confirmed their right under the gas tariff (due to our downgrade). Don's team, myself and the credit contact at NIMO reviewed the exposure calculation and believe it to be accurate at first review. I am inquiring to a lock box to reduce the requirement by 50%. Deadline to deliver is next Thursday, Nov 29th. Harry/Gloria - could you please review their requirement? NIMO is asking for collateral in effect to cover EES base load for the Supplier Select program, assuming EES does not deliver for 30 days and assuming the coldest day (in the past 30 years) which in effect mutiplies our load by a factor of 3. However, NIMO has agreed to use forward Jan price in lieu of the past 12 months as stipulated in their tariff. Regards Molly -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 1:43 PM To: Harris, Molly Cc: Leff, Dan; Ogenyi, Gloria; Kingerski, Harry Subject: FW: Performance / Surety Bonds Molly -- Please let either Gloria or Harry know if you need our assistance. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Leff, Dan Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 12:32 PM To: Harris, Molly; Mihalik, Teresa; Fite, Rebecca; Kingerski, Harry; Steffes, James D.; Hughes, Evan Cc: Ogenyi, Gloria; Sharp, Vicki; Herndon, Rogers; Black, Don; Richter, Jeff; Bradford, William S. Subject: RE: Performance / Surety Bonds When is this due? What is our gas exposure in NIMO's service territory? Who is on point? Thanks - Dan -----Original Message----- From: Harris, Molly Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:39 AM To: Mihalik, Teresa; Fite, Rebecca; Kingerski, Harry; Steffes, James D.; Leff, Dan; Hughes, Evan Cc: Ogenyi, Gloria; Sharp, Vicki; Herndon, Rogers; Black, Don; Richter, Jeff; Bradford, William S. Subject: RE: Performance / Surety Bonds EES received a margin call for $4.3MM on Nov 19th from Niagara Mohawk for EES gas business to cover settlement and imbalance risk for NIMO's "Supplier Select" Program. The Enron Corp. gaurantee is no longer acceptable at our current rating. Legal has confirmed NIMO's rights under its gas tariff. Regards Molly
|