Message-ID: <14932276.1075845747502.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:06:00 -0700 (PDT) From: dtucker@bracepatt.com To: kay.mann@enron.com, bjspringer@jonesday.com Subject: Agency Agreement Cc: cdade@bracepatt.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: cdade@bracepatt.com X-From: "David Tucker" X-To: , X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Kay_Mann_June2001_1\Notes Folders\Chicago X-Origin: MANN-K X-FileName: kmann.nsf As we discussed, in an effort to forward our internal discussions and memorialize the results of our discussions in Chicago last week, Boyd and I have produced a new draft of the Agency Agreement. The changes can be inspected by launching the attachment in Word and then going to Tools --- Track Changes --- Highlight Changes to display and print the changes in the document. A number of questions must be addressed. They include, in no particular order: Can we delete the confidentiality article? Is it commercially important to restore the langauge on displacement deliveries? What will the compensation arrangements be? Are we willing to deduct the administrative fee from the net cumulative revenues? [Doing so "loses" us $10,000 a month.] Will we collect accounts receivable directly or have payments made to a deposit account in which we will retain a security interest? How should Section 2.9(ii) be recast to allay Boyd's regulatory approval concern? Is the new Section 2.10 acceptable? How must the agreement change to reflect the "two county" concern? I look forward to discussing this with you at your convenience. DT - #1127382 v9 - NEW AGENCY AGREEMENT.doc