Message-ID: <4631270.1075845877860.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 03:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: gregg.penman@enron.com
To: kay.mann@enron.com, dtucker@bracepatt.com
Subject: Schedules A & B
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Gregg Penman
X-To: Kay Mann, dtucker@bracepatt.com
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Kay_Mann_June2001_2\Notes Folders\Enovate
X-Origin: MANN-K
X-FileName: kmann.nsf

Hello - attached are copies of Schedule A (Enron MW) and Schedule B (Peoples 
MW) to the MEH LLC Agreement.  Peoples has included a few projects they are 
working on that don't have existing agreements.  Enron's list is much 
shorter, 3 agreements to be exact.  The third agreement is a storage deal 
with Nicor that would technically be a permitted activity under the trading 
exclusion.  However, I believe we decided to include it, but we need to also 
include the disclaimer language that inclusion on the Schedule does not imply 
a restricted activity.  I have asked Hunter Shively, Central Desk Director, 
if he knows of any other "middle-market" deals that we should include and he 
said no.  I have also had our back office run the counterparties through our 
trading systems to identify any term transactions that may currently be in 
place.  Other than the Nicor deal listed, there were only standard trading 
buy/sells with Nicor in the system.  Which brings up my last point, do we 
need to disclose the existence of Master Purchase Agreements with a Covered 
Gas Utility?  Trading uses these Agreements for standard physical buy/sells.  
Anything more complicated would be done under a separate agreement.  The 
Nicor deal was done under a separate agreement, not the existing Master.  If 
my vote counts, I say let's not include them.  But, I defer to the experts.  

Let me know your thoughts on the attached,

Thanks,

Gregg