Message-ID: <1283333.1075845907160.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 07:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: kathleen.carnahan@enron.com
To: kay.mann@enron.com
Subject: Re: Fort Pierce
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Kathleen Carnahan
X-To: Kay Mann
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Kay_Mann_June2001_3\Notes Folders\Notes inbox
X-Origin: MANN-K
X-FileName: kmann.nsf

Yes, we have a TECO CA.

The counterparty to the Participation Agreement is with Fort Pierce Utilities 
Authority.  The reason you thought we were just sending out the public 
documents is because that is want Ben wants you to think.  He had Fred Mitro 
send out alot of the "unexecuted proposed agreements" to TECO prior to our 
meeting the other day (which is why Bart and I have been concerned).

K-




Kay Mann
05/22/2001 01:44 PM
To: Kathleen Carnahan/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Re: Fort Pierce  

Do you know if we had TECO sign a confidentiality agreement?

Who is the counterparty to the participation agreement?  I thought we were 
just sending out  the public documents.

Thanks,

Kay


   
	
	
	From:  Kathleen Carnahan                           05/21/2001 03:14 PM
	

To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: Fort Pierce

Just so you know, Ben and Fred have provided copies of the Participation 
Agreement and Option to Lease between us and Fort Pierce Utilities Authority 
to TECO.  Both documents contain "Confidentiality Clauses".

K-