Subject: RE: FW: New lease option
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:07:00 -0700 (PDT)

One project co is good enough.

ckm

From: Greg Krause/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/23/2001 01:42 PM
To: Kathleen Carnahan/ENRON@enronXgate, Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: RE: FW: New lease option

Kay, 
One of the first things we do after we execute an option agreement is to get 
into the interconnect queue.  To do so, we must enter into an interconnect 
study agreement and in the past we have entered into these agreements using 
the same project agreement that has the option agreement.  Are you saying 
that we need two project companies for each project: one for the option 
agreement and one for the interconnect study agreement?  As you may know, it 
has taken 11 months to get to the point in the Midway project from the time 
we executed an interconnect study agreement with FPL to today when we are 
ready to begin negotiating a construction and connection agreement.  Would 
you please clarify the issue for me? 

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Carnahan, Kathleen  
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 1:03 PM
To: Mann, Kay
Cc: Krause, Greg
Subject: RE: FW: New lease option

Okay.  I will set up a new LLC (Homestead Development Company, LLC, if 
available).  Would it be preferable for its sole member to be Lauderdale Land 
Development Company, LLC or ENA?

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay  
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 12:46 PM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Subject: Re: FW: New lease option

I wouldn't use  an LLC with an prior history.  We might have to get the old 
stuff approved in order to put the equity into TurboPark.  If the LLC paid 
for an interconnect study, it could be a hard cost and we are dead.

I know this seems silly, but hey, it is!

ckm

From: Kathleen Carnahan/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/23/2001 11:31 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: FW: New lease option

We have decided to use:  Voyager Development Company, L.L.C. for the new 
Homestead land option.  We had initially planned to use it for an option that 
we let go (Option Agreement never got assigned to Voyager either).  According 
to Greg Krause, the only thing associated with Voyager was an old 
interconnect study request that was paid for and never used.  I feel 
confident that Voyager is "clean" to use.

Kathleen
 -----Original Message-----
From:  Ann Elizabeth White  
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 12:19 AM
To: Kathleen Carnahan
Subject: New lease option

I talked to Kay about the new land option Greg will be negotiating this 
weekend in Homestead.  She said to put the options in the terminal company, 
not Lauderdale Land, LLC as you had suggested.  Pick one of the other LLCs 
for me and let me know the name.

Thanks.