Message-ID: <20408824.1075858583405.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:10:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: stacey.richardson@enron.com
To: gerald.nemec@enron.com
Subject: RE: Revised Pooling Point GTC
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Richardson, Stacey </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=SRICHAR2>
X-To: Nemec, Gerald </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Gnemec>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Nemec, Gerald (Non-Privileged)\Nemec, Gerald\Inbox
X-Origin: Nemec-G
X-FileName: Nemec, Gerald (Non-Privileged).pst

Thanks.  I'm sure it would've taken me a while to figure out what the difference was.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald  
Sent:	Monday, August 13, 2001 1:08 PM
To:	Richardson, Stacey
Subject:	RE: Revised Pooling Point GTC

The only change is in Section 2.  I refer to the requirement to schedule the Daily Contract Quantity instead the Nomination.


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Richardson, Stacey  
Sent:	Monday, August 13, 2001 1:04 PM
To:	Nemec, Gerald
Subject:	RE: Revised Pooling Point GTC

In a nutshell, what changed on this version?  I haven't compared it against the old one yet.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald  
Sent:	Monday, August 13, 2001 1:03 PM
To:	Richardson, Stacey
Subject:	RE: Revised Pooling Point GTC

Not anytime soon, but within the next couple of weeks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Richardson, Stacey  
Sent:	Monday, August 13, 2001 12:57 PM
To:	Nemec, Gerald
Subject:	RE: Revised Pooling Point GTC

Thanks.  Do you anticipate any more changes to this version?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald  
Sent:	Monday, August 13, 2001 11:51 AM
To:	Wallumrod, Ellen; Richardson, Stacey
Cc:	Thorne, Judy
Subject:	Revised Pooling Point GTC

Please use the attached GTC is place of the previously forwarded for all deals going forward.

 << File: PoolGTC1.DOC >>