Subject: Re: Huber WIC capacity assignment
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 23:24:00 -0800 (PST)

A possible scenario may be to release to Huber (with ENA still on the hook if 
Huber defaults) and once credit is approved by the banks, ENA would be 
released from any financial obligation.  CIG would have to agree to do this.  
Further, we presumably would have a credit reserve until ENA is removed (we 
should check with the other Chris to run the credit trap).  

Mark - I don't quit understand Steve's comments regarding the release.  This 
is a long-term release at what CIG considers the same a s maximum rate.  
Huber will be the pre-arranged bidder.  No one else has a right to trump.  ???

Do you want me to talk to Steve?

chris
x31666

From: Mark Whitt@ENRON on 11/02/2000 04:42 PM MST
Sent by: Mark Whitt@ENRON
To: Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Meyer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul T 
Lucci/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:  
Subject: Huber WIC capacity assignment

I spoke with Steve Saye at WIC today and he said that they interpret the 
tarrif to read that a release done at the full negotiated contract rate is 
the same as the maximum rate. Therefore we can release at the $.12 rate.  He 
also stated that he would begin the approval process with the banks for the 
release but thought that there would be no problem with Huber's credit.  He 
did state that the bank approval timing was out of his control but he would 
try to expedite it. In addition, he felt that the best way to do the release 
was to do it  with the first bidder meeting minimum terms and have Huber 
ready to take it.  He said that it would not have to be noticed ahead of time 
so noone would know that it was going  to hit the board.

My question is, can we get the contract with Huber signed prior to receiving 
the bank approval for the WIC peice?

Mark