Subject: Re: Fort James Canada
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 1979 16:00:00 -0800 (PST)

The litigation against Ft. James has been settled. Enron and Ft James  agreed 
to cancel the master commodity purchase agreement,but all then existing 
purchase-sale agreements were left in place. In other words, 

	Greg Johnston
	10/30/2000 10:22 AM
		 
		 To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Cyntia DiStefano/CAL/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Fort James Canada

Richard, as you may recall, about a year ago I talked to you about Enron 
Canada continuing to transact with Fort James' Canadian subsidiary, Fort 
James Canada Inc., relating to physical gas transactions under the gas master 
ECC has with Fort James Canada in light of the ongoing litigation ENA has 
with Fort James Corp.  At that time, you indicated that you were fine with us 
continuing to transact with Fort James Canada.  However, subsequent to our 
conversation, we did include in the confirms the following language:

Customer confirms that this Transaction is entered into for its own purposes 
and not for any purposes relating to the litigation between its parent 
company, Fort James Corporation, and Enron North America Corp., the parent 
company of Enron Canada Corp.

Recently, we received a notice from Fort James Corp. indicating that they 
were ceasing to transact with Enron, including ECC.  However, Cyntia 
DiStefano, the commercial person responsible for this counterparty received a 
call on Friday from one of their local plants indicating that they were in 
desperate need of gas and asked if we could supply them.  Apparently, Fort 
James Canada has agreed that ECC can supply this gas, which would be in the 
range of 400 GJs per day for one year.  I wanted to once again confirm that 
you were okay with us doing this deal.  I am happy to include the above 
wording in this confirm as well.

Can you get back to me on this ASAP?  The counterparty is anxious for an 
answer.

Thanks

Greg