Message-ID: <19324255.1075858816719.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 11:33:27 -0700 (PDT) From: edward.sacks@enron.com To: douglasp@coned.com Subject: Consolidated Edison Company of New York / Enron North America Corp - Proposed Credit Terms Cc: rob.wheeler@enron.com, sara.shackleton@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: rob.wheeler@enron.com, sara.shackleton@enron.com X-From: Sacks, Edward X-To: 'douglasp@coned.com' X-cc: Wheeler, Rob , Shackleton, Sara X-bcc: X-Folder: \SSHACKL (Non-Privileged)\Shackleton, Sara\Inbox X-Origin: Shackleton-S X-FileName: SSHACKL (Non-Privileged).pst Please review the following proposed outline of the credit lines for the proposed ISDA. Collateral Threshold (tied to S&P and Moody ratings, lower of): ConEd Enron A+/A1 and above $75,000,000 $60,000,000 A, A-, A2, or A3 $60,000,000 $55,000,000 BBB+, BBB, Baa1 or Baa2 $25,000,000 $50,000,000 BBB- or Baa3 $5,000,000 $15,000,000 Below BBB- or Baa3 $0 $0 I am trying to set parameters which give ConEd the credit that it deserves as an A+ regulated utility and Enron the credit it warrants as a BBB+ energy marketer. Given the different business profiles of our companies, I don't believe that the application of parity should be practiced with regards to setting credit lines. I think you would agree to this approach when looking at other market players, such as banks, municipalities, etc. I hope we can come to agreement on the proposed credit lines, so that we can proceed with the negotiations of the ISDA. Please call or reply with any comments or questions. Regards, Ed Sacks Enron Corp. 1400 Smith Street Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 345-7712