Subject: RE: POA/ Cargill line...
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 11:33:00 -0800 (PST)

Caroline:

Sorry I wasn't able to reach you today and I will be out of the office 
tomorrow.  If this can wait until Monday, please contact my assistant Kaye 
Ellis (X35968) and get on my calendar early Monday.  If this cannot wait, 
please contact Mark Taylor (X37459) and he may be able to find a lawyer to 
assist you.

In general, I thought that Wendi was waiting to hear back from Cargill 
Incorporated credit.  Once we understood what Cargill was looking for, I was 
hoping to speak with their lawyer and agree to eliminate all of the 
provisions appearing in the draft POA which did not really concern ENA.  
Recall that ENA does not want to monitor Cargill's agent:  that's an internal 
job for Cargill.

I hope that we can speak on Monday.  Maybe you can coordinate tomorrow with 
Wendi.  Thanks.

Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
[email-masked]

	Caroline Abramo@ENRON
	03/07/2001 06:09 PM
		 
		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: RE: POA/ Cargill line...

Sara- I am going to suggest to Cargill that we will call them before any deal 
with Global gets booked.. they will have to approve it.. and then I'll go 
ahead with the Global deal... they will have to strip out all the references 
to the line... need to ask you a few other things though....
---------------------- Forwarded by Caroline Abramo/Corp/Enron on 03/07/2001 
07:07 PM ---------------------------

[email-masked] on 03/02/2001 10:39:03 AM
To: [email-masked]
cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], 
[email-masked] 

Subject: RE: POA/ Cargill line...

Currently Cargill and Enron have a 15MM collateral threshold.  If
possible, I think the cleanest way to run this biz would be to put a
box around the prime broker biz.  We would still operate under the
master isda but could set up a mutually agreeable credit support annex
for this biz.  We would still keep the 20,000,000 line referenced in
Schedule B of the POA agreement.  The line in the POA is a seperate and
distinct measure from the daily collateral.  The 20 mill reflects gross
exposure.  Let me know if you think this is reasonable and workable.
We too, are open to suggestion as the Global and Enron relationships
are very important and a high priority to us.

Thanks
Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 7:26 AM
To: lardy, joe /xtwn
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: POA/ Cargill line...

Joe-  a few things regading the POA/ Cargill line..

I am going to find out how much line we currently have available... you
probably already have this.  We should allocate a piece to Global which
would solve the problem of other Cargill people using the line, putting
us
over the limit, without me knowing...

We could change the language of the POA to this... we will not go over
Global's piece of the Cargill line...I think this would solve our main
concern...

Please let me know... we are eager to keep trading with Global and
yourselves...

Regards,
Caroline