From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 07:29:00 -0700 (PDT)

I just came across this morning to some additional information from the 
regulator (CNE) regarding their motivations on its Arcos TPA ruling: 

1) Despite the current regulatory gaps, Enron's allegations were properly 
crafted, and made possible a way forward within the existing legal framework. 
The "two-sides commitment" idea suggested by Enron has been quite determinant 
because...

2) ... the resolution fundamentally aims at making sure that the power plant 
is actually built (Enron finally commits), but also that new gas 
infrastructures start being developed asap!! There is clearly an underlying 
energy policy issue here, and this reasoning fits with the tight timescales 
imposed by the CNE to ratify our interest and signing the TPA contract. The 
resolution is seen by the CNE as a catalyser to put in track gas expansions 
and power plant investments.

Note that the CNE (and the Ministry) are testing if Enron is "truly" 
committed to put the money and invest by placing us in a no-return point 
(mine).

Please, find below a full English translation of the CNE's ruling.

Of special interest, see sections III, VI, VII and IX of the GROUNDS FOR THE 
DECISION ADOPTED Chapter.

a.