Message-ID: <32720656.1075842088663.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 07:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: carol.clair@enron.com
To: rod.nelson@enron.com
Subject: Dresdner Bank Credit Issues
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Carol St Clair
X-To: Rod Nelson
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Carol_StClair_Dec2000_1\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: STCLAIR-C
X-FileName: cstclai.nsf

Rod:
These are the issues  taht we need to talk about before our call on Wednesday 
afternoon.
Carol
---------------------- Forwarded by Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT on 05/08/2000 
02:36 PM ---------------------------


Carol St Clair
05/05/2000 10:36 AM
To: Rod Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jason Peters/Corp/Enron@Enron 
Subject: Dresdner Bank Credit Issues

Rod:
The following are the credit issues that they raised in their comments:

1. Cross default threshold - instead of $100,000,000 they want a 3% of equity 
test.

2. Credit Event Upon Merger - they want to delete the amendment language in 
our Schedule

3. MAC Trigger - this currently is an Event of Default.  They want to make it 
a Termination Event.  Also, they want to add to the trigger going below a 
Baa3 rating by Moody's.

4.  In the financial reporting section, they want to add on our side a 
requirement that we deliver to them any financial or business report that we 
make available to our shareholders or that we file with the SEC or bank 
regulatory authorities

5. In the Netting language, they have excluded FX and Currency Option 
transactions.

6. In the setoff language, they have limited the trigger to the designation 
of an Early Termination date because of the Termination Event Credit Event 
Upon Merger.  Alos, they want setoff to apply to "matured and unmatured" 
obligations.

7. They don't want a cap on the Enron Guaranty

8. In the Termination section where we specify Loss and Second method that 
have an interesting rider (insert 2) that modifies how the Second Method 
works.  I'm still trying to understand what this language does but it appears 
to qualify any payments on termination that the Non-Defaulting Party would 
have to make to the Defaulting Party.

I will send you a copy of their comments and hopefully we will talk to them 
about this next week.

carol