Message-ID: <29850915.1075852502289.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 10:19:40 -0700 (PDT) From: d..steffes@enron.com To: diann.huddleson@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com Subject: RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-From: Steffes, James D. X-To: Huddleson, Diann , Mara, Susan X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \JSTEFFE (Non-Privileged)\Steffes, James D.\Sent Items X-Origin: Steffes-J X-FileName: JSTEFFE (Non-Privileged).pst Sue -- Please work with Diann to determine if their calculations are tariff driven= or simply an internal process of SCE. Thanks, Jim -----Original Message----- From: =09Huddleson, Diann =20 Sent:=09Friday, September 14, 2001 9:40 AM To:=09Bradford, William S. Cc:=09Curry, Wanda; Steffes, James D.; Hughes, Evan Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC As a matter of fact, I disputed their calculations when I was there. They = are basing our deposits on the total charges rather than just the transmiss= ion and distribution charges, which is all we are responsible for. Accordi= ng to them, they do not distinguish between DA and bundled charges. Jim, do you feel we have any recourse in challenging SCE's methodology for = calculating these requirements? From:=09William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/14/2001 07:51 AM To:=09Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES cc:=09Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate=20 Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Do we have no way to confirm the validiity of the amount required? There h= as to be some tariff driven requirement or I am just dreaming? Bill -----Original Message----- From: =09Huddleson, Diann =20 Sent:=09Friday, September 14, 2001 7:48 AM To:=09Bradford, William S. Cc:=09Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, = Tracy; Curry, Wanda Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Bill, SCE's security requirements are based on their projected bill amounts= for each account that will switch. They are the ones to calculate this. = I will contact Kim Santa Cruz today and see if they have increased their re= quirements since August 9. From:=09William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/13/2001 07:15 PM To:=09Clement Abrams/ENRON@enronXgate, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES cc:=09Teresa Seibel/ENRON@enronXgate, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Maurice Wint= er/HOU/EES@EES, Tracy Ngo/ENRON@enronXgate, Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate=20 Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Diann, We need to read the tariff and understand SCE's security requirement and th= en extrapolate potential requirements based on our expected load. Wanda - do you have time to help with this analysis? Does it make sense to offer the guaranty for $50mm and move on? Let's discuss, Bill -----Original Message----- From: =09Abrams, Clement =20 Sent:=09Thursday, September 13, 2001 9:02 AM To:=09Huddleson, Diann; Bradford, William S. Cc:=09Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, Tracy; Curry, Wan= da Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Diann, When I spoke with Kim, she suggested that I direct the question to credit, = hence the inquiry. Clement -----Original Message----- From: =09Huddleson, Diann =20 Sent:=09Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:35 AM To:=09Bradford, William S. Cc:=09Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, = Tracy; Curry, Wanda Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Bill, not sure what "effective" date is needed. Our customer accounts be= gan switching to direct access in late June. As for the maximum requiremen= t, the amount is dictated by SCE. When I met with Kim Santa Cruz, et al, o= n August 9, the amount they calculated for EESO was at $37,111,872. It is = likely that amount has gone up, but I have received no official request sin= ce then. Clement, do you know what the latest security requirement is? From:=09William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/12/2001 12:57 PM To:=09Clement Abrams/ENRON@enronXgate, Teresa Seibel/ENRON@enronXgate cc:=09Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Maurice Winter/= HOU/EES@EES, Tracy Ngo/ENRON@enronXgate, Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate=20 Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Diann, Do you have a view on the effective date? What is the maximum guaranty req= uirement under the direct access? We should probably put the cap north of = that level. Please advise, Bill -----Original Message----- From: =09Abrams, Clement =20 Sent:=09Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:49 PM To:=09Seibel, Teresa Cc:=09Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Bradford, William S.= ; Ngo, Tracy Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Teresa, Myself and Kim Santa Cruz of SCE have agreed in principal to the format of = the guarantee to be provided by Enron Corp. The only matters to be finaliz= ed with respect to the guarantee is the effective date and aggregate cap am= ount of the guaranty. Could you supply this remaining information?=20 Thanks,=20 Clem -----Original Message----- From: =09Bradford, William S. =20 Sent:=09Friday, August 03, 2001 6:35 AM To:=09Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa Cc:=09Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Teresa, Please work with Diann's team and Treasury to see if we can issue a 2 month= surety while Clem works out the details on the guaranty format. Work with= Diann's team and SCE to validate the $ amount. Use Veronica Gonzalez to h= elp if necessary. Make sure formats on surety are approved by EES legal. = Hopefully we will be able to replace with a guaranty in a couple of months. Thanks, Bill -----Original Message----- From: =09Abrams, Clement =20 Sent:=09Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:46 PM To:=09Bradford, William S.; Seibel, Teresa Cc:=09Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Bill, Given the nature of progress in the past, I wouldn't want to hang my hat on= saying that the guaranty can be completed within a day or two. What I can= do to push the process ahead quicker is to provide comments to the extent = that they are absolute and necessary and then leave it with Southern to say= that they can or cannot accommodate us. Is there any possibility of uppin= g the surety bond support for a short period until this can be handled? Clem -----Original Message----- From: =09Bradford, William S. =20 Sent:=09Thursday, August 02, 2001 4:16 PM To:=09Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa Cc:=09Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Clem, This process has been ongoing and we should have been continuing to pursue = this guaranty. Sorry for any confusion if you feel this has been late noti= ce. We need to resolve this issue ASAP. If you are unavailable, we have t= he option to issue a surety bond at some cost. Please advise if you feel w= e should pursue this option given the short time frame. Bill -----Original Message----- From: =09Abrams, Clement =20 Sent:=09Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:27 PM To:=09Seibel, Teresa Cc:=09Richardson, Cindy; Bradford, William S.; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Ev= an; Winter, Maurice Subject:=09RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Teresa, Teresa, I believe you understand what the negotiation pattern has been betw= een Enron Corp. and Southern California Edison. It has not changed, especi= ally given the fact that once again I have received a form of guaranty that= is different than before and would need to be modified in order to be acce= ptable to Enron Corp. I received the guaranty and have not been able to ad= dress it because I have been busy preparing items for the upcoming Enron Co= rp. board meeting. And, just as in the past, Enron Corp. and Southern Cali= fornia Edison has not been able to come to any agreement as to what the for= m will look like. My question is, why is it the case that it is the ninth = hour when it is determined that Enron Corp. has to deliver a guaranty, espe= cially to Southern California Edison (a Counterparty where it is well known= that there will be problems with the format)? Surely, we are keeping trac= k of our credit limits and the time frames in which they can to be exceeded= . There will be a negotiation process and it may not necessarily meet the = time frame that you have mentioned below. Clement =20 -----Original Message----- From: =09Seibel, Teresa =20 Sent:=09Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:07 PM To:=09Abrams, Clement Cc:=09Richardson, Cindy; Bradford, William S.; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Ev= an; Winter, Maurice Subject:=09SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC Importance:=09High Clement - On Monday I sent you a request via email and fax regarding the ne= ed to put in place a Enron Corp Guaranty for Enron Energy Marketing Corp.(E= EMC) to Southern California Edison. This has now become very urgent, since= EEMC is now close to going over their current credit limit. Please let me= know as soon as possible what the status is. Thanks, Teresa