Subject: Canadian Power Confirms
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:46:00 -0800 (PST)

Attached is a redraft of the three proposed points for inclusion in each of 
financial and physical power confirms.  Please review and advise of any 
further comments or thoughts.  

It is my understanding that it has been decided that Canada wants to negate 
Market Disruption concepts on the basis of changes to EUA or Pool rules.  I 
have also negated force majeure claims on the same basis (typically not apt 
in financial--however, since it could be argued I added it in the financial 
confirm language as well).  Question:  Would we also want to add "any other 
excuse of performance" to this concept?  Such language would afford a broader 
sweep in respect of various claims, however, (i) the sweep may be too broad 
in light of it covering any change in the EUA or Pool rules and (ii) 
ultimately, we may want some flexibility to argue other points.   Advise.

Under Performance Suspension the intent is to carve out the "trade" for 
suspension, while leaving the other aspects of the masters/gtcs in place, 
such as bankruptcy and other termination events.

Mary

Cordially,
Mary Cook
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith, 38th Floor, Legal
Houston, Texas   77002-7361
(713) 345-7732 (phone)
(713) 646-3490 (fax)
[email-masked]