Message-ID: <5748003.1075860083100.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 06:00:00 -0800 (PST)
From: mark.taylor@enron.com
To: samantha.boyd@enron.com
Subject: Appointments of Agents and Attorneys in Fact
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Mark Taylor
X-To: Samantha Boyd
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Mark_Taylor _Dec_2000\Notes Folders\Sent
X-Origin: Taylor-M
X-FileName: mtaylor.nsf

Here is the MEH e-mail I mentioned
----- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 11/07/2000 01:59 PM -----

	Mark E Haedicke
	10/20/2000 10:56 AM
		 
		 To: Julia Murray/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Deb 
Korkmas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Appointments of Agents and Attorneys in Fact

I would like to do fewer resolutions authorizing non-vps to sign contracts, 
and when we need such authorizations, let's make sure the resolutions are 
appropriately limited.  My thoughts are as follows:

1.   We have a lot of vps that can sign contracts.
2.   It is generally ok to have confirmations signed by certain carefully 
selected directors since we are confirming a trade that already took place 
and there is master agreement already signed.
3.   There are certain very routine agreements like pipeline right-of-way 
agreements that are ok for carefully selected directors to sign.
4.   Confidentiality agreements should be signed by a vp.
5.   Any authorization for a director to sign should expire within not more 
than one year and revoke all prior authorizations.

Please give me your comments.

Mark