Subject: Re: Fwd: Citizens Gas Supply Offer - PPL counter proposal
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:21:00 -0700 (PDT)

---------------------- Forwarded by Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT on 04/03/2001 
08:16 AM ---------------------------
From: Kim Ward on 04/03/2001 09:11 AM CDT
To: Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Fwd: Citizens Gas Supply Offer - PPL counter proposal  

Chris,

this looks good to me.  Stephanie is checking with Transwestern to see what 
their parking/lending fees would be for weekends, just for an idea.  I am 
also talking to the desk.  I will keep you posted.

Kim

To: Kim Ward/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Fwd: Citizens Gas Supply Offer - PPL counter proposal  

Kim:

Please review and add anything you want and return.

C

John/Sean:

A few thoughts on the Griffith deal:

1.  Term:  PPL indicates they want to do the deal through 2003.  That is 
really 2003 - 2004 as it incldues Nov - Mar.  Extension until this time might 
require extension of our underlying deal.  This would be OK with us.
2.  Character of service:   The text indicates that PPL would have the right 
to request deliveries be made to an alternqate point on TW.  Why would they 
want this?  This could be a problem if we know the gas wouldn't flow as we 
would shut in puchases.  We would like to make this on a mutually acceptable 
basis.
3.  Pricing:  Does the reservation cahrge include variable transport?  I 
think that is what we proposed.  If not, then the Commodity rate flow needs 
to include the variable cost of  transport plus fuel.
4.  Conditions:  Noms must be in at 8:00 am.  This is very important and the 
a deal killer.  We need time to manage the position.  Also, the weekend issue 
needs to be addressed.  As we have discussed, weekends trade as the same 
quantity each day.  If they want to vary the daily amoount during the weekend 
and make Sunday higher than Sat or Monday, that is fairly ewaasy to deal 
with.  If they want to have lower takes on Sunday, this is more difficult ad 
increases costs.  We might be able to craft a solution to this however.

Chris

   
	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
	
	From:  [email-masked]                           04/02/2001 12:35 PM

To: <[email-masked]>
cc: <[email-masked]> 
Subject: Fwd: Citizens Gas Supply Offer - PPL counter proposal

Chris,

Here is the counter.  I will talk to you before I get own the plane.

John

Return-Path: <[email-masked]>
Received: from  rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by 
air-yg04.mail.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Apr 2001 15:22:00 -0500
Received: from  mailgate.pplweb.com (mailgate.pplweb.com [167.155.6.158]) by 
rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Apr 2001 15:21:32 -0400
Received: from dl23003x.papl.com (dl23003x.papl.com [167.155.16.38]) by 
mailgate.pplweb.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.8.6) with SMTP id PAA19127; Mon, 2 
Apr 2001 15:17:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by em-srv-f.papl.com (8.9.3 
(PHNE_18546)/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA25798; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 15:16:21 -0400 
(EDT)
Disposition-Notification-To: [email-masked]
X-OpenMail-Hops: 2
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 15:16:20 -0400
Message-Id: <"H0000f820a8747f1.0986238980.em-srv-a*"@MHS>
Subject: Citizens Gas Supply Offer - PPL counter proposal
MIME-Version: 1.0
TO: [email-masked], [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="openmail-part-00489817-00000001"
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)

Sean/John,
We'd like to thank you for puttting together this offer for bundled supply to
our Griffith facility.  We are very agreeable to the structure and general
framework that you have laid out.  We did make a few modifications however and
you can find them in the attached redlined version of your proposal.  We will
available to discuss this proposal with Citizens.

Thanks

Terry

 - PPL - Griffith Gas Sales Proposal-rev.doc