Message-ID: <13077098.1075851944826.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 05:49:00 -0800 (PST)
From: todd.peterson@enron.com
To: pybarbo@enron.com
Subject: COU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Todd Peterson
X-To: pybarbo@enron.com
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Paul_Ybarbo_Nov2001\Notes Folders\Eco - cond. of use
X-Origin: YBARBO-P
X-FileName: pybarbo.nsf

---------------------- Forwarded by Todd Peterson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 
03/06/2001 01:51 PM ---------------------------


Nancy Corbet
08/02/2000 02:51 PM
To: Todd Peterson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Daniel R Rogers/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 

Subject: COU

Dan is not available today but asked me to get back to you on his behalf re 
way forward on  Cou with Cabot . Basically he supports our earlier advice 
that we try to get an agreement prior to the next delivery on the terms we 
have proposed. We appreciate that that may be difficult given Cabot's 
corporate situation and its disinclination to accept the terms. If Cabot is 
suggesting something other than what we have proposed (ie knock for knock ) 
they should revise the agreement to reflect this and we can consider. Again 
it will not be easy to get them to do any revision before the next delivery. 
Suggest that you call Paul Parish and discuss with him the effect of a knock 
for knock as you understand Cabot's position to be and then discuss this with 
your commercial team.

We suspect that we may again be in same position we were last delivery , in 
which case at a minimum we will have to send Cabot a similar letter saying 
that we are not waiving any rights. If by chance we have come to agreement 
verbally but have not a full agreement in place it would be wise to state the 
agreed principles in a letter pending completion of the definitive agreement. 
Nancy