Subject: Re: Action points for Simmons & Simmons
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:56:00 -0700 (PDT)

Jonathan, Ned,

Enron Europe Limited would be fine, thanks.

And a couple of other questions, which blend with the ones I mentioned below.

has there been issued any statement by the CFTC or other regulatory body 
regarding the point about marketing via the Internet not infringing 30/10 
relief, i.e without breaching the limited marketing rules?  Can LME Contracts 
therefore be marketed via the EnronOnline website to US customers, bearing in 
mind that the underlying principal to the LME Contract would (so far as 
EnronOnline is concerned) be Enron Metals Limited (formerly known as MGL)?  
As an aside, each Counterparty that is given access to the EnronOnline system 
is required to execute certain "access" documentation - for the US, the Enron 
entity to these documents is EnronOnline LLC, and for Europe, the entity is 
Enron Power Operations Limited.  In each case, EnronOnline LLC and Enron 
Power Operations Limited execute these documents on behalf of themselves as 
well as their group undertakings.  But note that no cases will EnronOnline 
LLC or  Enron Power Operations Limited be the Enron contracting entity to any 
trade concluded via EnronOnline.
is MG London Inc. (the FCM) required to act as agent or as principal under 
the LME Contracts with US customers, or can it merely market to US customers 
and then pass these on to Enron Metals Limited in London for execution, 
whether offlline or via EnronOnline?

Thanks.
Justin

   
	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
	
	From:  "Jonathan Melrose" <[email-masked]>              
             12/09/2000 13:37

To: <[email-masked]>
cc: "Ned Swan" <[email-masked]> 

Subject: Re: Action points for Simmons & Simmons

Thanks - will look at these and revert.

On a house keeping point, is this work for Enron Metals or a different Enron 
entity?

Rgds
>>> <[email-masked]> 12/09/2000 11:39:34 >>>
Dear Jonathan,

Following our conference call yesterday, I hope these action points for you
make sense:-

   Determine the scope of the 30/10 exemption, assuming it was granted to
   MGL in 1988 and confirm the benefit to MGL of changes to CFTC Rules
   since then.

   Determine the scope of the FCM authorisation granted to MG London Inc.

   Provide details of the requirements for the purpose of 30/10 and FCM
   authorisation in terms of customer warnings/documentation required to be
   given.

   Confirm alternative bases for relief under 30/10 and FCM authorisation.

   Confirm that MG London Inc. (as an FCM) may market to US customers
   without also having to act as disclosed agent for EOL.

   Confirm that marketing via the Internet, ie. the EnronOnline website,
   does not infringe any conditions of the 30/10 relief.

Thanks,

Justin Boyd