lets try to work through this one.  it will be a good example of potential 
energy deals and give us a good feel of how far out of the zone this is or 
whether it will simply take some work.

bs


To: Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S 
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, Debbie R 
Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT 

Subject: Re: Indicative request to buy  

Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple.  Duke Energy Trading & Marketing 
is a marketing sub and does not prepare separate financials.  The S&P rating 
is based on an implied guaranty from Duke Energy.  Legal would also need to 
review this counterparty from the standpoint of confidentiality agreement 
violations. 

Also, as a trading counterparty, Sempra Energy Trading is not authorized for 
credit derivative trading, because the existing guaranty does not explicitly 
cover this type of transaction.  If Sempra wishes to transact out of this 
entity, we can look into amending the guaranty to cover this product.  This 
will require legal efforts and approval.

Rod




Tomas Valnek
03/02/2000 08:36 AM
To: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rod 
Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Edmund 
Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: John Metzler/LON/ECT@ECT, Martin McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Indicative request to buy

Both of  these entities have an E-rating of 3. Any issues?

Tomas


---------------------- Forwarded by Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT on 02/03/2000 14:36 
---------------------------


John Metzler
01/03/2000 15:41
To: Martin McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT, Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:  

Subject: Indicative request to buy


Reference Name:  Duke Energy Trading & Marketing (sub of Duke energy -- he 
claims they have their own debt)
Counterparty:   Sempara Energy Trading
Term:    2 years
Notional Amount:  $2 million (I made that up)

John