Sue --

Please work with Diann to determine if their calculations are tariff driven or simply an internal process of SCE.

Thanks,

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Huddleson, Diann  
Sent:	Friday, September 14, 2001 9:40 AM
To:	Bradford, William S.
Cc:	Curry, Wanda; Steffes, James D.; Hughes, Evan
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

As a matter of fact, I disputed their calculations when I was there.  They are basing our deposits on the total charges rather than just the transmission and distribution charges, which is all we are responsible for.  According to them, they do not distinguish between DA and bundled charges.

Jim, do you feel we have any recourse in challenging SCE's methodology for calculating these requirements?




From:	William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/14/2001 07:51 AM
To:	Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES
cc:	Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate 
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Do we have no way to confirm the validiity of the amount required?  There has to be some tariff driven requirement or I am just dreaming?

Bill


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Huddleson, Diann  
Sent:	Friday, September 14, 2001 7:48 AM
To:	Bradford, William S.
Cc:	Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, Tracy; Curry, Wanda
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Bill, SCE's security requirements are based on their projected bill amounts for each account that will switch.  They are the ones to calculate this.  I will contact Kim Santa Cruz today and see if they have increased their requirements since August 9.



From:	William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/13/2001 07:15 PM
To:	Clement Abrams/ENRON@enronXgate, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES
cc:	Teresa Seibel/ENRON@enronXgate, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Maurice Winter/HOU/EES@EES, Tracy Ngo/ENRON@enronXgate, Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate 
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Diann,

We need to read the tariff and understand SCE's security requirement and then extrapolate potential requirements based on our expected load.

Wanda - do you have time to help with this analysis?

Does it make sense to offer the guaranty for $50mm and move on?

Let's discuss,
Bill

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Abrams, Clement  
Sent:	Thursday, September 13, 2001 9:02 AM
To:	Huddleson, Diann; Bradford, William S.
Cc:	Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, Tracy; Curry, Wanda
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Diann,

When I spoke with Kim, she suggested that I direct the question to credit, hence the inquiry.

Clement

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Huddleson, Diann  
Sent:	Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:35 AM
To:	Bradford, William S.
Cc:	Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Ngo, Tracy; Curry, Wanda
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Bill, not sure what "effective" date is needed.    Our customer accounts began switching to direct access in late June.  As for the maximum requirement, the amount is dictated by SCE.  When I met with Kim Santa Cruz, et al, on August 9, the amount they calculated for EESO was at $37,111,872.  It is likely that amount has gone up, but I have received no official request since then.

Clement, do you know what the latest security requirement is?



From:	William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 09/12/2001 12:57 PM
To:	Clement Abrams/ENRON@enronXgate, Teresa Seibel/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:	Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Maurice Winter/HOU/EES@EES, Tracy Ngo/ENRON@enronXgate, Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate 
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Diann,

Do you have a view on the effective date?  What is the maximum guaranty requirement under the direct access?  We should probably put the cap north of that level.

Please advise,
Bill


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Abrams, Clement  
Sent:	Wednesday, September 12, 2001 12:49 PM
To:	Seibel, Teresa
Cc:	Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice; Bradford, William S.; Ngo, Tracy
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Teresa,

Myself and Kim Santa Cruz of SCE have agreed in principal to the format of the guarantee to be provided by Enron Corp.  The only matters to be finalized with respect to the guarantee is the effective date and aggregate cap amount of the guaranty.  Could you supply this remaining information? 

Thanks, 

Clem

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Bradford, William S.  
Sent:	Friday, August 03, 2001 6:35 AM
To:	Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa
Cc:	Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Teresa,

Please work with Diann's team and Treasury to see if we can issue a 2 month surety while Clem works out the details on the guaranty format.  Work with Diann's team and SCE to validate the $ amount.  Use Veronica Gonzalez to help if necessary.  Make sure formats on surety are approved by EES legal.  Hopefully we will be able to replace with a guaranty in a couple of months.

Thanks,
Bill


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Abrams, Clement  
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 6:46 PM
To:	Bradford, William S.; Seibel, Teresa
Cc:	Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Bill,

Given the nature of progress in the past, I wouldn't want to hang my hat on saying that the guaranty can be completed within a day or two.  What I can do to push the process ahead quicker is to provide comments to the extent that they are absolute and necessary and then leave it with Southern to say that they can or cannot accommodate us.  Is there any possibility of upping the surety bond support for a short period until this can be handled?

Clem

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Bradford, William S.  
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 4:16 PM
To:	Abrams, Clement; Seibel, Teresa
Cc:	Richardson, Cindy; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Clem,

This process has been ongoing and we should have been continuing to pursue this guaranty.  Sorry for any confusion if you feel this has been late notice.  We need to resolve this issue ASAP.  If you are unavailable, we have the option to issue a surety bond at some cost.  Please advise if you feel we should pursue this option given the short time frame.

Bill


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Abrams, Clement  
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:27 PM
To:	Seibel, Teresa
Cc:	Richardson, Cindy; Bradford, William S.; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice
Subject:	RE: SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC

Teresa,

Teresa, I believe you understand what the negotiation pattern has been between Enron Corp. and Southern California Edison.  It has not changed, especially given the fact that once again I have received a form of guaranty that is different than before and would need to be modified in order to be acceptable to Enron Corp.  I received the guaranty and have not been able to address it because I have been busy preparing items for the upcoming Enron Corp. board meeting.  And, just as in the past, Enron Corp. and Southern California Edison has not been able to come to any agreement as to what the form will look like.  My question is, why is it the case that it is the ninth hour when it is determined that Enron Corp. has to deliver a guaranty, especially to Southern California Edison (a Counterparty where it is well known that there will be problems with the format)?  Surely, we are keeping track of our credit limits and the time frames in which they can to be exceeded.  There will be a negotiation process and it may not necessarily meet the time frame that you have mentioned below.

Clement    

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Seibel, Teresa  
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:07 PM
To:	Abrams, Clement
Cc:	Richardson, Cindy; Bradford, William S.; Huddleson, Diann; Hughes, Evan; Winter, Maurice
Subject:	SCE - Enron Corp. Guaranty for EEMC
Importance:	High

Clement - On Monday I sent you a request via email and fax regarding the need to put in place a Enron Corp Guaranty for Enron Energy Marketing Corp.(EEMC) to Southern California Edison.  This has now become very urgent, since EEMC is now close to going over their current credit limit.  Please let me know as soon as possible what the status is.  Thanks, Teresa