stu said he would get with chip

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Meyer, Chris  
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 1:04 PM
To:	Parks, Joe
Subject:	RE: Centana

I think you got your answer from Stuart, but the issue is the netting of post petition storage.....are you calling Chip?

chris


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Parks, Joe  
Sent:	Tuesday, February  12, 2002 12:33 PM
To:	Meyer, Chris
Subject:	RE: Centana

i was told by ed that we would not need a batch funding request to sell gas against post petition. 

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Meyer, Chris  
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:49 AM
To:	Parks, Joe
Cc:	Zisman, Stuart; Nemec, Gerald
Subject:	Centana

Joe - we are going to move forward on the two step approach on the Centana deal that we discussed.  However, to execute step one (sell pad gas with the exception of the amount to cover pre-petition storage cost and net post petition storage costs against proceeds), we will still need to present a Batch Funding Request.  Therefore, please update the working copy to reflect the deal as we've discussed, including justification of the pricing (basis).  Have you discussed w/ the counter party the issue of continued storage costs?

Stuart - once Joe gets this done, we'll forward for your review, send/discuss with Chip to ascertain level of review (hopefully only Cash Committee per Gerald).  Goal is to close this week/ early next week.

Gerald - do you want to start drafting documents and do we want to include a termination provision such that ENA will no longer incur post petition cost on pre-petition retainage?  


chris