The City alleges that we have breached by failing to pay for our share of the gas which they procured in order to run the plant.  Approx $1.5 mm.

Stuart

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Mann, Kay  
Sent:	Wednesday, December 12, 2001 12:52 PM
To:	Clark, Barton; Keenan, Jeffrey
Cc:	Zisman, Stuart
Subject:	RE: Austin Energy

At the risk of asking a stupid question, are we in breach under the project agreement?  I didn't comb it, but I also didn't see anything that screamed breach to me.  If we have a paid up call on 100 MW, that is probably something we would want to preserve.

More to consider!

Kau

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Clark, Barton  
Sent:	Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:42 AM
To:	Keenan, Jeffrey
Cc:	Mann, Kay
Subject:	RE: Austin Energy

For now, Kay and I both will be working on this. I learned this am that the desk has a power deal with City of Austin that is in default ( not involving the LCRA hedge), so it may be beneficial to think about some kind of global workout with the City involving the $$ owed, the 8% interest held by Sandhill and the obligations under the power deal. When I have some time to read the project documents, and you get your info, all three of us should meet to formulate a response to the City's letter.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Keenan, Jeffrey  
Sent:	Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:13 AM
To:	Zisman, Stuart
Cc:	Clark, Barton
Subject:	Austin Energy

Stuart:

Here is my shot at your memo.

I will have the accounting spreadsheet from Theresa Vox today.

Jeffrey


 << File: Sandhill Memo Keenans makup to Zisman.doc >>