2 meetings on monday  8 & 9:30 in 49C2 and 2 on friday, 9 & 10 in 49C2.

 -----Original Message-----
From:     Kevin_A_Howard.enronXgate.ENRON@enron.net@ENRON
Sent:     Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:40 PM
To:       Hayslett, Rod
Subject:  RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects



Rod:
I have been meaning to ask you, what staff meetings should I be attending
and
when are they held?

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   "Hayslett, Rod" <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com>@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
   Sent:   Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:15 PM
   To:     kevin.howard@enron.net
   Subject:  Fw: Confidential - Decision tree on projects

   Fyi
   --------------------------
   Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


   -----Original Message-----
   From: Mahan, Mariella <Mariella.Mahan@ENRON.com>
   To: Horton, Stanley <Stanley.Horton2@ENRON.com>; Hughes, James A.
   <James.A.Hughes@ENRON.com>; Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com>;
   Sommers, Jeffrey E. <Jeffrey.E.Sommers@ENRON.com>
   Sent: Tue Nov 13 14:53:54 2001
   Subject: Confidential - Decision tree on projects

   Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting.

   There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and
   thus difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama
   and Gaza.  In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have
   taken the position that we would not inject cash into these companies
   and would be prepared to face a default and possible acceleration of the
   loans.  SECLP has been the biggest issue/problem.  Panama is much less
   (a few million of floating of our receivables from the company) would be
   sufficient to meet the cash crunch in April of this year.  Note that, in
   Panama, the debt is fully guaranteed by the government and is
   non-recoursed to the operating company, BLM.  In the past, we have
   discussed letting the debt default, which would cause the bank to
   potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from the GoPanama.
   The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from actions taken
   by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with private
   parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which
   although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a "mark" on
   the company's liquidity position.

   Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in
   Panama or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken
   or made) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an
   effort by Enron to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor
   confidence?  The same could go for SECLP and Gaza.

   This is simply an overall "guidance" question.  Let's take it up during
   our staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you.

   Many thanks, Mariella