Attached below is my approval of a bunch of capacity packages for sale on 
EOL.  As you can see, I think there is an important issue of contract 
language that we need to resolve at some point if we are going to get maximum 
mileage out of EOL.  Please let me know what you think we ought to do about 
this--in my view, if we are going to sell long term capacity on a discounted 
basis, we ought to keep using the language we have historically used on what 
happens if our max rates are reduced and what happens if our rate design is 
modified.  As to the old confidentiality paragraph and some of the other 
stuff, I'm not sure it is worth keeping and running the risk of FERC finding 
that we have overreached (i.e., the paragraph saying a customer can't ever 
challenge our discount adjustment).   Lets talk.  df 
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 02/13/2001 
10:39 AM ---------------------------


Drew Fossum
02/13/2001 10:38 AM
To: Craig Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave 
Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Craig Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen 
Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jo 
Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda 
Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/Enron@EnronXGate, Dari 
Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: EOL Routing/Approval - Urgent  

I am OK on selling these packages on EOL.  This approval is based on my 
understanding that all of this capacity is currently posted, or, if not 
currently posted, will be posted for the appropriate amount of time prior to 
sale.  Additionally, this approval is contingent on use of the webtext we 
have been using for other EOL deals (I feel the need to say the obvious 
because I don't believe Law will see anything on these packages again).  I 
also assume that these will be short term deals--i.e., less than one year.  
Any long term discounted deals raise concerns that our "standard discount 
language" is designed to address, such as what is the effect of a new rate 
design or reduction in the max rate on the discounted deal.  I think we can 
live without that language in short term deals for now, but we need to 
revisit this issue and come up with a solution before we sell any long term 
deals on EOL.  ONe last thing, it is marketing's decision whether to include 
in the webtext the provision that says Northern gets the $$ if the shipper 
releases the capacity at a rate higher than the discounted rate.  I think our 
approach in negotiated deals has been to get that agreement if we could (a 
basis run up could make it a very valuable right).  If you have any 
questions, call me.  DF      


   
	
	
	From:  Craig Buehler                           02/12/2001 02:50 PM
	

To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent 
Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Craig 
Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jo 
Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda 
Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: EOL Routing/Approval - Urgent


***  EOL ROUTING ***

Please send your approval by return email, to Craig Buehler, for the EOL 
packages listed on
the attached spreadsheet.  Each of the packages (22 in total) shows the path, 
sustainable capacity
and proposed rate for each product.  The rates are estimated to provide a 
measure for the dollar
amount of the discount (per our current discount policy).  These 22 products 
are the initial deals
being offered; subsequent packages will be routed as they are developed.  
Please call Craig, at
713-853-6964, if you have questions.  After approval by Legal, Reg Affairs 
and Marketing, the
approvals and/or comments will be forwarded to Danny McCarty for review.

Thanks,

Craig