I am not currently negotiating any deals with this counterparty.  If the contract is with HPL, any issues they have should be directed to AEP.  Also given your information regarding trade status,  I  would not consider entering into any type of contract with this company.  Finally, I can offer you no info with regards to the "LLC",  The only company I am aware of is "Upstream Energy Services Company.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Balfour-Flanagan, Cyndie  
Sent:	Friday, July 20, 2001 1:21 PM
To:	Dickson, Stacy E.; Theriot, Kim S.; Baxter, Bryce; Perlingiere, Debra; Sever, Stephanie; Brackett, Debbie R.; Hare, Bill D.; Greif, Donna
Cc:	Bryan, Linda S.; Richardson, Stacey; Schott, Samuel; Elledge, Susan
Subject:	Upstream Energy Services Company: Headquarter/Tradename issue revisited

While researching an EOL issue for Upstream Energy Services Company I noticed two records in the Global Counterparty Database that looked to be duplicates.

49992 Upstream Energy Services Company [Tradename]
92260 Upstream Energy Services Company, LLC	[Headquarters]

Both records are "active" (as they should be based on the current classification)

However, the note listed below seems to suggest that the customer is actually doing business as LLC:

 << OLE Object: PBrush >> 

The only master contract we had in existence was assigned to AEP/HPL and all current business is now conducted under GTCs. BOTH CP versions are EOL counterparties and both appear on the 7/19/01 Credit Watch Report as "No Trades" with an E-rating of 10.

The question: Should all activity actually be under only the LLC version? Knowing most traders, they are going to pick which ever one they happen to click on first.


Bryce: Does anyone in your group know any reasons why Upstream Energy Services Company, LLC would want to segregate invoices & payments? One under "Upstream Energy Services Company" & the other under "Upstream Energy Services Company, LLC"?

Donna: Is there a pathing issue that needs to keep transactions under both CP versions? One under "Upstream Energy Services Company" & the other under "Upstream Energy Services Company, LLC"?

Debbie: Since they are linked, we are capturing exposure for transactions under either. How would credit prefer to see this?

Stacey/Debra: Are we currently negotiating a replacement GISB with Upstream? If so, any idea which name is or will be on the contract?

Stephanie: What is EOL's view?

The reason I bring this issue to your attention is based on the previous discussions surrounding the debate and concern on downstream system and deal capture under Headquarters, Divisions & Tradenames. Given the obvious similarities of the names as listed in the Global Counterparty database, any confusion that can be avoided in the future would be a benefit for all groups.

Thank you!
Cyndie
[Global Contracts]