IN: Ugh. We'll keep working this angle if their new attorney shows up on deck, but I think Susan and I have done as much as can be done with Howard H. Do any of you know what the Red Cedar facilities look like? I.e. how many miles of line, any big diameter line, any compression, etc? Howard must have read some old cases and gotten himself spooked that their facilites aren't gathering under the modified primary function test. I'm not sure why he thinks signing a transport contract with us will make their situation any worse, but that seems to be his conclusion. If Steve and Bill can't nudge Red Cedar's management into doing the deal, I'd suggest that you both or one of you ask Tsuri (sp?) to have his new lawyer call me and Susan after Howard leaves, maybe with one of the Kinder Morgan lawyers on the phone also, and we'll try to straighten this out.

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Red Cedar
IN: This is an email
Good talking to you last nite. Here's the summary with the 5th scenario. The Speaker has it. Give a call if you have any questions. Best,

What is the subject?

OUT: 5th Scenario
QUESTION: Lindy, As mentioned in the phonemail message I left, below is a revised listing of the Order 637 Imbalance provisons filed that we want to either retain or potentially trade in 637 negotiations. I moved the mandatory cash-out provision into the trade column. Please review and advise if you agree with the list. Thanks. gh Already in TW's Tariff 1. Dollar valuing. Need to terminate volumetric OBA's where possible to minimize TW's financial exposure. Proposed in TW's 637 Filing - Keep 1. Definition of 6 indices (vs. 3 in current tariff). 2. Parties may mutually agree to cash out PNR. Could probably do today without this language. 3 . Clarification that PNR may be used by Operators. 4. May use PNR for "auto-balancing". Proposed in TW's 637 Filing - Could "Trade" 1. Mandatory cash-out each month (after netting and option to trade). 2. Daily balancing. Including daily tolerance, daily auto-transfer to PNR & daily pricing 3. Smaller tolerance range. Proposed change from +/- 10% to +/- 5%.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: 637 Imbalance Provisions
Attached please find referenced list. Again, no European power for U.S. counterparties until further notice. On Sithe Power where we only changed the counterparty id #, there is no change from my previous approval.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Counterparty Approval List for 02/02/00
When you get a minute I need to discuss the last attachment for the Co Op term sheet (the asset management one). Here's the current state of the draft: We do not have a current CA with PB. I will have one in the am to send out. Do you want Jude, et al to look at the EPC contract stuff? Kay
Answer: Co Op City
Q: Ed: I spoke with our credit people today. We would like to arrange a call to discuss our concerns about Section 5 of the Guaranty with me, our credit people, your counsel and your credit person or someone that can make a decision if we propose a change to the Guaranty. Can you let me know who these people are (and their phone numbers) so that we can arrange a call? We understand fully your need for the Section 5 language, but we would like to explore with your people whether your concerns can be addressed in a different manner. Thanks.
Propose a subject line
A:
Status