Hi there, Feel free to leave me an email about anything you are working on, as I will be available next week and onward to cover for you. In fact, if you want to stay home and go with KS to her dr's appt on Monday, I'll be there to cover. In fact, just PLAN to not be there, and if you are, it is a bonus. I don't you worry about anything when it gets to be baby time. If you do figure out remote access, I can email you questions and you can answer when it is convenient. Paige is almost 21, Michael is 6.5. It goes fast!!! Ciao, Kay
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Next week
I don't know what list you are working from for your approval of credit derivatives, but attached is the list EOL sent me. Many of the counterparties on the list are London based credit counterparties, and I will not be reviewing those, but I thought you might want to take a look at this to see if it's jiving with what you're looking at. When I'm done (probably some time at end of the day since I just got the list yesterday and it's due today! ), I will be emailing my approvals to Mark Dilworth in London.
Answer: Revised counterparty list for credit derivatives approval
Here is an email: Sales Tax to Rise by a Quarter of a Cent Finance: A 1991 law triggers a reduction in good times and kicks it back up during slowdowns. The state deficit means a higher rate on Jan. 1. By JULIE TAMAKI TIMES STAFF WRITER November 1 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Gray Davis' administration is expected to confirm today
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: FYI - LA Times story on sales tax increase
Q: On Friday, December 28, 2001, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates ("ORA") filed a motion requesting that the Commission suspend the procedural schedule in the SoCalGas/SDG&E 2003 BCAP. ORA also requests that the time to respond to its motion be shortened to ten days (Jan. 7). ORA's motion comes in the wake of the Commission's final decision in the Gas Industry Restructuring proceeding, Decision ("D.") 01-12-018, which was voted out on December 11, 2001. As you know, that decision adopts the Comprehensive Settlement Agreement ("CSA"), to which Transwestern is a party, with modifications. SoCalGas and SDG&E have notified the Commission that they will need to file revised BCAP applications (and supporting testimony) to reflect the impact of the CSA. SoCalGas has not given a date certain for the submission of its revised application, but hopes to provide that information to the Commission by mid-January. SDG&E plans on submitting its revised BCAP application 15 days after SoCalGas makes its filing. In its motion, ORA requests that the Commission suspend the procedural schedule in the BCAP, under which ORA is scheduled to submit its "report" (direct testimony) on March 22, 2002, until after SoCalGas and SDG&E have submitted their revised applications. After SoCalGas and SDG&E make their filings, the Commission would convene a second pre-hearing conference to adopt a new procedural schedule. It is unlikely SoCalGas will submit its revised BCAP application before the end of January. If SDG&E takes another 15 days to submit its revised application, that would leave a month, at most, under the current schedule for ORA to prepare its report. That is not enough time for ORA to get its act together, especially given the two cost allocation methodologies which may be at issue in the BCAP. Thus, it is very likely the Commission will grant ORA's motion. At a minimum, the ALJ will establish a new schedule after SoCalGas informs the Commission of the date when it will submit its revised application. ORA's motion does not raise any substantive issues. The fact of the matter is that the procedural schedule in the BCAP is going to slip even more as a result of adoption of the CSA. How much it will slip primarily depends on how quickly SoCalGas prepares its revised application. Accordingly, we do not believe it is necessary for Transwestern to respond to ORA's motion. Please do not hesitate to call or write if you have any questions.
Propose a subject line
A: SoCalGas BCAP
IN: FYI, I wanted to let you guys know of an OA problem that I am seeing on the central desk for december 2000. It appears deals that are gas daily priced deals are being priced incorrectly in Unify. Two gas daily publications came out at the end of the year. The publication on the 29th was for trans. dated the 28th and flowing the 29th. The next gas daily publication came out on the 2nd of Jan. and was for trans. 29th flowing the 1st adn 2nd. We flashed gas daily prices for the 30th & 31st that equalled the GD publication of the 2nd. This is correct, we should pay sat. and sunday based on Monday's price. Settlements paid the 30th & 31st at the 29th's price. I am going to give Bryce a call, I just wanted to share this with you since you should be seeing OA forms starting today for Dec production. If you disagree with my logic, please give me a shout. Thanks. PL

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Gas Daily pricing 12/30-12/31
IN: This is an email
FYI - I spoke with Thomas Fay in NY about setting up Instinet in London. I HAVE BOTH INSTINET FILES IN MY OFFICE. Sam, I told Thomas that we do not need copies of any agreements. You must have been looking for them while I was on vacation. Remember, broker'futures agreements are in RED files to make them visible. SS

What is the subject?

OUT:
Instinet