Subject: "Nanny".

Body: Hi Carol, I saw that you posted about getting a nanny. I've used two services, but only one that I can suggest. For my last nanny, I used Morningside Nanny Service, or something close to that. They seemed thorough, and found us a wonderful person. I've also used River Oaks Nanny, but they sent me a nut case. Good luck, Kay

Subject: "URGENT REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ACTION : Welcome to UBS meeting tomorrow 10.15 am @ the Houstonian".

Body: UBS have organized an important meeting will be held tomorrow for all employees who : 1) have accepted offers or 2) intend to accept offers ( to the best of their knowledge) but who have issues that are being resolved All employees in these categories should attend Buses will be provided for those who do not have their own transport and will pick up from the south side of the north building - please assemble in the Java plaza area from 8.30am to 9.30am ( last bus leaves @ 9.30 am ) The meeting will last until approximately 1pm and will be presented by senior managers from UBS on the firm and it's strategy. There will be breakfast available at the Hotel from 9am to 10am and there will be sandwiches afterwards. If traveling independently please make sure you leave sufficient time to park (it will be very busy) and get to the Grand ballroom Employees need to bring their id's or drivers license with them to gain access to the meeting I'm sorry for the short notice on this - please call out to anyone who should be attending who will not get this message in time Tammie Schoppe on behalf of UBS HR

Subject: "CONFIDENTIAL".

Body: Guys, attached you will find a draft org memo that I anticpate going out on Thursday. I appreciate your patience. Please give me any comments ASAP (only major issues). Brian/Tim, I assume that we need a communication strategy to HPL employees before this memo goes out - please advise. Please keep this note confidential until release. Regards

Subject: "VNG transportation capacity".

Body:
John, I have reviewed the contracts (Asset Agreement and the GPA) and here are my= thoughts regarding your request. In short, the agreements do not specific= ally address capacity being needed by third parties. ENA does have a right= to all of their capacity free and clear of all encumbrances. Last year we= did discuss this issue (the interruptible VNG customers wanting to take re= leases of VNG capacity), but at the time Jim Scabareti indicated that he wa= s going to play hard ball with his interruptible shippers in year 2 (i.e. n= ow), since VNG was really getting tight on assets due year-on-year load gro= wth and no new capacity additions. He gave the assets up last year because= he did not want to have any noise at the VSCC when the VSCC was considerin= g the affiliate relationship between VNG and AGLES. However, as I reflect = on it now, it seems to me that VNG (aka Sequent) really needs to weigh heav= ily the decision to release any assets to third parties through this winter= (interruptible or otherwise). At a minimum, any releases should be done r= ecallable based on weather forecasts based on some HDD amount. The profit = sharing provision is the same for years 1 and 2. My suggestion is that you do the following: (1) remind Sequent about the de= liverability issue facing VNG and (2) develop a plan with Sequent for talki= ng to Customers, so as to minimize any VSCC risk since the VSCC thinks Sequ= ent is VNG's asset manager. =20 Mark Breese is back in the office tomorrow and I will confer with him as we= ll. You might seek Jeff Hodge's thoughts as well. If you have any questio= ns, please ask. Regards,