Following last week's meeting, here is my recommendation on how to proceed with SCE. 1. Form Enron Negotiation Team My recommendation is to use the same team we used with PG&E + Jeff Dasovich. My understanding was that Lisa M. was the lead negotiator - I would not change this. Jeff should only be there to make introductions. 2. Meet & Confer (10/29) Sue Mara and Jeff Dasovich will listen and report back to everyone on what happens. 3. Reformed Stipulation I would propose that we take a wait and see approach to this document. Based on Dasovich's idea to get together with SCE on Thursday, maybe let this ride. 4. Meeting My understanding is that (Jeff D. please correct) SCE can meet with us this Thursday. Can everyone make it that needs to be there? Probably meet in California. We should put the laundry list on the table. Please let me know what else we need to discuss or if anyone disagrees. Thanks,
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Proposed SCE Negotiation Strategy
Please pull a report detailing all incoming faxes received by fax machine number 713/646-3483, located between EB 3115 and 3114B from September 1 through present. WE NEED THIS REPORT IMMEDIATELY. Time is of the essence. Should you have any questions, please call me at 35587 or my legal specialist, Linda Guinn, at 36104. Richard Sanders RC 0630 Co. 413
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Fax Number 713/646-3483
Geoff, To confirm the deal we did today, you bought the physical x1h2 Dawn Parkway spread at $0.065 US/MMBtu from Lambie. We used NX1+0.20 for Dawn and NX1+0.265 for Parkway. To clarify, you bought Parkway at +0.265 and sold Dawn at +0.20. Calgary is entering the trade. Thanks. Steve Burnham
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: xh dawn parkway spread details
Richard Sanders and I talked with Elizabeth (an attorney with AEP). She was not sure that their was a question that needed to be answered. Richard opined that the question may have related to the effect on HPL if it lost the Taub lawsuit. This suit relates to an alleged violation of the surface rights agreement (Collateral Agreement) which was entered into with certain surface owners after the Unit Agreement was signed. Richard explained that if HPL lost the suit, it would lose its rights to maintain a pipeline and well facilities on the property subject to the lawsuit. In that event HPL would have to either locate its pipeline around the property or use its condemnation rights to acquire an easement across the property. Because the Collateral Agreement relates to surface rights, losing those rights would not affect HPL's rights under the Unit Agreement and thus the Taubs would not have the right to drill a well to produce the gas that HPL has in storage.
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer:
Taub lawsuit Project Triple Lux