IN: This is an email
Carolyn, I wasn't sure you had the last version. This is the version agreed to by GE, which should be attached to the letter agreement. I will email an exhibit which needs to be inserted.

What is the subject?

OUT: CA Development Agreements

IN: This is an email
Dear Stacey and Kristin- I have attached the 2000 Doorstep report for UK and Continental Power. Unfortunately, Gas, EGM and EIM are also co-mingled in this report. I apologize. I will bring to the planning meeting their responses and status of these findings (I unfortunately, cannot email these). Stacey - FYI, I kinda discussed this with Kristin. But RAC is no longer going to play an active role in the doorstep process. We are going to use their business expertise and concerns during the planning meeting, but other than that, they have agreed to be available on a "consulting" basis after that. I am working with Paul Day (Andersen Sr. Mgr in London) and Paul Bromley (London EAS) on either getting an Andersen deal tester for you all or just substituting Andersen's deal testing for ours. Additionally, EAS has performed a Client Self Assessment (similar to a "what could wrong" or control analysis form). I am trying to get a copy of that prior to you all leaving for the doorstep. I hope to have more info by next week, but wanted to pass this along. Thanks, Christy

What is the subject?

OUT: UK and Continental Power DS Report

IN: This is an email
Steve, We are currently negotiating an interconnect agreement for an upgrade of an existing interconnect off the Trawick System into TUFCO. The interconnect is solely a delivery to TUFCO. We are down to one point of difference in the agreement. Typically HPL disclaims any liability for consequential damages to the other party. TUFCO is asking for an exception for any violation of gas quality specifications. This would mean that if HPL delivered off spec gas to TUFCO which required cleanup of their pipeline system or caused damage to a customer of TUFCO's HPL would be liable under this Agreement. From a legal standpoint, we can make this exception, but I wanted to make sure everyone understood and agreed with the acceptance of this potential liability. Assuming we are properly monitoring all our receipts there shouldn't be an issue. Please let me know what you think about this situation. I can forward a copy of the interconnect agreement if you do not currently have one.

What is the subject?

OUT:
TUFCO Trawick I/C