QUESTION: When: Thursday, November 01, 2001 1:30 PM-2:00 PM (GMT-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada). Where: TBD *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* This is a new day and time for this meeting. Thank you and I apologize for any inconvenience. Background: A request was received by the Gas Tactical group that would have implications on the system you use. The request was to have the existing warning window appear if the trader enters a date that is before the date of the trade. Knowing that there are times where trades can be back dated we cannot restrict this but to have the trader see a warning window appear to make them double check their dates (if they are for a previous date) would be beneficial to the requestor. If they know the date is correct they would have the option to continue with the terms. Often times, due to human error, Book Admins see mistakes made where the trade date is 10/15/01 and the terms are 10/01/01 to 10/31/01. Because we are in the middle of the month a red flag is being raised with the Book Admins to question this trade. Often times it is found that it was a mistake. To date the system will only show a warning window if the trade terms were for 9/01/01 to 9/30/01. Request Review: Is it possible to allow the existing warning window to display for a date that is before the trade date (even a day before) and not just for a different month? Thank you in advance.
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Warning Window for the Tagg Deal Entry

QUESTION: Sharen told me this morning that you guys were waiting on a deal Stewart Rosman did with Port of Oakland yesterday and wanted confirmed today. I've spoken with a few people here and discerned that the deal wasn't in because the counterparty wasn't in the system yet. I took a look and found that Port of Oakland had been added, and entered the deal according to the terms Stewart sent out in an e-mail yesterday. Deal number is 533916. Thanks for waiting. Kate
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Stewart Rosman deal - Port of Oakland

QUESTION: Jose, I think the supplemental info you have provided is outstanding and helpful to the lenders in understanding the overall picture and the history. However, its focus is not the central concern of the lenders at this point as I understand it. The lenders and their counsel are concerned specifically about third party liability meaning, I believe, lawsuits or claims from parties who did not receive power because Cuiaba failed to generate. Therefore, I think the questions which Tozzinni needs to address are along the lines of: 1) If EPE is required to sign the agreements by ANEEl, What is the extent of damages that could be claimed in the context of such agreements? 2) Could any consequential damages be assessed? 3) Could EPE excuse itself from the legal proceedings on the basis of the bid documents, the PPA or other agreements with Furnas, Electronote or Eletrabras? 4) How would the economic equilibrium process work in the case of a judgement which was payable by EPE? Could the process be expedited to avert a liquidity crisis? 5) Could EPE be denied access to the grid as a result of failure to cover a spot market price assessed by the MAE stemming from an unscheduled outage? 6) Similarly, could EPE incur penalties or be denied transmission if they failed to contribute in accordance with the shared liability provisions of the agreements? 7) Will we need to sign the agreements for other reasons (such as access to back-up power) which would be excluded from the protections by Furnas under the PPA? 9) Could Furnas deny or delay reimbursement if the amount is not recoverable by them or while they are awaiting word on a claims recoverability? 10) A question for insurance - Does our Business Interuption insurance protect us in any of these instances? (Note: the US$20MM Sponsor liquidity facility provides some comfort to the lenders) John, stop me if you think I am off track. If you have other questions which you think need to be addressed please continue ....
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS:
Interconnection Agreements