Since the time frame is short, I wanted to give you an outline to mark up/correct. Here's how I understand the deal: People's has the Manlove gas storage facility. We have presented to People's a nonphysical method to monetize it, similar to what was done with Bammel. Since this is a regulated asset, regulatory approval will be required, and the consumers will receive part of the benefit of the monetization. The essence of our deal is that Enron will receive 50% of the net earnings, up to $25mm, as our fee. In consideration for this fee, Enron takes the financial, legal, accounting and engineering lead. Peoples and Enron will work together on the regulatory strategy formulation and implementation. We want to present a draft MOU to Peoples this week. The basic goals are: Define scope of the agreement Define our lead role in the 4 stated areas Create exclusivity for Enron Define financial arrangements (cost/profit) Get an acknowledgement that what was presented to them was proprietary, and covered by our confidentiality agreement. Define term (5 years) Each party bears their own internal costs, and third party costs are split 50/50, with prior approval. In that regard an immediate concern is getting the engineering work kicked off. We want the agreement broad enough to cover physical withdrawals. We do not want it specific to this field, since we want the benefit of the use of our methodology. Please correct/supplement, etc. Thanks,
Answer: Manlove Monetization
Randy, based upon the records review, this is the only issue that may be a= =20 problem. If a tank has been moved to another location, it would trigger=20 requirements which were enacted on the date of the relocation. For instanc= e,=20 if a tank constructed prior to 1973 was moved in 1978, there would be=20 emissions control requirements placed on the tank as required by the 1978= =20 tank regulations. If the tank had remained at its original location, it=20 would be grandfathered with respect to emissions. However, because the tan= k=20 was relocated, it is looked upon as being a tank constructed in 1978 and=20 subject to the 1978 regulations and is no longer grandfathered. I was not given this information during the records review, so I dont know = if=20 any of the tanks apply. If any of the tanks fit into the above scenerio,= =20 EOTT or Koch will be looking at some major $$$$$ to bring any subject tank= =20 into compliance. Generally speaking, the regualtions and costs to comply= =20 increase as a function of date. =20 1. Q. Of the tanks listed on the spreadsheet, have any of the tanks been=20 relocated from its original construction locations? List the tank, date=20 moved and location moved to. A. Benevides Station Tank 6125 and Mirando Station Tank 28591 were relocat= ed=20 to those stations. Three Rivers Tanks 28508 and 28100 were relocated and= =20 re-erected at that station. Duval Station Tank 28052 and Mirando Station= =20 28045 were relocated and re-erected at those stations prior to Koch=01,s= =20 acquisition of those assets.
Answer: Koch South Texas pipeline data room questions and answers
Attention Power Traders: On Friday, November 16 IntercontinentalExchange will launch the PJM Uniform= Capacity Credit (UCC). The system will list the prompt five calendar year= s as well as a custom strip. All strips will have to be manually added to = portfolios on Friday morning. The product ID for the PJM UCC is (141).
Answer: New Power Market on ICE
Hey thanks for coming out to see the boys the other night, if you weren't there you missed a good show. 24BOM will probably play with Junco Parker again. But more important than that is Thursday night at the Medicine Hat Gallery- 18th and Alberta St- 9:00 PM. Show up and give some support, 24BOM will be recording live that night and it would be great to have some crowd response on that cd!! Thanks again for your support- hope to see you there
Answer:
Thursday