QUESTION: FYI. Presentation by Brattle Group before CA leg committee yesterday in which they assert market power at the CA border (held by "out-of-state suppliers") explains high gas prices in California. If you have any questions, call me at 415.782.7822. Please forward to others whom you think might be interested. Stephanie, could you forward along to Barry? Best,
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Sacramento Pres Final 4_13_01(projected).ppt
Clement, I had sent you a draft of a guaranty by Enron Corp. for ECS Compression Company, L.L.C. earlier. Have you had a chance to review and obtain execution yet. Please let me know the status. Thanks for your help
Q: What is a potential subject line for this email?
answer: Guaranty
We are currently discussing several potential approaches for a "Phase VII" expansion project. We have preliminary work underway on several potential scenarios, some of which might involve Gulfstream as an upstream transporter. As part of these discussions, Gulfstream has inquired about FGT's interest in providing a capacity lease for backhaul service (approximately 20-30 miles - they did not identify the specific market). My questions are: (1) Backhaul capacity lease with an interstate pipeline - Do you see any problems/issues? The lease arrangement would be with Guflstream Pipeline. (2) If this backhaul lease capacity is used by Gulfstream to provide deliveries to an electric generator, would the FP&L Favored Nations Clause be triggered?
Answer: Capacity Lease (Backhaul) - Gulfstream
Here is an email: Gavin, Thanks for taking time to explain how county ad valorem taxes in Texas work to both me and Becky. As I understand it, there are two types of county ad valorem taxes that might be relevant in this lawsuit: a tax on reserves in the ground pre-production, which is typically paid by the producer, and a tax on gas that has been produced and then stored in some sort of storage facility in that county (although I didn't ask, I again assume that the owner of the gas in the storage facility or the owner of the gas storage facility pays that tax). If I recall correctly, you advised me that none of the three Enron defendants named (Enron Corp., Enron Gas Marketing, Inc. and Intratex) had paid either of these two types of ad valorem taxes back as far as your records show. I am hoping that you can say that based on your records, none of these entities owned any reserves in Zapata County or stored in gas in Zapata County or owned any storage facilities in Zapata County (whatever the relevant question is) for as far back as your records go (I recall you mentioning that none of these entities stored gas in Zapata County, but I can't remember if I asked you if I also asked you to confirm that none of these entities owned any gas reserves in Zapata and I don't know how far back your records go). (Of course, if I have gotten any of this wrong or mischaracterized what you've said, please let me know). If I haven't worn out my welcome, would you be the right person to be able to sign an affidavit supporting the foregoing? I am anticipating that we will need to file an affidavit confirming these facts in the near future to support a motion to dismiss. I look forward to hearing from you. Britt
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: RSM Production v. El Paso
Q: (See attached file: clcot061802.pdf)(See attached file: ngcot061802.pdf) This message and any attachments (the "message") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified.
Propose a subject line
A: BNP Paribas Commodity Futures Commitment To Traders Report for 06/18/02
Here is an email: Pls. plan to join the Enron Corp. Board of Directors meeting scheduled for Friday, November 2, at 3:30 p.m., CST. For planning purposes, your placement on the agenda is as follows: Jeff McMahon #1 Rick Buy #2 Mark Haedicke+Others #7 It makes sense for Jeff and Rick to be there at 3:30. We will call Mark at his office a few minutes before his session and the rest of his team will join via teleconference at that time. Please call me or Kelly Johnson (36485) if you have any questions. Thanks.
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A:
Enron Board Meeting