Here is an email: Tino called today to report on their meetings with DOE last week. Tino, Dennis Langley, and their outside lawyer Jim Slattery met with Bill Richardson and DOE staff to discuss the "sole source" procurement approach to DOE's obtaining an alternative power supplier for Kirtland AFB and Sandia. Tino reports that Richardson signed off on the sole source approach, subject only to DOE review of the final contract to assure its consistency with the public interest. Tino believes that the combination of significant Native American involvement in the overall deal structure along with a power price that is lower than DOE's current PNM rates will satisfy the "public interest" standard. Slattery is set to begin discussions with DOE next week on the overall structure of Dennis' proposal. I am surprised that Dennis would go this far before hearing from us on the economics, but Tino made it sound like the initial discussions would be fairly general--i.e., to explain to DOE that the
What is a potential subject line for this email?
A: Pueblo
Q: I notified Jim Fell and Terrell Gault of the delay in getting the documents to them, and Jim actually said he had both the Business Plan and the EIS and therefore didn't need either. Hopefully the Business Plan will arrive from BPA today and I'll send it off to Terrell. Also, I'm sorry about the errors on the place cards. I was in a hurry to get them out to Sir Not-So-Speedy and overlooked those details. I hope it didn't cause too much confusion. Kate
Propose a subject line
A: Update
IN: This is to confirm a meeting for tomorrow, Tuesday, July 11 at 2:00 pm. Please reference the meeting as Systems Meeting and also note that there will be a follow up meeting. The meeting will be held in EB3321. Call Kim Hillis at x30681 if you have any questions. k

Generate a subject line.

OUT: System Meeting 7/11
IN: This is an email
Dear Body Shop Member: During the UBS/Enron transition your Body Shop membership will continue without interruption. We are working with UBS and Enron to transition payroll deductions and continue exterior door access to the Body Shop. While we are finalizing these changes please continue your Body Shop membership. Thank you,

What is the subject?

OUT: Body Shop Deductions for UBS Employees
QUESTION: Jeff: Alicia and I will get back to you with a mark-up with our thoughts on this since some of the langugae appears to be different from what is in the Revolver. Alicia thought that maybe this langugae came from Condor. My objective here is to make sure that there is some good precedent for this language and that this deal does not create a new standard. Carol
Propose a subject line for this email?
ANS: Cross Default Langugae
IN: As far as your email questions, my responses are following: 1. The list I have provided you is the only list that exists on financial counterparties. There is no Excel spreadsheet to follow. 2. Duke Energy Corporation. At Mark's direction, I am sending his note below regarding utilities. Again, until we do the due diligence on a utility counterparty we have no way of knowing what kind of local, state or federal regulation or approvals they may be subject to. We currently have masters in place with only about 10 utilities/govt's. We are in the process of negotiating another 30. Until those masters are executed and we have the relevant resolutions, authority documents and/or legal opinions, I cannot approve them for online trading. I have made every effort to search company websites and elicit from Credit whether a counterparty is a regulated utility or not. If I cannot tell by the information available to me, additional due diligence will be needed to see if they are subject to local, state, or federal regulation. Mark can override any decision I have made, I can only make decisions within the guidelines the attorneys have set for me. 3. Montana Power Trading and Marketing Company is a subsidiary of a regulated utility. I am unable to determine from Credit or their website what type of regulation they might be subject to. The note is true that Credit says they are getting out of the business anyway. 4. Petrotemex. Per my conversations with Mark and our advice from counsel, unlike U.S. and U.K. counterparties, Mexican counterparties are not able to enter into derivative transactions unless their articles and bylaws specifically provide for these types of transactions. We will not know this until the due diligence is completed, so I am supposed to say "no" for Mexican counterparties we do not have a master swap agreement in place with. 5. PSEG. It is an energy services company; however, it is also not an eligible swap participant (or "ESP"). CFTC regulation limits the derivatives trading we may do to certain types of counterparties that meet certain financial requirements (large, institutional type investors, companies, banks, etc). Corporations and partnerships have to meet certain net worth and asset levels or we cannot trade financially with them. Whenever I say "not ESP" or "not eligible swap participant" it means they have not met the financial net worth test. 6. The American Coal Company. See prior note.

Generate a subject line.

OUT:
Online Derivatives Trading with Regulated Utilities