![]() |
Enron Mail |
Sorry, I left you off the original list.
Thanks, Wanda ---------------------- Forwarded by Wanda Curry/HOU/ECT on 03/09/2000 06:23= =20 PM --------------------------- Wanda Curry 03/09/2000 06:22 PM To: Michael E Moscoso/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wes Colwell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barry=20 Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT cc: =20 Subject: Prudency Please see the attached draft prudency policy and prudency schedule. Barry= ,=20 I need your comments ASAP. I am in meetings until around 11:00 tomorrow. = =20 I don't think we can argue that we no longer need prudency without it being= a=20 change in accounting policy. This years Annual Report FN-3 stills contains= =20 the following statement: The values are adjusted to reflect the potential impact of liquidating=20 Enron=01,s position in=20 an orderly manner over a reasonable period of time under present market= =20 conditions. =20 I think the best we can argue is 1)that the liquidity in some commodities= =20 (gas for U.S. and maybe power for U.K.) has increased to a level that=20 prudency is no longer required and 2)setting a minimum level of VAR before= =20 prudency is required are not a wholesale change in our accounting policy. = =20 I have not attempted to address establishing an operational reserve. I thi= nk=20 the two are separate, but no reason why we can't create one this quarter. Wes, I need to get with you to determine what ENA would like to do. The=20 earnings situation may be different than expected. ENA has taken a large= =20 amount out of prudency (see the attached schedule). We can probably argue= =20 for that release to be reduced, pending complete research on power liquidit= y=20 and implementation of the new RAC calculation. I obviously will not hold a= ny=20 discussions with AA. =20 Let me know what the next steps are. I will be waiting to hear from you bo= th. Wanda
|