|
|
Enron Mail |
It's ok to use Blakes given the conflicts. On the structure, I will forward
this message to Steven Douglas and ask for his advice. Mark Peter Keohane 10/16/2000 01:01 PM To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT, David Pope/CAL/ECT@ECT, Kate Chaney/CAL/ECT@ECT, Mark Powell/CAL/ECT@ECT, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Sharon Crawford/CAL/ECT@ECT Subject: Retail Initiative Mark I am following up with you regarding legal support for this matter. Mark P. is dedicated to this project and getting up the learning curve by focusing his time on understanding the regulatory/statutory/licensing requirements for a retail affiliate for Alberta electricity. We hope to have a recommendation shortly on an action plan for the regulatory compliance requirements, a recommendation on contracting forms (separate commercial and residential consumer forms) and to begin drafting forms. However, as discussed, outside counsel legal support will be required (i) to set up/register the retail entity to do business (subject to confirmation of the outstanding structuring issue, on which I await an answer); (ii) confirm all regulatory/statutory/licensing requirements for a retail affiliate; (iii) review and advise on contracting forms; and (iv) take an advocacy position for us at upcoming regulatory hearings. In this regard we had agreed to talk to Stikeman Elliott about representation. It turns out the Stikemans has an unresolveable conflict, as it acts for Enmax, the City of Calgary's retail affiliate and a direct competitor. From asking around, it also seems that any of the firms which have/may have experience in the developing retail market, have acquired that experience for a client that would put them in direct conflict as well (ex. Bennet Jones - Atco/Canadian Utilities; Macleod Dixon and McCarthy Tetrault - TransAlta; Burnet Duckworth - City of Calgary/Enmax/City of Medicine Hat; Borden Ladner Gervais - EPCOR), many of whom we have no experience in dealing with in any event. It seems to me that the available alternatives are Blake Cassels & Graydon and Osler Hoskin & Harcourt, neither of whom to my specific knowledge have specific expertise in this area. However, as noted, those with any actual (or purported) expertise tend for that reason to be conflicted. Accordingly, my suggestion is that I speak to Blakes to see what expertise they have, but likely nonetheless retain them (assuming there is no conflict) on the basis of their general capabilities and their understanding and commitment to Enron. At the end of the day, even if there is a learning curve, it is seemingly learnable and inevitable. Please let me know if you have a problem, as we need to move quickly to get on with the project. To confirm, you were going to let me know how we should proceed with structuring the affiliate (liability vs. tax efficiency), which may be affected by how and if EES participates. Once the ball is rolling on the Alberta electricity front, we will re-focus on gas and other jurisdictions, such as Ontario. Regards, Peter.
|