Re: SMC FP&L Confirm

Dan -- It sounds okay, but I would expect them to question the need for this
provision. Of course, the first reason is that the deal needs to get done.
The second is the reg-out that FP&L wants. Is it a fair representation that
our language is the same as FP&L's? I know the language is not identical,
but I want to say our language is a very short version of what FP&L has
drafted. Is this okay?

Also, the traders want to be sure that the $0.50/MMBtu LD's are also
incorporated. You may have heard this request already, so disregard mine if
duplicate?

Thanks -- David

Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

From: Dan J Hyvl 08/18/99 09:50 AM

To: David L Fairley/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: SMC FP&L Confirm

David,
Please review Item 4. of the Other provision and give me your thoughts.

Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

From: David L Fairley 08/18/99 08:32 AM

To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: SMC FP&L Confirm