|
|
Enron Mail |
I need a Heather deal to work on.
Good luck in Conn! Kay ---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 05/29/2001 09:36 AM --------------------------- From: David Fairley/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/29/2001 09:18 AM To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Reagan Rorschach/ENRON@enronXgate, Heather Kroll/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom May/ENRON@enronXgate, Kayne Coulter/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: RE: ILA/ESMA conflicts Kay -- We should check each on a case by case basis. We probably would be better off using any definition from the ILA since it was already found to be acceptable by MDEA unless there is simply a better definition in the ESMA or some inherent conflict or gap relative to the scope of the overall agreement. For any that are not obvious to you, please do not hesitate to continue shooting questions at us for clarification. Should we look at Ancillary Services? Thanks -- David -----Original Message----- From: Mann, Kay Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 8:25 AM To: Rorschach, Reagan; Fairley, David; Kroll, Heather; May, Tom; Coulter, Kayne Subject: ILA/ESMA conflicts What is your preference when there is a conflict between the interim agreement and the last draft (v23) of the ESMA. (For instance, the definition of ancillary services.) Shall I just ignore the ILA, or does it represent the customers' expectations? Kay
|