|
|
Enron Mail |
_______________________________________________________________
This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you. _______________________________________________________________ David: Here are comments on the draft you sent yesterday. Good job as always. (1) Page 1-should have new date; (2) Sect. 1.17-change spelling of "interruptible" before parking and loaning; (3) Sect. 2.2-Note the sentence toward the bottom of p. 4 indicating that neither MEH nor Peoples is liable ... in performing its duties, absent willful misconduct or gross negligence." Does this (or something similar) sufficiently protect MEH from liability so as to permit adjustment of 2.9 (ii) to delete the commercial reasonableness qualification for MEH's responsibilities? From a regulatory perspective, I would like to avoid qualifying the obligation to follow the GTC, if we can address the liability concern in another way. (4) Sect. 2.10. There should be something before "(ii)", maybe "and"; Sect. 2.4. There is a sentence missing between before the new sentence which Peoples was in Peoples' draft and is important to include: "Peoples may only revise information regarding firm Hub Capacity that is provided to MEH pursuant to Section 2.4(a) if MEH consents to such revision." This should be the second sentence of the text following the listed items (before the strikoeover which starts "Peoples shall inform...").
|