Re: JM - Trailblazer

More broadly speaking, we need to insure that the assignment of capacity
leaves the pipeline no recourse back to Enron for everything outside of the
contract year. If this is not the case, we should revisit the credit
reserve. If this is the case then we need to rebook the transactions to
reflect this.

Bill

From: Russell Diamond
09/25/2000 01:50 PM

To: Mark Whitt/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul T Lucci/NA/Enron@Enron, Gerald
Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Hilgert/HOU/ECT@ect
cc: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: JM - Trailblazer

To All:

After speaking to Bill, we are giving approval to this second transaction
between JM Huber and ENA with the condition that the assignment of transport
capacity is taken on by JM for BOTH transactions as previously discussed, and
I initial this contract which clearly states this assignment of capacity. It
was our assumption, in Credit, that this initial transaction with JM was to
include the assignment of capacity, which lead to a re-evaluation of the
credit reserve. It is imperative now, that once the contract and
transactions are executed, they be re-confirmed in TAGG to more accurately
reflect the exposure of JM

Russell