Enron Mail

From:luiz.maurer@enron.com
To:joe.kishkill@enron.com
Subject:Re: MAE/COEX - ANEEL Resolutions
Cc:richard.shapiro@enron.com
Bcc:richard.shapiro@enron.com
Date:Wed, 25 Apr 2001 09:43:00 -0700 (PDT)

Joe

We have had several conference calls since last Saturday. Perhaps you should
talk to Orlando and join us from now on. This subject is in state of flux.

As you know, those measures triggered a hostile reaction from D/Cs and from
Gs.

Aneel (Jose Mario and Jose Alves) called me on Saturday asking for help. We
discussed this subject internally over the weekend.

On Monday, Joao defended ANEEL in the COEX meeting. However, we were the only
ones. Other players were very angry. They perceived the action as pure
intervention (despite necessary and timely for most). ANEEL was informed
about the COEX reaction and thanked us for our position.

We examined the Resolutions in great detail. Unfortunately, it seems that
ANEEL went far beyond its institutional responsibilities. The substance is
OK. The format is legally weak.

Our strategy (we will try to sell to Abradee, CBIIE, COEX and ABRACEEL) is to
remove the spotlight from the legal arguments and propose to our industry
peers to focus on the design of a new Market agreement (to create a sense of
buy-in). We know that the changes will be only cosmetic. The basic principles
of the resolution should be maintained.

As per Enron's suggestion, I spoke to ANEEL again (Jose Mario and Jose Alves)
showing them how difficult the situation is. In our view, thard he only way
to validate the measures is to write a new agreement (Fred and Debora are
working on that). I was open in saying that the Resolution are weak from a
legal standpoint. They agreed with us. Publicly they say otherwise. They said
they are willing to negotiate. We also expressed our view to ANEEL that part
of the reaction is parochial: some COEX members will lose their jobs. ANEEL
agrees. That is why they are inviting all CEOs and Chairmen of the Board to a
meeting tomorrow, where ANEEL will explain what is happening and ask for
support from top management.

Why has ANEEL approached us? Perhaps two reasons: 1) They know we defend
markets 2) We wrote Informativo Regulat?rio # 3, attached (which basically
purports the replacement of COEX by a professional Board - I discussed those
issues with Rick Shapiro before the IR was issued to understand Enron's view
on power pool governance)

Your comments/involvement would be very important. It is a pretty delicate
and messy situation.

My personal view.

1) This was a necessary evil. MAE would not function otherwise. Our merchant
plants would be in jeopardy.
2) I would dare to say that this is a "window of opportunity" to get MAE
working (and therefore our long term strategy)
3) However, the way ANEEL did was disastrous. They should have acted long
before. (imposing gradual penalties). Now they suddenly "fired" 26 CEOs of
the largest utilities in Brazil
4) We should support ANEEL. However, it has to be in a very diplomatic way.
Orlando will take care of Abradee. Joao - COEX. S,rgio CBIEE. We have to walk
over a fine line. If we push to hard, they will reject Enron (together with
ANEEL's Resolution)
5) We should be the champions in drafting a new Market Agreement




LM













Joe Kishkill
04/25/2001 01:07 PM
To: Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron, Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron,
Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Jose
Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Re: MAE/COEX - ANEEL Resolutions

when are we talking?



Luiz Maurer
04/24/2001 09:42 AM
To: Joao Carlos Albuquerque/SA/Enron@Enron
cc: Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio
Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Jose
Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Re: MAE/COEX - ANEEL Resolutions

Perfect

LM



Joao Carlos Albuquerque
04/24/2001 09:30 AM
To: Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Sergio
Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron, Fred
Sampaio/SA/Enron@Enron, Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron

Subject: MAE/COEX - ANEEL Resolutions

At the COEX meeting yesterday, it was clear from the lawyers presentation
that there are grounds to legally challenge ANEEL's resolutions. Some
romantic guys were kind of going in that direction.
My position was to take the subject to a Market Assembly for the
shareholders to deliberate.
Also everybody knows, and some acknowledged, that MAE governance was not
working. Our line of action at the Assembly would be to support the general
direction of the measures, and at the same time, preserve MAE autonomy,
opening a negotiable line with ANEEL.
The main point of discussion will be if we should discuss without going to
court or after challenging ANEEL in court.
The Assembly was called for next Thursday, April 26th.
Fred is going to talk to Luiz Maurer for us to have a deep exam of the
resolutions and see what points we can propose to ANEEL to improve. Also, in
that negotiable line, we should discuss/propose some names to the new COEX.
We need to discuss this subject tomorrow.

Jo?o Carlos