|
|
Enron Mail |
As you are aware, with the Alberta power markets opening up on January 1,
2001, Enron Canada has significantly increased the number of financial power transactions into which it has been entering. The Calgary operations group has set up our power confirm desk. In circulating the financial confirms internally for approval over the last month or so, we have been receiving comments back on the form (which was based on the ENA form, I believe) and Melinda and I have recently sat down and settled on the form of the financial power confirm that incorporates these internal comments. As you can well imagine, ECC needs to settle on a form as a precedent on a go-forward basis and I think we have done that now. However, before we implement the precedent and begin to use it for all financial power deals, there has been some concern voiced that this form of confirm is slightly different than the form used by ENA and that, depending on which entity confirmed a transaction, the paper would look slightly different. This concern is exacerbated by the fact that we have the intercompany services agreement between ENA and ECC that allows for either entity to enter into financial transactions under the other's paper. Therefore, we could have ENA generating a confirm between a counterparty and ECC and the paper would look slightly different from that used if ECC had generated the same confirm (and vice versa with ENA deals). My first thought is that, on the physical side, ECC's confirms look different than ENA's and so a counterparty dealing with both would face the same issue and we have never really considered that a problem. However, before we implement our precedent form, I wanted to see if either of you objected to us doing so. If you would like to see the forms we are proposing to use, please let me know and I would be happy to send them to you. Thanks Greg
|