|
|
Enron Mail |
Here is an update from Jeff Keeler on the status of our proposed chnages to
the derivatives section of the bankruptcy code amendments. Carol ---------------------- Forwarded by Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT on 02/02/2000 01:18 PM --------------------------- Enron North America Corp. From: Jeffrey Keeler @ ENRON 02/02/2000 12:07 PM To: Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: elevinso@cwt.com Subject: Re: Bankruptcy Legislation Good to hear from you, Carol. All's pretty well here in DC with the family...actually the family will be expanding...we're expecting another baby in early August. I'm glad you got in touch...I had an update to do for you anyway based on recent events. The Senate is moving forward with their bankruptcy legislation, and it will likely pass today or tomorrow. The Senate bill will include our technical correction on production payments, but will not include any DOI language (which is good) or our derivatives changes (which is not the best result, but OK). Based on conversations on Capitol Hill and with industry folks, the best place to do our amendments would be in the conference committee that will reconcile the differing House and Senate versions of the bill. According to most sources, the House folks have a much better handle on the financial contracts/derivatives issues and they will take the lead in making some technical changes to that title in conference. The Senate provisions on financial contracts are considered more of a "placeholder." I met yesterday with counsel to the House Judiciary Committee and she was fairly receptive to our ideas. Again...and we've found this all along...they want the President's Working Group sign off, as well as the OK of other key industry groups (ISDA, Bond Market Association) before they accept anything as a "non-controversial" technical fix. The Bond Market folks have already presented a package of non-controversial technical corrections for inclusion in conference, and I think they would be amendable to adding our changes to their package. Because we need to get PWG sign-off, we're in the position of probably being successful on adding "weather derivatives" to the definition of swap agreement, and on our changes to the netting provisions...but we're still left hanging on our suggested change to the word "regularly." I've talked to Ellen about possible other ways of tackling the "regularly" problem, but there does not seem to be a way to cover a "one off" transaction unless without getting rid of the "regularly" requirement. I'll continue to see if there are other suggested approaches. In meeting earlier this year at Treasury with Mark Haedicke, Assistant Secretary Lee Sachs indicated they would be amendable to talking about other ways of solving the "regularly" problem, so the lines of communciation are open. We just need to decide quickly whether to give up on this issue, or come up with a palatable solution. On another topic, I met with staff of the House Banking Committee, who have been waiting to see the fate of the bankruptcy bill before moving legislation that amends the banking statutes on netting and other derivatives issues, but also includes bankruptcy language. I wanted to make sure that they are aware of our suggested amendments, so that any efforts out there....bankruptcy legislation, banking legislation....are consistent. Perhaps a conference call with you, me and Ellen (and Lech) is in order to figure out where we go next. How does Friday (the 4th) work for everyone? Carol St Clair@ECT 02/02/2000 10:32 AM To: Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Bankruptcy Legislation Jeff: How are you doing? Hope things are going well with you and your family. Can you e-mail me with an update of where things stand on the legislative front, particularly with respect to the derivatives legislation that we were lobbying for? Our traders want very much to be able to use Master Netting Agreements with certain of their counterparties and we are currently exploring the possibility of accommodating them, subject to the bankruptcy concerns that we may have. I look forward to hearing from you. Carol
|