On the first point the reference to a "municipal plant" did not disclose 
whether it was a legal body corporate. That fine if the check has been made.

As far as the US$6m  min asset level is concerned it does not specifically 
relate to Australia counterparties (ie those  incorporated in Australia). It 
relates to companies with whom we trade Australian power irrespective of 
place of incorporation. Under our power trading licence requirements we are 
required to take reasonable steps to satisfy ourselves that we are dealing 
with non-retail type investors. There is a check list in the licence of 
requirements , the most relevant for companies not trading in Australia is 
the AUD10m (US$6m) in "tangible assets".

Tana thank you for your offer. You are really doing an excellent job pulling 
together a huge amount of information in such an effective. I am loath to do 
anything that would make your job any more difficult. I think we can assume 
that a party which has sufficient assets to trade US power can also trade 
Australian power. As far as Australian incorporated companies are concerned 
we will be checking their suitability Australian power hopefully at the time 
we receive the password application. If not I will pick it up when I check 
your list.      

               


From: Tana Jones@ECT on 17-08-2000 09:10 CDT
To: David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:  

Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00  

Each legal trading group here in Houston checks on a relevant counterparty's 
ability to trade its products.  So far the only physical trading area where a 
governmental counterparty appears to have problems is the power trading group 
where there are licensing requirements that may or may not have been obtained 
to trade power.  For financial trading we do have to inquire into the 
relevant governmental entities' authority to enter into derivative 
transactions.  In order to do that we look at statutory authority, any 
relevant local regulations, investment policities, etc., in addition to 
obtaining legal opinions on the subject, and with some counterparties hiring 
outside counsel to advise us.  For most governmental entities if we do not 
have an ISDA Master in place and have already done such due diligence, I will 
not be approving them to trade financial products.

As far as the financial test, for the US based counterparty list, I check 
with Credit on every counterparty to determine whether they meet the US 
eligible swap participant standards.  As I'm sure you know, for most plain 
vanilla corporates and partnerships this means having total assets of $10mm 
or a net worth of $1mm.  Pretty much, if I am turning down a counterparty to 
trade financial it will be because they do not meet the ESP test or they are 
a governmental or quasi-governmental entity.

If what you are telling me is that the Australian counterparties have to meet 
a $6mm asset test to trade any products, then I will add this to my daily 
inquiry to Credit and turn down Australian counterparties if they do not meet 
this test.  At your direction I will handle this in this manner.  How would 
you like me to proceed?
 



	David Minns@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	08/16/2000 07:58 PM
		
		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00

Is this an incorporated entity? I assume its authority to trade a range of 
products has been checked out? In Australia this assumption can not be made 
for government  entities

Under our licencing requirements we need to make reasonable enquiries that a 
counterparty has (or is guaranted by someone who has) atleast USD6 million in 
assets. Can this assumption be made?         


From: Tana Jones@ECT on 16-08-2000 08:39 CDT
To: David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:  

Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00  

Tauton is ok for all products, except for financial products (it can do 
power).  David, when I talk about this I am never including credit 
derivatives unless Credit specifically tells us in their spreadsheet that 
this is a credit derivatives counterparty.



	David Minns@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	08/15/2000 05:32 PM
		
		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00

Tana what can the Taunton Municipal Light Plant trade? Is it the same as 
Huntsville? 


From: Tana Jones@ECT on 15-08-2000 01:35 CDT
To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy E 
Dickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, David 
Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Marie Heard/Enron 
Communications@Enron Communications, Robbi Rossi/Enron Communications@Enron 
Communications
cc:  

Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00


----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 08/15/2000 01:35 PM -----

	Bradley Diebner
	08/14/2000 05:27 PM
		 
		 To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana 
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark 
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli 
Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia 
Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe Global 
Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie 
Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey 
Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, 
Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/14/00

The EOL approvals for 08/14/00 are attached below.




Regards,
bd