Message-ID: <1371349.1075842567008.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 01:26:00 -0800 (PST)
From: drew.fossum@enron.com
To: susan.scott@enron.com
Subject: Re: Mavrix
Cc: bob.chandler@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: bob.chandler@enron.com
X-From: Drew Fossum
X-To: Susan Scott
X-cc: Bob Chandler
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Drew_Fossum_Dec2000_June2001_2\Notes Folders\'sent mail
X-Origin: FOSSUM-D
X-FileName: dfossum.nsf

Thanks Susan, that makes sense.  df




Susan Scott
02/02/2001 09:20 AM
To: Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Re: Mavrix
  

...So it would not have to be disclosed in our Form 2.  This was at Rod 
Hayslett's request (via Tracy Geaccone.)


   
	
	
	From:  Bob Chandler                           02/01/2001 06:08 PM
	

To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Mavrix


Don't know why I didn't think to look in Secretariat:

http://home.enron.com:84/secretariat/CDS12547.htm


It's currently a sub of Transwestern Pipeline Company.   Is this the best 
positioning for legal/regulatory purposes?  I liked your idea, Drew, of 
having it be a sub of Enron Pipeline Company.

If it's a sub of TW, it'll get disclosed in the TW Form 2.  I don't know 
whether that's a concern for you.




