---------------------- Forwarded by Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT on 05/08/2000
11:26 AM ---------------------------

Jamie Lynn@ENRON
05/03/2000 03:53 PM
To: Mark Warner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Toby Kuehl/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sean
Sargent/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Teresa Wright/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin M
Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Micardo Johns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Greg
Piper/Corp/Enron@Enron, Allan Weatherford/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Brad
Morse/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rafael Rizo-Patron/LON/ECT@ECT, Gary W
Lamphier/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Perron Rogers/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Ryan Smith/AA/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Archie N
Eubanks/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Fred
Rhodes/AA/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris Barnes/Enron@Gateway, Eric
Benson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Charles Caine/ECF/Enron@ENRON, Mike
Croucher/HOU/ECT@ECT, Clarence Davis/ECF/Enron@ENRON, John
Garrett/Corp/Enron@Enron, Willie Haggerty/ECF/Enron@ENRON, Eric J
Hardy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dwight James/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Kuykendall/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Richard A Lammers/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, John
Meeks/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Richard Orellana/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John
Meeks/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Fimber Phillip/ECF/Enron@ENRON, Ruben
Salinas/ECF/Enron@ENRON, John Shupak/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Spring Basketball Tournament

---------------------- Forwarded by Jamie Lynn/ET&S/Enron on 05/03/2000 03:33
PM ---------------------------

Jamie Lynn
05/03/2000 02:06 PM
To: Oliver Brown/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Martin
Rosetta/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Pam
Newsome/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ryan
Woods/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mike
Layne/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Fred
Salinas/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sean
Long/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Kevin
Ruffcorn/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Keith
Sparks/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Aaron
Mackey/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Braedi Craig/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Jennifer McClain/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, John Garrett/Corp/Enron@Enron, Darrell
Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Pamela
Carter/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Brandon
Whittaker/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Chris Williams/Enron@Gateway,
Johnny Mitchell/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mike Bryant/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Rick
Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bjorn Hagelmann/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Patrick
Hickey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Samantha T Davidson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tangie Dykes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tara E
Turk/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Pratorius/HOU/EES@EES, Brad
Peden/HOU/EES@EES, David Blankenship/Corp/Enron@Enron, Milton
Brown/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ken Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rory
Juneman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fred
Bridgewater/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sandy
Roberts/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Derek Anderson/HOU/ECT@ECT, David
O'Dell/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:  (bcc: Jamie Lynn/ET&S/Enron)

Subject: Spring Basketball Tournament

ENRON IS HAVING A BASKETBALL TOURNAMENT ON A MAY 13TH AND YOU ARE INVITED TO
PARTICIPATE!

On Saturday, May 13th, beginning at 9:00 a.m., The Enron Basketball
Association will be sponsoring our Spring 2000 Basketball Tournament for all
E.B.A. members. We are planning to limit the size of this tournament to the
first eight teams that reply.  While we encourage you to form your own teams,
please let us know if you do not have enough players and we will make sure
that you are placed on a team.  We will be having a captain's meeting on
Tuesday, May 9th, to discuss the rules, prizes, and other details related to
the tournament preparation.  Please have a representative from your team come
to this meeting prepared with rosters, a team name, and shirt sizes.  Lunch
will be provided.

If you are interested in placing a team in the tournament, or enter as an
individual, please contact one of the following by Monday, May 8th.

                  Jamie Lynn        ext. 3-9515
              Rick Dietz           ext. 3-5691
                             Steve Kleb          ext. 3-3959

If you have any questions, please give any of us a call.


print
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:15 AM -----

	John Ambler@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	10/13/2000 04:39 PM

		 To: Jimmy Mogal/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
		 cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer@ENRON, Johan
Zaayman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
		 Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement

Jimmy,

I'll be working up a limited statement and Q&As, which we will need to run by
Jeff Sherrick and Mark Metts.  Once we have an approved statement I'll let
you know.  Of course, we would prefer to avoid publicity if possible.  Until
we have an approved statement, please call me to discuss if you have pressing
demands.

Thanks,

John
---------------------- Forwarded by John Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on
10/13/2000 04:26 PM ---------------------------

Jeffrey Sherrick@ENRON
10/13/2000 03:04 PM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John
Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jimmy
Mogal/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Larry Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike
Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sanjay
Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT

Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement

On Friday (last night Houston time) we announced Enron's decision to sell
Enron Oil & Gas India Ltd. (EOGIL), our subsidary that owns a 30% interest in
the Panna, Mukta and Tapti concession areas.    We now have bankers involved
and a data room is being prepared in Houston which  made it extremely
difficult to keep the deal quiet any longer.  There were a rumors circulating
through the office, but the reality of the announcement was still a shock to
most of the employees in India and Houston.  Attached is a memo we handed out
to employees, but basically we said the following:
 1) Selling assets or companies is a routine part of Enron's strategy to
redeploy capital in the higher return opportunities.  The company has
exposure to a number of tremendous opportunities today that were not
envisioned even twelve months ago.  In line with this strategy, we are
placing EOGIL in the market.
 2) Depending on the success of finding an acceptable buyer for EOGIL,  we
will be reviewing the balance of our portfolio for transfer to other Enron
entities or for sale as separate packages.  We anticipate closing the EOGIL
transaction and rationalizing the remaining portfolio by March 31, 2001.
 3) Pending the success outlined in item #2, we will eliminate Enron Global
E&P as an Enron business unit on March 31, 2001.
 4) We announced some interim staff changes to facilitate the process.
  a) Jeff Sherrick would re-focus his time largely on the sale process
  b) Mike Stewart will be responsible for all India activity except the sale
process
  c) Steve Harper will be responsible for EGEP's sale activity and
coordination with our bankers and Corporate Development
 5) Commented on the potential impact to employees in general terms.  We told
them it was pre-mature to outline all of the possibilities until we signed a
PSA with a buyer.  However, in general, there is a good likelihood that many
people will either have opportunities for future employment with the buyers
or through redeployment within Enron.  Those people that do not remain with
the assets or are not redeployed in Enron will be involuntarily terminated
March 31, 2001 unless they are needed to close a transaction or to provide
transition services to a buyer.

I would like to keep this as low-keyed as possible.  Last year when we were
for sale there were not a lot of comments, but you never know.  If anyone in
the media picks up on this I would expect it to happen early next week.  Mike
Stewart is currently in India in the Mumbai office (01191228395841) and can
be reached at the Mariott after-hours(01191228577878).  He is fully briefed
on our position regarding the activities within EGEP and EOGIL.  Mike will be
traveling offshore and to Baroda over the weekend and on Monday.  I will be
available all weekend and next week at the following numbers; (work)
713-853-5934, (home) 281-320-2198, (cell) 713-569-4713.  I would suggest
talking with Mike or I before making any comments to the media if possible.

This afternoon I notified our partners and thr Gov't of India of our
intention to market our assets.  I will be making a trip to India soon to
visit with the appropriate people in these organizations within the next two
weeks.  While I wouldn't expect this to happen, please refer any inquiries
from our partners (ONGC and Reliance) or the GOI to Mike or me.  As you might
expect, we want to be careful and consistent in our message to these
groups.

I will keep you informed regarding any changes to the above.  If you have any
questions, contact me at the above numbers.

jeff


Sara,
I have spoken to Kim Theriot and she has said that that you are the person
who needs to sign off on the Master ISDA agreement which TD wish to use.
Could you let me me know if this is ok,  I need to get back to TD today. Kim
has confirmed that the ISDA has been fully executed.
Also could tell me which ISDA,  ENA have in place with Morgan Stanley Capital
Group Inc. Kim says its was executed on 2nd March '99 but I don't know if it
is the same ISDA as  the one TD want to use.

Regards

Treasa


sounds great

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	8888915473@archwireless.net@ENRON
Sent:	Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:42 PM
To:	bmckay@enron.com
Subject:	Wireless Message

do u have your hears on went thru the corvet museum very interesting dad


Ricki, no problem.  Let's also book 4194 for the day and I will talk to
the three people that have meetings in 4194 to let them know they
could use my office.   Are you OK with that?  Thanks. Lynn

From:	Ricki Winters/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/06/2001 09:17 AM
To:	Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna Scott/FGT/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject:	FW: PRC Meeting

Lynn & Donna, I will not release the Gas Control Conference room until Monday morning, just in case someone up there bumps us.

Thank you,
Ricki

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Winters, Ricki
Sent:	Tuesday, June 05, 2001 3:05 PM
To:	Taylor, Gina; Blair, Lynn; Bryant, Mike; Corman, Shelley; Dietz, Rick; Holmes, Brad; January, Steven; Nacey, Sheila; Scott, Donna; Winters, Ricki
Cc:	Brown, Sharon; Garcia, Ava; Carrillo, Alma; Russi, Estalee
Subject:	PRC Meeting
Importance:	High

Please make note that the PRC Smoothing Process scheduled for Monday June 11th will start at 7:30 AM and conclude at 4:30 PM in EB42C1 (Gas Control Conference Room).  Also, I wanted to let you know that Shelley will be leaving briefly to attend Stan's staff meeting.

Thank you,
Ricki


thirsty?
cold beers with hot  dogs & probably some venison at Edy's Ice House this  evening

Chris Broussard
Project Manager
D.E. Harvey Builders
713-783-8710


I will be out of the office on Friday Dec 8 and Monday Dec 11.  I will return
on Tuesday Dec 12.  If you need assistance during my absence,  please call X
35000 or Mark Thorne at X36347.


John,

He is currently a student at Carnegie Mellon, one-year computational finance
program. I got his resume recruiting in  the campus. I would recommend him as
a potential hire (my group or trading).

Vince

John J Lavorato@ENRON
12/10/2000 11:40 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: A resume - Canadian trader

Vince where did this resume come from and is he still employed by the
National Bank in Monteal.


Joe,

I shall probably ask Tanya to attend. It coincides with Parents'
Weekend at Stanford. Please, send me the slides anyway.

I shall help Tanya to prepare her presentation.

Vince

From: Joseph Hrgovcic/ENRON@enronXgate on 02/12/2001 09:47 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FW: Invitation to 2001 Energy Finance Conference - The University of
Texas at Austin

Vince,

 I understand you'll be speaking at the CEFER conference. Gary Taylor, the
head of marketing in the Weather Deriv. group, would like to know if you plan
on mentioning weather derivatives at all and that if you do, he has numerous
existing slides and presentations that might be useful to you.

Joe

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Angela Dorsey  [mailto:Angela.Dorsey@bus.utexas.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 9:06 PM
To: Angela Dorsey
Cc: Ehud Ronn ; Sheridan Titman (E-mail)
Subject: Invitation to 2001 Energy Finance Conference - The University of
Texas at Austin

Colleagues and Friends of the Center for Energy Finance Education and
Research (CEFER):

Happy New Year! Hope you all had a wonderful holiday season.

On behalf of the University of Texas Finance Department and CEFER, we
would
like to cordially invite you to attend our:

2001 Energy Finance Conference
Austin, Texas
February 22 - 23, 2001
Hosted by the University of Texas Finance Department
Center for Energy Finance Education and Research

Dr. Ehud I. Ronn and Dr. Sheridan Titman are currently in the process of
finalizing the details of the conference agenda.  We have listed the
agenda
outline below to assist you in your travel planning.  Each conference
session will be composed of a panel discussion between 3 - 4 guest
speakers
on the designated topic.

As supporters of the Center for Energy Finance Education and Research,
representatives of our trustee corporations (Enron, El Paso, Reliant,
Conoco, and Southern) will have the $500 conference fee waived.
The conference package includes Thursday evening's cocktails &
dinner and hotel/UT shuttle service, as well as Friday's conference
meals,
session materials and shuttle service.  Travel to Austin and hotel
reservations are each participant's responsibility.

A limited number of hotel rooms are being tentatively held at the
Radisson
Hotel on Town Lake under the group name "University of Texas Finance
Department" for the nights of Thursday, 2/22/01 and Friday, 2/23/01 (the
latter evening for those who choose to stay in Austin after the
Conference's conclusion).  To guarantee room reservations, you will need
to
contact the Radisson Hotel at (512) 478-9611 no later than Monday,
January
22nd, and make your reservations with a credit card.  Please let me know
when you have made those arrangements so that I can make sure the
Radisson
gives you the special room rate of $129/night.

Please RSVP your interest in attending this conference NO LATER THAN
JANUARY 22nd to angela.dorsey@bus.utexas.edu, or (512) 232-7386, as
seating
availability is limited.  Please feel free to extend this invitation to
your colleagues who might be interested in attending this Conference.

Center for Energy Finance Education and Research
PROGRAM OF THE 2001 ENERGY FINANCE CONFERENCE
February 22 - 23, 2001

Thursday, Feb 22:

3:00 p.m. Reserved rooms at the Radisson Hotel available for
check-in
5:30 p.m. Bus will pick up guests at the Radisson for transport to
UT Club*
6:00 p.m. Cocktails, UT Club 9th Floor
7:00 p.m. Dinner, UT Club
8:00 p.m. Keynote Speaker
9:00 p.m. Bus will transport guests back to hotel

Friday, Feb 23:

7:45 a.m. Bus will pick up at the Radisson for transport to UT

8:30 a.m. Session 1 - REAL OPTIONS
  Panelists:  Jim Dyer, UT (Chair)
    Sheridan Titman, UT
    John McCormack, Stern Stewart & Co.

10:00 a.m. Coffee Break

10:15 a.m. Session 2 - DEREGULATION
  Panelists:  David Eaton, UT (Chair)
    David Spence, UT
    Jeff Sandefer, Sandefer Capital
Partners/UT
    Peter Nance, Teknecon Energy Risk
Advisors

11:45 a.m. Catered Lunch & Keynote Speaker

1:30 p.m. Guest Tour - EDS Financial Trading & Technology Center

2:00 p.m. Session 3 - RISK MANAGEMENT
  Panelists:  Keith Brown, UT (Chair)
    Vince Kaminski, Enron
    Alexander Eydeland, Southern Co.
    Ehud I. Ronn, UT

3:30 p.m. Snack Break

3:45 p.m. Session 4 - GLOBALIZATION OF THE ENERGY BUSINESS
  Panelists:  Laura Starks, UT (Chair)
    Bob Goldman, Conoco
    Ray Hill, Southern Co.

5:15 p.m. Wrap-Up

5:30 p.m. Bus picks up for transport to airport/dinner

6:30 p.m. Working dinner for senior officers of Energy Finance
Center
Trustees

*We have made arrangements to provide shuttle service between the
Radisson
hotel and UT during the conference. However, if you choose to stay at an
alternative hotel, then transportation to conference events
will become your responsibility.

**************
Angela Dorsey
Assistant Director
Center for Energy Finance Education & Research
The University of Texas at Austin
Department of Finance, CBA 6.222
Austin, TX 78712
angela.dorsey@bus.utexas.edu
**************


I wanted to give you an update as to the status of the NSM Cases:

1)  Farallon:  There is a signed settlement agreement in place.  (I have the
plaintiffs' signature pages and am gathering the other defendants' and will
forward you a fully-executed copy when I've got it.)  However, the case has
not been dismissed yet because of two small issues, neither of which involves
Enron/ECT Securities directly.  First, plaintiffs had wanted two signatures from each defendant on the
Settlement Agreement.  (The California corporations code provides that a
corporation cannot claim lack of authority by signers of a document if both
the president or a vice president and the secretary, CFO or treasurer sign.) I've convinced them to accept one signature from ECT Securities because it is
a limited partnership, so the code provision does not apply.  However, the
plaintiffs are insisting that Natwest, several of whose entities are
corporations, provide two signatures instead of only one.  I suspect the issue
will be worked out this week - there is a hearing scheduled for Friday (7/20)
at which the case is expected to be dismissed.

Second, several of the defendants (but not ECT Securities) have cross-claims
against John Schultes that were not released in the settlement with
plaintiffs.  In negotiating to settle those claims, Schultes indicated that he
wanted to be released from liability by all defendants, including ECT
Securities.  However, we have made clear to the other parties that ECT
Securities (and its affiliates) will not release any claims it may have
against Schultes (e.g., for indemnification and/or contribution with respect
to our settlement amount and attorneys fees) without being released from all
liability to Schultes relating to NSM - including the action he filed in Ohio
state court, in which he sued Enron.  The other defendants may settle with
Schultes and simply leave ECT out of it, in which case the entire Farallon
case could be dismissed, leaving Enron/ECT to deal with Schultes on our own. (ECT has the right to bring any indemnification or contribution claims in a
separate action, so dismissal of the case would not affect its rights.)  I'll
keep you updated on this - we should know more by the hearing on Friday
morning.

2)  Legg Mason.  We have a fully-executed settlement agreement.  (I'll send
you a copy later today.)  Plaintiffs expect to dismiss the case later this
week - perhaps at the hearing on Friday in Farallon.  I'll keep you updated.

3)  Agreement among defendants.  All defendants have signed the agreement and
releases.  I will have all signature pages today and send you a copy.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (310) 551-9180 or
return this e-mail.

Thanks.

    - Jonathan -                                                                                ................................................

ALSCHULER GROSSMAN STEIN & KAHAN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
www.agsk.com

2049 Century Park East
Thirty-Ninth Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-3213
Tel 310-277-1226
Fax 310-552-6077

This transmission is intended only for the use
of the addressee and may contain information
that is privileged, confidential and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. If you are not
the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any dissemination, distribution or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this communication
in error, please notify us immediately
via e-mail at postmaster@agsk.com or
by telephone at 310-277-1226. Thank you.

...............................................


Tammy, are you getting all these reports?

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 09/06/2000
03:37 PM ---------------------------

Theresa Vos@ENRON
08/31/2000 04:43 PM
To: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tammy R
Shepperd/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jody Pierce/HOU/ECT@ECT, Georgeanne Hodges/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Faith Killen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey
Keenan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric
Boyt/Corp/Enron@Enron, Toni Bustamante/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Austin Weekly Report thru 8/24

Attached is the City of Austin's weekly cost summary with actuals thru
8/24/00.  The current estimate was increased by $1.2MM for development
expenses and EE&CC's fee.  Please call me if you have any questions.

Thanks,
theresa
x58173


I understand from Shona that you and she have discussed our plans for
Doorstep Reviews in 2001.  I am asking via this note for my assistant to set
up a meeting for the two of us to spend some time reviewing the timeline,
methodology, Andersen's involvement and the involvement of your team.  I will
be on vacation the week of December 18.  I will be working the week between
Christmas and New Year's, so if you are in the office we can plan on getting
together that week.


Thank you Jill

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Chatterton, Jill
Sent:	Wednesday, June 13, 2001 11:09 AM
To:	Poston, David
Cc:	Luu, Duong; Williams III, Bill
Subject:	Todays meeting

Dave,
You are all set for your meeting at 2pm pacific, 4pm central time
in the Mt. Rainier conference room.

- Jill


Biliana,

I have prior commitments on Saturday, February the 5th. Please, send me more
information about the following Saturday. There is a remote possibility I
shall have
to go to London that weekend. Otherwise, I shall be glad to join you.

Vince

Biliana Pehlivanova <pehlivanova@sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com> on 01/28/2000
11:54:58 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: AIESEC

Dear Mr. Kaminski,

The following are the  personal and work e-mail addresses of the Polish
trainees in College Station.

Sylwester Rutkowski  sylwesterr@usa.net, sylwester.rutkowski@destia.com
Patricia Dalecka  pdalecka@hotmail.com, patrycia.dalecka@destia.com
Danusia Mas   danusia.mas@destia.com
Lidia Olczyk   lolczyk@usa.net, lidia.olczyk@destia.com
Robert Lyczak   rlyczak@yahoo.com, robert.lyczak@destia.com

I would like to invite you to join us for a paintball game next Saturday,
Feb 5th. The purpose of this event is to develop team building among our
student members, Board of Advisors, and corporate clients.

In addition, I would like to invite you to participate in our Mock
Sales day on Saturday, Feb. 12th.  During this day, the new members will
first receive training on AIESEC sales/knowledge and then role play with our
Board of Advisors and alumni acting as company
representatives. Sharing your AIESEC and work experience would be a
valuable contribution to our training program.

I will get in touch with you regarding these events in the beginning of
next week, as soon as I have the time and place finalized.

I appreciate your interest in working with us.

Best regards,

Biliana Pehlivanova
Vice President of Incoming Exchange
AIESEC Houston


Please stop sending me this report.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	PortfolioMailer@smtp.quote.com@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, December 13, 2001 6:04 PM
To:	kpresto@enron.com
Subject:	Quote.com Portfolio Report (Presto)

PORTFOLIO REPORT - from Lycos Finance
Thursday, Dec 13 2001 (generated at 03:00 PM PST)

Symbol      Close               Change     Today +/-             Total Return
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEOS         0.10      +0.01 (+11.11%)       $+10.00       $100.00  (-99.43%)
EEX          1.60      -0.04  (-2.43%)       $-40.00      $1600.00  (-41.82%)
GW           2.75      +0.05  (+1.85%)      $+750.00     $41250.00  (+29.41%)
KCS          2.53      -0.07  (-2.69%)     $-1050.00     $37950.00 (+102.40%)
KEG          8.40          0   (0.00%)         $0.00     $84000.00  (+60.00%)
MHR          8.13      -0.31  (-3.67%)     $-1550.00     $40650.00 (+103.25%)
TMR          3.20      -0.05  (-1.53%)      $-750.00     $48000.00  (-28.89%)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals                                     $-2630.00    $253550.00  (+20.24%)

Index          Last              Change
---------------------------------------
DOW Jones   9766.45   -128.36  (-1.29%)
NASDAQ      1946.51    -64.87  (-3.22%)
SP500       1119.38    -17.69  (-1.55%)

=============================================================================
                       Need auto or term life insurance?
              Shop to save at Lycos Insurance Center.  We let you
          compare free insurance quotes to find the best rates around.
               http://finance.lycos.com/home/perfin/insurance.asp
=============================================================================

=============================================================================
           Thinking about selling your home within the next 5 months?
            Don't gamble with the biggest transaction of your life!
         Use HomeGain's free service to find & compare local Realtors
.
                   http://realestate.lycos.com/realtorfinder/
=============================================================================

=============================================================================
UNSUBSCRIBE OR CHANGE PREFERENCES
---------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this and all Lycos Finance portfolio emails, send
email to unsubscribe@news.quote.com with REMOVE in the subject field.
Please be sure that you are emailing using the same account to which
this email was addressed.

Don't want this email?  Want it at a different time?  Or in summary form?
Click here to go to your Quote.com eMail Command Center.  All your options
can be changed here.

http://finance.lycos.com/home/portfolio/prefs.asp?FG=94C037AB-8875-438C-8C27-8F714F5D4461
=============================================================================


yeah baby!   that place is gonna rock


Drallion show is Feb 7 (thursday)
I will give you your tix on Sunday


CALENDAR ENTRY:	INVITATION

Description:
	EB3109  Services meeting re: coal plants

Date:		4/23/2001
Time:		3:00 PM - 4:00 PM (Central Standard Time)

Chairperson:	Stacey W White

Detailed Description:


Sure.

From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/09/2001 02:42 PM CDT
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject:

I need to send a copy of a report to:

Greg Blue
Dynegy
5976 W. Las Positas Blvd.
Suite 200
Pleasanton, CA  94588

Could you stop by and pick it up when you get a minute?  Thanks a million.

Jeff


FYI
ds

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Peter Melera <pmelera@calpine.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Peter+20Melera+20+3Cpmelera+40calpine+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Tuesday, September 04, 2001 9:22 AM
To:	'dschool@enron.com'; West Real Time Group
Subject:	southpoint

 - Southpoint Gas Model.xls


Here's the email that I mentioned in my voicemail.  Take care, Mark

 -----Original Message-----
From:  james.doty@bakerbotts.com@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-james+2Edoty+40bakerbotts+2Ecom+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 9:08 AM
To: mmetts@enron.com
Subject: SEC Chairmanship and James R. Doty

  Mark:  If this is not what you had in mind, let me know. I have tried to
give you some detail to back up my claim that I can provided much-needed
stature and leadership to the SEC. I am also addressing what I think may be
some of the objections of constituencies in the corporate and financial
community who have, I believe,  told the Administration not to appoint a
lawyer and former member of the Staff of the SEC. (Of course, Arthur Levitt
was not a lawyer, and was a former head of the Amex, and has rammed through
one of the mose activist regulatory programs in SEC history! So what I am
offering, in part, is balance and respect for process).

1. The President has the opportunity, by appointing Jim Doty, to get the SEC
headed in a direction the corporate and financial community wants and to do
so with broad (indeed, enthusiastic) support from the agency itself, the
corporate and securities bar, the accounting profession and other
constituencies (including the NASDAQ, the NYSE, members of the Congressional
oversight committees and their staff on both sides of the aisle).

 Doty knows securities markets and practices through his work for securities
firms and is well aware of the issues of market structure that will face the
new Chairman--in this he favors continuing to encourage competition and
technological innovation in the markets, and is committed to keeping our
capital markets the best in the world.

 He understands the problems the accounting profession and the
standard-setting bodies are facing--including international accounting
standard issues--and is well equipped to be sure the private standard
setting regime we have relied on works well and with sensitivity to current
realities.  He will not be a "grenade thrower" on the complex
pooling/purchase issues now confronting the SEC and the FASB. (Here it will
be particularly important that the next Chariman give the FASB proposals on
impairment of goodwill in purchase transactions a fair hearing, and not
attempt to "strong arm" the private standard setters into a requiring
accelerated depreciation of goodwill: this is especially critical given the
fragile state of the technology sector.)

 Doty has spent his career advising boards of directors and senior
management on the practical problems businessmen face in dealing with the
SEC. He will bring to the job hands-on experience working with the business
community(corporate and financial), in solving the problems they face in
raising capital and complying with securities regulatory regimes--State,
Federal and cross-border.

 2. Doty has a national reputation as a corporate- and securities- law
expert, has published and is in demand as a speaker.  As a practicing
lawyer, however, Doty would bring some extraordinary qualifications to the
job of running the SEC, which are as folows:

          a. His record as General Counsel of the SEC from 1990-92
demonstrates an understanding of how to work effectively in governmnet.
Doty has the respect of the Staff and will bring credibility within the
building to accomplish needed reform.  During his tenure as the SEC's
General Counsel, with a Democratic majority in Congress, he had a major role
in reform initiatives to reduce costs of raising capital and streamline the
financial regulatory structure under President George H.W.Bush. These
included the Small Business Initiative, which reduced costs for small- and
first-time registrants, and structured finance initiatives to provide more
efficient access to capital markets for seasoned issuers.

          b. Doty is committed to using the exemptive authority under the
Securities Act of 1933 to promote more efficiency and lower costs in the
capital-formation process.  He knows where additional exemptive action or
repeal is needed--as in the Public Utility Holding Company Act, for
example--and he will be a knowledgeable and effective ally of the
Administration, including Cabinet officers, and the Republicans on the Hill,
in promoting further reform and efficiency.

         c. Doty will get the agency behind the President's proposal to
create individual retirement investment accounts for all members of the
workforce.  He is committed to helping the Administration get this done when
they decide to push for it, and knows how the issues of safety can be
practically addressed and the technical objections of critics overcome.

          d. Doty is a consensus-builder, a good listener and an effective
communicator. He is a Texan, a Rhodes Scholar and graduate of Rice
University. He has been active in the communities in which he has lived
(Senior Warden of Christ Church Cathedral in Houston, Vestryman of St.
John's Lafayette Square in D.C.). He is a good family man--his wife of 29
years presently serves in the First Lady's Correspondence Office. As a
BakerBotts Senior Partner, Doty can afford to do this for the sake of the
job well done and is not attempting to "polish his resume" for another job.

         e. Most important, Doty has worked tirelessly for this President,
knows the President and his style, and is loyal to the President.  He wants
the President to succeed and will work hard to make sure the policies and
practices of the SEC reflect well on the President and his Administration.


Marie -
I have reviewed the changes you have requested for the US Bandwidth
products.  Please be advised that the process of revising the product types
and variables comprising the products will be substantial.

7 Bandwidth product type descriptions will need to be rewritten (1 product
name has been changed).
The reference period description will need to be revised.
68 Bandwidth locations will need to be revised.
Note:  Although Legal has requested a change, "Currency" CANNOT be revised.
The Unit of Measurement description has been revised and in addition also
includes refererence to a "Service Level Agreement."

In order to apprise the EOL team of the changes, please note that Legal has
revised the Bandwidth GTC's and requested changes to the following 7 product
descriptions:

US Bandwidth DS-3 Phy Fwd
US Bandwidth OC-12c Phy Fwd
US Bandwidth OC-48c Phy Fwd
US Bandwidth OC-3 Phy Fwd
US Bandwidth OC-3c Phy Fwd
US Bandwidth STM-1 Phy Fwd
In addition, Legal has revised the product description:
US Bandwidth DW-48 Phy Fwd has been changed to US Bandwidth 2.5G Naval Phy Fwd

(Marie, please note that the Premium and Standard Service IP products will
not be revised since their descriptions were created for a one-time
demonstration).

For EOL purposes, please note that the product types should include the
reference to the transaction as being "A US Transaction."  You have requested
the following changes:

e.g.:  Product Type (for DS-3 to be revised from):

"A US Bandwidth Transaction with Enron Broadband Services, L.P. ("EBS")
pursuant to which the Seller shall sell and the Buyer shall buy the quantity
of Bandwidth Units submitted by Counterparty via the Website. The number of
DSO's per DS3 is 672. The price shall be as submitted by the Counterparty via
the Website. Any party entering into a Transaction to buy or sell Bandwidth
Units from or to EBS shall be responsible for connecting to the Demarcation
Point located at each Market Pooling Point in order to take physical delivery
of such Bandwidth.  In order to achieve such connectivity, a party may incur
costs and expenses and may additionally be required to execute certain
documentation."

to (note: insert "US"):

"A US Transaction with Enron Broadband Services, L.P. ("Company") for the
purchase and sale of Bandwidth pursuant to which Seller shall sell and  Buyer
shall buy the number of units of Bandwidth ("Bandwidth Units") submitted by
Counterparty via the Website. The number of DS-0s per DS-3 is 672. The price
shall be as submitted by the Counterparty via the Website. Any Party entering
into a Transaction to buy or sell Bandwidth Units from or to Company shall be
responsible for connecting to each applicable Demarcation Point in order to
take or make, as applicable, physical delivery of such Bandwidth Units.  In
order to achieve such connectivity, a Party may incur costs and expenses and
may additionally be required to execute certain documentation."

Reference Period to be revised from:

"The Term of the Transaction shall begin at 12:00 a.m. (EST) on the Effective
Date and continue to 11:59: 59 p.m. (EST) on the Termination Date. The
Effective Date is 01 Apr 2001 and the Termination Date is 30 Sep 2001."

to:

e.g. "The Transaction shall commence at 12:00 a.m. (EST) on 01 Nov 2000 and
continue until 11:50:59 p.m. (EST) on 30 Apr 2001."

Location to be revised from (e.g. New York to LA):

"The Transaction shall be for Bandwidth between the New York Market Pooling
Point (111 8th Avenue, Suite 1517, New York, NY 10011, NPA-NXX: 212-462,
CLLI: NYCMNY83H62) and the Los Angeles Market Pooling Point (530 W. 6th
Street, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90014, NPA-NXX: 213-362, CLLI:
LSAJCAWZH04),  for a total of 2,446 DSO miles."

to:

"The Transaction shall be for Bandwidth Units between: (a) 111 8th Avenue,
Suite 1517, New York, NY 10011, NPA-NXX: 212-462, CLLI: NYCMNY83H62 and (b)
530 W. 6th Street, Suite 300, Los Angeles, CA 90014, NPA-NXX: 213-362, CLLI:
LSAJCAWZH04 (each location described in (a) and (b) above being the
applicable "Demarcation Point"), for a total of 2,446 Vertical and Horizontal
(DS-0) Miles.

Currency  (cannot be revised)
from:
"The price is quoted in US Dollars per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency."

to
"The price is quoted in Dollars per DS-0 mile per DS-0 per Bandwidth Unit per
Period (i.e. one month), which will be the contractual currency."

Unit of Measure
from:

to:
The Contract Price per Bandwidth Unit per Period (i.e. one month) is
calculated as follows: Quoted Price x the  number of DS-0s per Bandwidth Unit
x the number of Vertical and Horizontal (DS-0) Miles.  The Service Level
Agreement applicable to this Product Description is set forth in Exhibit C-2
to the GTCs.

Marie Heard@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
01/11/2001 01:55 PM
Sent by: Erica Braden@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
To: Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Cynthia Harkness/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: EOL GTC's

Rob,

Attached are the revised GTC's together with the long descriptions.  As I
stated earlier, our commercial people are reviewing these and I will advise
you if we have changes or if the attached are in final form.

Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else.

Thanks for your help.

Marie

Marie Heard
Senior Legal Specialist
Enron Broadband Services
Phone:  (713) 853-3907
Fax:  (713) 646-8537
Marie_Heard@Enron.net


did i win my bet?


I am working with the EOL system development group on improving the reporting
capabilities of EOL so that Internal EOL traders can personalised and save
report formats.  Currently the system only saves the last report format.  If
you have any ideas, thoughts or requests please let me know.
I have attached a file with examples of reports that can be generated.  The
goal would be to give you the ability to view the information when you need
it and in the required format.


The plans are up in the air. The first weekend that we are all free is the
weekend of Feb 26.(if you can't make it that weekend, let me know.) If all
three of us come, there is probably 4-6 hours of work. I would propose that
we bring Ben,James and Ryan only. I will arrive Fri night and leave Sun
morning. Let me know what you think.

John Sanders MD <johnbepa@macol.net> on 01/12/2000 08:20:01 AM
To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, "Doug Sanders" <namuathome@aol.com>
cc:
Subject: Perd

Doug and Richard,

Is the Perd going to be all work and no play? I'm trying to decide if I'm
going to take Ryan with me. We could leave around 4 PM on Friday. I could
leave much sooner, if I weren't taking him with me (school and all). I
don't think he'll be
much help to what we're doing, but he'd probably have more fun than if he
he
were to stay at home.

So, when do you guys think you'll get there? How long do you think you'll
stay? Are any of your kids going?

John


CORRECTION TO SUPER SATURDAY DATES

Two dates in our prior Save the Dates memo were incorrect.  The dates to save
for the first Super Saturday weekend are Friday, October 27th and Saturday,
October 28th.  The correct dates for the last Super Saturday weekend are
Friday, December 8th and Saturday, December 9th.

We apologize for any inconvenience.


Thank you for your request. You will be notified by email when your request has been processed. You can check the progress of your request by clicking http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000069909&Page=MyReq.


(See attached file: PulpexWeekly_202.pdf)(See attached file: Pulpex_Broker_
List2.doc)

This file can be read using Adobe Acrobat Reader
It is also available in a *.rtf format. If you prefer to receive the bulletin in
this format, please advise me by return email.


/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Hi Folks,

Here's how I see the Rushing Game Matchups this week.

PLEASE NOTE:   See the cheatsheet online www.footballguys.com (will be
posted soon) for exactly where I rank players and to determine who to start.
I always receive emails asking me how I can have a guy ranked highly on the
cheatsheet but listed under a matchup that favors the Defense.   Just
because one matchup may be more favorable than another, that doesn't
necessarily mean I'd start the player with the best matchup.   Ahman Green
may have a horrible matchup one week but unless you're sitting on Ricky
Williams or Marshall Faulk, Green's your guy no matter who he's lining up
against.   The matchup info is meant to be just one more tool in your box
when it comes to deciding between players.

Stats are provided by Mike Hall's excellent FLM League Management Software.
http://www.fflm.com/ for more info.   Fantasy Points Allowed by position
numbers are from ESPN.com.
Let's get to it.

Joe

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Locks:  These games feature Defenses that should be overmatched against the
Offense.

Baltimore's Moe Williams vs Indianapolis Defense

With Jason Brookins' unfortunate injury, Moe Williams is handed the chance
of a lifetime.   A month ago, he was stuck behind Terry Allen and Brookins.
Now, he's likely the guy who'll be asked to carry the rushing load for the
defending World Champs.   I'd expect you'll see FB Obafemi Ayanbadejo to
play a larger role.   Williams had already started becoming a much bigger
part of the passing game catching 4 passes for 47 yards last week.   He also
had 9 carries for 31 yards (3.4 ypc)   I think he'll do fine.   The Colts
are reeling.   Their defense ranks # 26 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game
over the last 4 weeks and for the year, they rank # 28 in Fantasy Points
Allowed to RBs.   You saw how Garrison Heart ran wild on them last week.

Green Bay's Ahman Green vs Jacksonville Defense

Start Ahman Green.   He rolled for 102 yards on 22 carries last week and
looks as solid as ever.   Jacksoville is ranked # 21 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks as if you needed another reason to
start him...

New Orleans' Ricky Williams vs Carolina Defense

Ricky Williams struggled a bit last week but still finished with 56 yards on
15 carries (3.7 ypc) and a TD.   He also added 39 yards on 3 receptions.
He's simply too good to sit.   The Panthers rank # 30 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 29 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.   Start Williams.

Pittsburgh's Jerome Bettis vs Minnesota Defense

Bettis faced a tough Titan team last week and still rumbled for 73 yards on
21 carries (3.5 ypc)   Kordell Stewart is somewhat of a worry vulturing TDs
but Bettis will get his share.   The Steelers losing OL Marvel Smith for any
amount of time with a knee injury could be a problem.   On the plus side,
the Steelers are for real and they know Bettis is their key.   This week,
they'll face a much softer Viking Defense that ranks # 29 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 30 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson vs Seattle Defense

LaDainian Tomlinson was the intended target of an amazing 13 passes last
week.   Even more impressive is that he caught all 13 passes and netted 72
yards receiving.   Paired with 75 yards rushing on 21 carries (3.6  ypc), he
had a very quiet 147 yards of offense.   On the downside, he did fumble and
he failed to get into the endzone.   His involvement in the offense though
is great to see.   He'll face a Seattle defense this week ranked # 28 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 17 in Fantasy
Points Allowed to RBs.   They'll also be without suspended CB Shawn Springs.
The Seahawks yielded 181 yards rushing last week against Kansas City.

San Francisco's Garrison Hearst vs Buffalo Defense

Garrison Hearst literally seemed to have turned back the clock last week.
Sunday was the first time I've been able to say "that truly looks like the
old Hearst".   His burst and his cutbacks were exceptional.   Throw in the
fact that Kevan Barlow injured his shoulder and I'm liking him even more.
Keep an eye on Terry Jackson and Fred Beasley to see what role the 49ers
give them with Barlow out.   I wouldn't be surprised to see them get some
additional short yardage / goalline chances.   They'll face the Bills
defense that ranks # 22 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4
weeks.   For the year, they rank # 24 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

St. Louis' Marshall Faulk vs Atlanta Defense

You can't bench Marshall Faulk.   Especially against Atlanta's defense
ranked # 24 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.
Enough said.

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Prime Matchups:  These games feature Defenses that should have trouble
stopping the Offense.

Arizona's Michael Pittman vs Oakland Defense

Michael Pittman clocked in last week with another of his middle of the road
performances.   44 yards on 18 carries (2.4 ypc) but he did get the TD
score.   I wish he'd be more productive in the passing game as QB Jake
Plummer needs another option besides David Boston.   This week, he faces an
Oakland defense ranked a surprising # 31 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game
over the last 4 weeks.   I caught some grief last week from people who
disagreed with me suggesting Tiki Barber could have a good game against
Oakland.   We know how that turned out.   The Raiders are a very good /
great team.   But people run the ball on them.   They're a little tougher in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs where they rank # 20.

Carolina's Richard Huntley vs New Orleans Defense

Richard Huntley came up small again last week with several stuffs at the
goalline.   He had 19 carries for 55 yards (2.9 ypc) in an ugly game.
Huntley's saving grace may be that Brad Hoover or any of the other Panther
RBs aren't any better.   This week, he'll face a Saints defense that is
pretty soft lately ranked # 27 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 21 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.   Still, it's hard to get too excited about a Panther at this point.

Chicago's Anthony Thomas / James Allen vs Detroit Defense

James Allen got the start for the ailing Anthony Thomas and delivered.
Allen rambled for 107 yards on 27 carries (4.0 ypc)   It may have been the
fast track in Minnesota, but Allen looked much quicker than I ever remember
seeing him.   This creates a huge headache for Allen / Thomas owners.
Coach Dick Jauron would never say it, but the Bears obviously have a great
chance to go deep into the playoffs.   They know they need a healthy Anthony
Thomas.   I would think you'd see Jauron very cautious about using Thomas
against a weak Detroit team.   Yes, anything can happen (just ask the
Packers) but I would think you'll see the Bears lean on Allen one more week.
This is pure speculation on my part as it's still very early in the week.
Stay tuned.   Detroit ranks # 18 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last four weeks and # 26 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

New England's Antowain Smith vs New York Jets Defense

Antowain Smith continues to amaze.   He rolled up 111 yards on 24 carries
(4.6 ypc) last week with a TD.   His longest run was 15 yards so it's not
like he padded those numbers with one huge play.   The Jets rank # 11 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks as they've improved
greatly from early on.   They rank # 23 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Oakland's Charlie Garner / Zack Crockett vs Arizona Defense

Garner looked like his typical self Sunday slashing for 68 yards on 14
carries (4.9 ypc)   He also caught 3 passes for 38 yards including a TD.
His trouble is that he often has to watch Zack Crockett score the short TD
from the sidelines.   Hard to believe Coach Jon Gruden could be that
insensitive to you Garner owners but that's how it is.   The Cardinals rank
# 17 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks but for the
year rank # 25 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Garner is too explosive
to sit for most teams.

Tennessee's Eddie George vs Cleveland Defense

For some reason, the Titans feel the need to throw on every down.   Eddie
George only had 15 carries last week.   He did gain 58 yards (3.9 ypc) but
he needs more work.   The Browns are rejuvenated but they've been run on
lately as they rank # 25 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4
weeks.   For the year, they rank # 18 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Washington's Stephen Davis vs Dallas Defense

Davis left the game last week with back spasms long enough for Ki-Jana
Carter to steal what should have been Davis' TD.   Ouch.   He'd been on fire
before leaving.   Davis returned to the game and looks to be ok for this
week.   Dallas has been sliding down the defense ranking and now comes in at
# 20 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the
year, they still rank # 10 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Even Matchups:  These games feature no real advantage either way

Buffalo's Travis Henry vs San Francisco Defense

Just when we were ready to write Travis Henry off, he produces like we'd
been expecting him to do all along.   Against a very good Miami Defense,
Henry rolled for 97 yards on 19 carries (5.1 ypc) and a TD.   New QB Alex
Van Pelt is clearly softening the defense as they now must respect the
passing game.   San Francisco is nothing special on defense ranking # 19 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year,
they're # 22 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   They allowed 127 yards to
the Colts last week.

Kansas City's Priest Holmes / Tony Richardson vs Philadelphia Defense

Both Holmes and Richardson are valuable Fantasy players.   Richardson is a
real live featured RB with 120 yards on 20 carries (6.0 ypc)   He threw in
another 70 yards on 3 receptions to boot.   Richardson doesn't get the
yardage but he has a nose for endzone.   He rushed 9 times for 18 yards (2.0
ypc) Sunday and scored again.   The Eagle defense looked very vulnerable
against the Redskin rushing game last week.   They rank # 13 in Rushing
Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 14 in Fantasy Points
Allowed to RBs.

New York Jet's Curtis Martin vs New England Defense

Curtis Martin's ready to roll after a bye week as the Jets face an
unexpectedly tough matchup with New England.   The Patriots rank # 16 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 19 in Fantasy
Points Allowed to RBs.

Philadelphia's Duce Staley vs Kansas City Defense

Staley seems to be running hard but his Eagles are in a funk.   He rushed 15
times for 50 yards (3.3 ypc) and caught 7 passes for 40 yards Sunday.   This
Eagle team is sliding while Kansas City is getting stronger.   The Chiefs
rank # 15 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the
year though, they rank # 31 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs so you have to
think Staley might be able to do something.

Seattle's Shaun Alexander vs San Diego Defense

Shaun Alexander had us worried last week as he struggled on the ground with
43 yards on 13 carries (3.3 ypc)   He made up for it on the receptions where
he caught 6 balls for 62 yards and a score.   He's looking more like Ricky
Watters Plus with each game.   The Chargers rank # 23 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank a very
solid # 6 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Last week, they did a good job
against Arizona holding them to 71 rushing yards.

Tampa Bay's Warrick Dunn / Mike Alstott vs Cincinnati Defense

Both of these guys turned in nice days against St. Louis Monday.   Dunn
rushed 14 times for 60 yards (4.3 ypc) and a score.   Alstott carried the
ball 11 times for 34 yards (3.4 ypc) and 2 scores.   Both were factors in
the passing game as well.   I'd look for something similar against the
Bengals this week.   Cincinnati is falling back to reality and rank # 14 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 12 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Alstott is obviously more
attractive in TD only leagues, but I can see going with either of these
players here.

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Downside Matchups:  These games feature a Defense that could pose trouble
for the Offense.

Atlanta's Maurice Smith / Bob Christian vs St. Louis Defense

Maurice Smith injured his ankle last week and turned the reins over to Bob
Christian.   And Christian responded in a huge way.   Dan Reeves is winning
with smoke and mirrors here but I wouldn't be surprised to see Christian
remain a big part of this offense even if Smith can go.   As you saw Monday
night with Mike Alstott, the Rams are certainly vulnerable to a big powerful
RB and Christian fills that bill.   St. Louis ranks # 1 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 9 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.   The Rams are beat up though and Christian might be worth a shot if
you're ready to roll the dice.   Just understand the risk though that he
could go back to his old role if Smith is healthy.

Cincinnati's Corey Dillon vs Tampa Bay Defense

We've said all along that this could be a very good team if they could just
get adequate play from the QBs.   Evidently, that's too much to ask.   With
the passing game quickly fading, Dillon is having a very tough time finding
any room to run.   Dillon managed 63 yards on 20 carries (3.2 ypc) last week
against a good Cleveland team.   The going won't be any easier this week
against Tampa Bay that ranks # 9 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 13 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.   You never know which Dillon will show and it's tough to figure out
which Buccaneer team will be there.   That makes this a tough call all the
way around.

Cleveland's James Jackson / Ben Gay vs Tennessee Defense

James Jackson tweaked his foot again so watch to see how this shakes out.
Ben Gay did see action Sunday.   Jackson was a non factor with 40 yards on
18 carries (2.2 ypc)   Fortunately for him, Gay was even worse with 16 yards
on 10 carries (1.6 ypc)   This week, they'll both face a tough Titan team
that's ranked # 4 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.
For the season, they're ranked # 16 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Denver's Mike Anderson / Terrell Davis vs Miami Defense

Mike Anderson answered the critics well with a 33 carry day for 118 yards
(3.6 ypc) Sunday.   He also scored a TD.   With Olandis Gary out for the
season, it's now down to Anderson and Terrell Davis.   Watch this one very
closely as Davis is reportedly making good progress and could play this
week.   If he's ready to go, I think you'll see Mike Shanahan give him
plenty of carries.   Some are even saying he might start.   I personally
think it'll be Anderson starting with Davis seeing a fair amount of action.
Keep an eye on this through the week.   Miami ranks # 10 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 7 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs but they were exposed by Buffalo's Travis Henry last week.

Indianapolis' Dominic Rhodes vs Baltimore Defense

I love to see a no name like Dominic Rhodes come in and succeed.   He was
extremely active last week and is doing a great job of filling in for
Edgerrin James.   He rushed 27 times for 104 yards (3.9 ypc) and 2 TDs.   He
also had 6 receptions for 43 yards.   He'll face a tough defense this week
in Baltimore though.   The Ravens rank # 12 in Rushing Yards Allowed per
Game over the last 4 weeks and # 3 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Even
so, unless you have very solid options, I'd take a hard look at keeping
Rhodes in your lineup.

Jacksonville's Stacey Mack vs Green Bay Defense

Stacey Mack isn't making anyone forget about Fred Taylor but Mack owners had
to like his 2 TDs last week.   He put up 50 yards on 13 carries (3.8 ypc)
Taylor's status is still up in the air so I'd think you'll probably see Mack
again.   The Packers bring a tough defense ranked # 7 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 5 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs so it's going to be rough going for him.   Although it won't be as tough
as it was last week against the Ravens.   On a side note, I keep hearing
whispers that Taylor could be done for the season.   Nothing official from
the Jaguars though.   You truly never know with Fred Taylor.   I could see
him missing the rest of the games and I could also see him stepping in for
week 16 and lighting up the scoreboard.

Miami's Lamar Smith / Travis Minor vs Denver Defense

Once again, Lamar Smith looked tentative and slow.   He only gained 37 yards
on 17 carries (2.2 ypc) although he did score.   Travis Minor, on the other
hand, looked explosive and gained 38 yards on 8 carries (4.8 ypc)   The fact
that Miami won the game probably keeps Smith in the #1 slot but you have to
wonder how Minor would do with a bigger role.   Miami's had to shuffle the
Offensive Line due to injuries, something it did not have to do last season.
Denver is ranked # 6 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks
so this won't be a cakewalk.   They rank # 8 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Defensive Slam Dunks:  These games feature a very tough Defense posing major
problems for the Offense.

Dallas' Emmitt Smith / Troy Hambrick vs Washington Defense

It's sad to see but Emmitt Smith is probably not the best RB on the roster
anymore.   Especially not from a Fantasy Football angle.   Troy Hambrick
merely put up 17 yards on 5 carries (3.4 ypc) Sunday but he did score twice.
Smith, on the other hand, managed just 9 yards on 9 carries (you do your own
ypc here...).   Clearly, there are ill feelings between Smith and management
as he's publicly questioning their desire to win as they evaluate talent for
next year.   I'm sure he's a little more sensitive as the primary talent
they seem to be evaluating is the guy who'll take his job.   This week, the
Cowboys face a rejuvenated Redskin team and a tough defense.   They rank # 5
in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.

Detroit's James Stewart vs Chicago Defense

James Stewart roared back with a vengeance last Thursday rolling up 102
yards on 14 carries (7.3 ypc)   He looked strong and quick.   Corey
Schlesinger was still in the picture with 5 rushes for 39 yards (7.8 ypc)
and 6 receptions for 41 yards.   Both should have trouble though this week
against an excellent Bears team ranked # 3 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game
over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 4 in Fantasy Points
Allowed to RBs.

Minnesota's Michael Bennett vs Pittsburgh Defense

Bennett is slowly climbing his way out of the Super Bust spotlight.   (Helps
to have Randy Moss on the field at the same time to deflect some
attention...)   He rushed 12 times for 75 yards (6.2 ypc) and definitely
showed flashes.   He's a threat anytime he touches the ball.   He also
caught a pass.   This week, he faces a very tough defense with Pittsburgh
though.   The Steelers rank # 2 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks and # 1 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs so you have to view
this as a tough matchup.

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

That'll do it for the Rushing Matchups.   Passing Matchups to follow.

Joe

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Bryant Analytics, Inc.   All Rights Reserved 1999-2001

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cheatsheets-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Top 50 counterparties - can you send me the list?

Louise Kitchen
Chief Operating Officer
Enron Americas
Tel:  713 853 3488
Fax: 713 646 2308


Vince,

I  wanted to follow up with you concerning our earlier exchange regarding my  brother Vikas Saksena. Have you had a chance to speak to your IT folks? I will  be meeting with Vikas in London by the end of this month and will get a chance  to talk to him in more detail. May I ask him to call you directly. For your  reference his phone number in London is 44 208 343 3298.

Thanks

Anurag
(952)  857 6133 ( work)
(952)  943 8501 ( home)


---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 04/04/2001 07:09 AM
---------------------------

"scott neal" <sneal12@mindspring.com> on 04/04/2001 12:12:18 AM
To: <Scott.Neal@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: bear markets

Unnatural  History

After the last two horrible quarters, many of  us are probably telling
ourselves that it can't get much worse than it's been.  For those of us who
believe that as an unquestioned article of faith, let me  give you a little
history lesson. You'll see that it can get a lot worse  than this.

For our little history lesson we'll focus on the S&P 500, because that
pretty much represents the entire US equity market. Obviously the NASDAQ has
had  it a lot worse -- but that's only a subset of the total market, and it's
fairly  concentrated in a single broad sector: technology. In subsequent
commentaries  the NASDAQ will get its turn in the historical spotlight.

Over the last two quarters  the S&P 500 lost 19.23%. As horrific as that has
been, that actually only  ranks 78th out of the 2409 six-month periods since
1800. Believe it or not,  there have been 77 that were worse.

There were eight six-month  periods in which the S&P 500 lost more than 40%.
There were 18 in which it  lost more than 30%. The very worst single
six-month period was the one ending  May, 1932, in which the S&P 500 lost an
astonishing 52.92%.

Of the 77 six-month periods  worse than the most recent one, 21 were before
1900, and none of them were  during the Civil War. 33 (including the very
worst 4) were in the 1930s, in the  Great Depression that followed in the
wake of the stock market crash of 1929.

The worst six-month period  in the modern era ranks 13th overall. It was the
one ended September, 1974, with  the S&P down 32.39%. 4 others were in the
1970s.

The most recent period worse  than the last six months ranks 73rd. It was the
one ended March, 1988, with the  S&P down 19.56%. That means that in the
1990s there were no six-month  periods worse than the most recent six-month
period.

This shows that what we've experienced over the last six months is by no
means as bad as it could have been, or could still be. But at the same time
it  shows that market performance this bad is extremely rare. The S&P 500
has  done this badly (or worse) only 3.2% of the time over a span of 200
years. But  don't let any of that make you think it can't get worse.

It can. Of the 77 six-month periods worse than the most recent, the S&P  went
down further during the next six months 24 times -- losing an  average of an
additional 18.24%.

Okay, so the bad news is that, based on history, we've got about a 1/3
chance  of things still getting worse over the next six months. But of course
the good  news is that we've got, on the same basis, a 2/3 chance of things
getting  better.

But not that much better. Over the 53 times the S&P rose over the  next six
months, it only rose an average of 18.38%. Even if that happens now  over the
coming six months, that's not going to make up for the 19.23% loss of  the
last six months. And don't forget about the bad magic of compounding losses.
If you start with a dollar and you lose 19.23% of it, you've got 80.8 cents
left. It that then rises by 18.38%, you're only back up to 95.6 cents.

History class dismissed. Oh, and there will be a test tomorrow... (and every
day).

 - TOP.GIF
 - BOTTOM.GIF
 - audio.gif
 - vid.gif


assumptions based on following with Bruce's notes

Development of 1 LM 6000 facility in a urban area for the purposes of
supplying the rapid load growth.  ENA will contribute the turbines to
Rochester and build the facility, while Rochester will own, operate and
finance the facility.  Rochester currently has a Westinghouse 251B
(oil-fired), which is dedicated to &SMPA8.  ENA will receive 100% of the
output through a PPA for the first year (summer 01) and 50% of the output
from 2002 through 2005.  The following are the project specifics:
? 1 LM 6000 Turbine
? Rochester actually needs only 23 MW,s from the facility - assume want full
Enhanced Sprint and maximized output for summer conditions
? Needs substation and compressor,s (NNG is only 400 psi). - Substation
estimate of $5.8M to $6.0 looks really high. I would usually assume single
transformer and connection to an existing bus - so one breaker/switch combo -
maybe $935,000 for a greenfield - maybe 775,000 on the way high side for this
opportunity unless RPC needs some sort of major expansion and this really
includes transmission lines, .....I will assume 115 kV on a transformer and
we will add as Owners cost the $5.8M.

will do compression to 700 psig from 400 psig
? Peoples is the closest LDC
? No SCR Needed; Water-injection with water on-site - assume trailer demin,
12 hours of storage
? Non-PSD
? Main fuel will be natural gas (100% of the time) with Fuel oil #2 as backup
- will have as dual fuel unit, assume no storage based on existing at site,
will have forwarding pump
? Water source will be from a local muni water system -need to get water
analysis so we can get good cost/1000 gal estimate

Assume that we want bidable performance numbers - we need tasking letter to
cover Engineering pulling the ambient weather data and running performance
(capacity and heat rate - will generate new & clean with EPC margins along
with expected heat rates for first 4 years based on 1500 hours operation per
year)

Assume we want cost estimate - Nepco just did a single unit estimate and is
going out with a proposal (cost is $26,000,000 starting from what they
indicated was the ENA LM pricing - no scope list so Mike and I will see ifn'
we can sweet talk Redmond out of a copy). Probably should get a Nepco two day
version - I will fill the shett out and work through Mike Coleman to get
Nepco on cost.

Likely will special noise considerations. we don't have an estimate -
probably should engage consultant to do quick study and see what we might be
faced with.
Any site data available? plot plans, substation one-lines, ....????
Bruce

Benjamin Rogers@ECT
02/14/2000 05:42 PM
To: Bruce Golden/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Oscar Dalton/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject:

Here is the summary of the Rochester deal.  Oscar, Russ and I would like to
sit down with you tomorrow to discuss the specifics of the deal. Please let
me know if you need anymore info than this and let me know what time is best
for you.  Thanks in advance for your time.
Ben


How do I get the software to operate Socal Gasselect and Passport?  I would
like to have them installed on my desktop and laptop.

Thanks,
Mike


Reagan,

I sent you an email last week stating that I would be in San Marcos on
Friday, April 13th.  However, my closing has been postponed.  As I mentioned
I am going to have Cary Kipp draw the plans for the residence and I will get
back in touch with you once he is finished.

Regarding the multifamily project, I am going to work with a project manager
from San Antonio.  For my first development project, I feel more comfortable
with their experience obtaining FHA financing.  We are working with Kipp
Flores to finalize the floor plans and begin construction drawings.  Your bid
for the construction is competive with other construction estimates.  I am
still attracted to your firm as the possible builder due to your strong local
relationships.  I will get back in touch with you once we have made the final
determination on unit mix and site plan.

Phillip Allen


The request has been completed with all resources requested either completed
or rejected. You can view the details of the  request by clicking
http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000025115&Page=
MyReq.


Do I need to get involved?

	Kay Mann@ENRON
	01/22/2001 04:50 PM

		 To: "Thomas Hetherington" <thetherington@bracepatt.com>
		 cc: <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>
		 Subject: Re: Westinghouse 501d memo

Yes, this is issue is still around.

Thomas, I had some correspondence faxed to you today.  In it SW is clearly
taking the position that the damage to the generator occured after delivery
under the contract.  I thought you addressed that well in your memo, however,
I have another question.  What impact does the use of DDP (Incoterms) have?
Is it just one more part of the contract to be taken as a whole, or might it
have some greater significance?

Will the passage of ROL impact the LD claim?  I assume not, but I want a
sanity check.

Thanks,

Kay

"Thomas Hetherington" <thetherington@bracepatt.com> on 12/19/2000 09:47:11 AM
To: <kay.mann@enron.com>
cc: <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>

Subject: Westinghouse 501d memo

Attached is a legal memo regarding Westinghouse's delivery obligations with
respect to the 501D5A gas turbine generator package.  I will forward you an
additional copy by fax.

TFAH


Daren - I need to get with you to find out when things (Industrials)  need to
get in to the system for December.  Since this is a weird month, I thought
things might have to be in sooner.  Let me know.

Aimee


All,

We had a preliminary meeting on Friday.  The attached is a summary of the matrix we developed as well as changes from subsequent e-mails.  Note, only one name has been placed in the matrix where two may have been suggested - if the name is not correct then please e-mail me back as soon as possible - only person per box please.  The names placed in the matrix will be directly responsible to the estate.

We need to meet Monday to: (1) agree on the matrix; (2) develop detailed processes for capturing value (trade books, structured deals, hard assets and business sales); (3) understand the approval process required on a go forward basis; (4) develop compensation / retention program for estate, (5) address any administrative concerns.

If you have not done so, please check the names in the matrix to ensure that they are correct and please send me any changes as well as their full names to be utilized for future e-mails.

Regards,

Jim


Brad,
We are going to have to pull some of the WEB team members to work on the split of the NNG and TW data on the ADHOC database.  The Internet pulls data from this database and we are having to split this up for security purposes.  This will impact us getting started on the HotTap Redesign Project.  We are hoping that we will be able to pickup on the effort at the beginning of February.  Just wanted to make sure you all were aware.  Let me know if you have any questions.  Thanks.


Hi Vince, I (and possibly Stinson as well) will be attending this initial
meeting looks like kick-off type of meeting. I will try to attend to drill
into what they can offer and what we have committed. make sure that we get
from the arrangement n John Griebling & Jim Irvine's perspective and ours.

I'll fire off additional information as I get them.

Ravi.

----- Forwarded by Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications on 02/23/00 10:51
AM -----

	nevil@ipn.caida.org
	02/22/00 12:16 PM

		 To: members@caida.org
		 cc: nevil@caida.org, (bcc: Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications)
		 Subject: CAIDA 'Metrics' WG meeting, 2 Mar 00

Hello CAIDA Members:

Update on the CAIDA Working Groups ..
   A.  'metrics@caida.org' mailing list
   B.  WG Charters, Meeting on 2 Mar 00

A. 'metrics@caida.oeg' mailing list

I've set up a single mailing list with this name, for discussions on WG
topics, passive measurements, etc.  To start with it's a moderated list
(i.e. you have to be a member of the list to post to it, you join by sending
email to nevil@caida.org asking to be added to the 'metrics' list), with
the following initial set of members:

        Sue Moon <sbmoon@sprintlabs.com>,
        Brett Watson <bwatson@vix.com>,
        Hans-Werner Braun <hwb@nlanr.net>,
        Matt Mathis <mathis@psc.edu>,
        Ian Graham <ian@cs.waikato.ac.nz>,
        Tony McGregor <tonym@nlanr.net>,
        John Cleary <jcleary@cs.waikato.ac.nz>,
        Joerg Micheel <joerg@cs.waikato.ac.nz>,
        Kevin Thompson <kthomp@mci.net>,
        Jambi Gambar <jambi@mci.net>,
        Daniel McRobb <dwm@caida.org>,
        David Moore <dmoore@caida.org>,
        Sean McCreary <mccreary@caida.oe,rg>
        Rene Hatem <rene@canarie.ca>,
        Shankar Rao <srao@qwest.net>,
        Cindy Bickerstaff <cbickers@td2cad.intel.com>,
        Jeff Sedayao <sedayao@orpheus.sc.intel.com>,
        Steve Feldman <feldman@twincreeks.net>,
        Bill Woodcock <woody@zocalo.net>

Two questions for CAIDA Members:
  i. Who else would you suggest be invited to join the list?
 ii. Should the list continue to be moderated, or should it
     be changed into an open list?

B.  'Working Group' developments

Following the CAIDA Members' meeting on 8 Feb 00 I've attempted to define
exactly what problem we could consider getting an IETF Working Group
started on.  My summary of the existing IETF WGs with interests in metrics
is given below (Appendix B), but it seems unlikely that we could get a
new IETF WG started.

I believe that we should instead run a single CAIDA Working Group
on 'Network Metrics,' rather than the two proposed earlier.  My draft
of its charter is appended below.  It focuses on producing educational
material about network measurement, and on developing new metrics - these
were the two areas of greatest interest amongst the CAIDA members.

The WG co-chairs are
  Sue Moon (SprintLabs) and Brett Watson (MFN/Abovenet)

You are invited to attend the first WG meeting.
The agenda is as follows ..

   Agenda for CAIDA WG meeting on: Thursday 2 Mar 00
                                   -----------------
   10 am - 4 pm, AboveNet, Downtown SJC (see below for details)
   ------------            ------------

   1. Review WG Charter
      - Is it reasonable as set out in the draft?
      - What should be removed or added?

   2. Work through revised charter in detail
      - Identify the work required for each part
      - Determine who's willing to work on it
      - Attempt to determine delivery times

   3. Discussion of new metrics
      - First attempt at making a list of metrics to be considered

   4. Anything else ?

Location: AboveNet is located in the Knight-Ridder Building,
attached to the Fairmont Hotel complex.  The address is

  50 W. San Fernando St.
  San Jose, CA  95113

RSVP: To help us with organising the meeting, please send email to
   nevil@caida.org telling us how many will attend from
   your organisation.

Cheers, Nevil

-------------------------------------------------------------
   Nevil Brownlee                     Visiting Researcher
   Phone: (619) 822 0893                 CAIDA, San Diego

CAIDA Network Metrics Working Group: Draft Charter, Tue 23 Feb 00

Goals:
 1 Education
   + FAQ on What does 'measuring the Internet actually mean?'
     - Why measure anyway?
     - What can be measured?  How?  Where?  By whom?
     - Active vs passive, end-to-end vs provider network only,
       application vs transport layer
     - Rating schemes: provider 'net performance' pages, Internet
       'Weather Map's, Keynote, etc.
     Publish as CAIDA web pages, or maybe as an Info RFC

   + Survey paper on metrics and Internet Measurement
     - Current measurement efforts (Surveyor, RIPE Test Traffic,
       AMP, IPERF, AT&T, Keynote,skitter, ...)
     - Current tools
     Publish as CAIDA web pages

 2 Service Metrics
   + Define new metrics
     - Taxonomy of current metrics (IPPM, RTFM, ITU, ..)
     - Summary of metrics used for current services
     - Gather information/ideas about new/emerging services,
       especially DiffServ-based ones
     - Make list of new metrics, either to improve measurement of
       existing services or to support new ones
       [list of 'metrics' questions (Appendix A) goes here]

   + Organise experimental implementation/testing of tools
     for new metrics

   + Make recommendations on implementation
     - Define core set of 'really useful' metrics
     - recommend that CAIDA implement these as a
       'Service Measurement Toolkit'

   + Publish new metric definitions through IPPM or RTFM

   + Produce document "measurement requirements for hardware/software
     vendors."  Publish on CAIDA web pages

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix A: Questions from the earlier draft CAIDA WG charters

 a. What types of network- and transport-layer metrics are being
    used by ISPs in engineering and operating their networks?
    By Customers for verifying service guarantees?
 b. What new services are being (or are likely to be) offered, e.g.
    DIFFSERV?  Is there a need for higher-layer metrics to better
    monitor and manage these services?
 c. Will these new differentiated transport- and
    application-layer services need new metrics?
 d. How can the service metrics be measured in a multi-ISP
    environment?
 e. How can customers verify these measurements?
 f. What requirements would service measurement introduce for
    equipment vendors?

 g. How relevant are specific techniques (e.g. which flow) and
    points of measurement to specific users (ISP, customer, etc.)
    requirements?
 h. How do these metrics relate to network behavior as perceived
    by users? How do they correlate with performance?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix B: Background on the IETF Working Groups

* RTFM WG: Realtime traffic Flow Measurement

RTFM is concerned with passive measurements of two-way traffic flows,
specified in terms of their end-point attributes.  Its primary goal was

To produce an improved Traffic Flow Measurement Model considering at least the
following needs:

 a. Wider range of measurable quantities, e.g. those
    relating to IPv6, and to class of service
 b. Simpler ways to specify flows of interest
 c. Better ways to control access to measured flow data
 d. Strong focus on data reduction capabilities
 e. Efficient hardware implementation

* IPPM WG: IP Performance Measurement

The IPPM WG charter is to develop a set of standard metrics that can
be applied to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet
data delivery services. These metrics will be designed such that they
can be performed by network operators, end users, or independent
testing groups. It is important that the metrics not represent a value
judgement (i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide unbiased
quantitative measures of performance.

RFCs
  Framework for IP Performance Metrics (RFC 2330)
  Metrics:
     Connectivity (RFC 2678),
     One-way Delay (RFC 2679), One-way Packet Loss (RFC 2680)
     Round-trip Delay (RFC 2681)

I-Ds
     Bulk Transfer Capacity (2x)
     Instantaneous Packet Delay Variation
     One-way Loss Patterns

* Other WGs

The RMONMIB WG is thinking about 'Application Performance
Measurement.'  This is clearly a hard problem (e.g. does this just
mean response-time measurement, can it be done by passive means, how
should the measurements be presented, etc.).

In short
 - RTFM provides a good distributed measuring system for traffic
   volumes
 - IPPM has concentrated on transport-layer behaviour of the
   current, best-effort Internet.
 - RMONMIB is beginning to consider application-layer measurement

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jinsung and Don,

We are continuing to have difficulties accessing data from DealBench.  The
response times from PECO, PricewaterhouseCoopers and other high speed
internet connections have been very slow (sometimes 5 minutes or more to
retrieve a single 10-15 page text document).  It would help us greatly in
our due diligence efforts if this material could be made available on CD
ROM as has often been done with other deals we have been involved with.
Please advise if this is possible and if so, when the CD's would be
available.

Mike Cazaubon
----- Forwarded by Michael P Cazaubon/Pecon/Genco on 10/16/2000 03:49 PM
-----

                    Charles P
                    Lewis                To:     Michael P
Cazaubon/Pecon/Genco@PecoEnergy
                                         cc:
                    10/16/2000           Subject:     Update on Enron Sales
Process
                    03:22 PM

----- Forwarded by Charles P Lewis/Pecon/Genco on 10/16/00 03:31 PM -----

                    "Modi, Rishi"
                    <rishi.modi@c        To:     "'clewis@peco-energy.com'"
<clewis@peco-energy.com>
                    sfb.com>             cc:
                                         Subject:     Update on Enron Sales
Process
                    10/16/00
                    02:10 PM

The following is an update on Enron's sales process, including several
additions to DealBench.

1.  The Purchase and Sale Agreement ("PSA") for each asset has now been
posted to DealBench under the New Document section.  Please review the
instructions attached to each PSA.

2. The Management Presentations (with audio) have now been posted to
DealBench under the Management Presentation(strikethrough: s) section.
When attempting to view the presentation, please log onto DealBench using
Microsoft Internet Explorer. Once in DealBench, you will most likely need
to download "Flash Player" (free download).  You can do this by clicking
"Macromedia Flash Player download center" in the Linked Documents section
of DealBench.  The download usually takes less than 30 seconds.  After the
download, return to the Management Presentation section of DealBench and
click on the Management Presentation (with audio).   A power point
presentation has also been included in the Management Presentation section
of DealBench.   A detailed instruction guide "Instruction for Viewing
Management Presentation" has been posted in New Document section of
DealBench.

3.  Please be sure to consistently review the New Documents section on
DealBench for any new documents that have been added to DealBench.  Also, a
running black line Due Diligence Index is posted in the Due Diligence Index
/ Plant Pictures section of DealBench.

4. Any drawings or CDs that you need from the Due Diligence Indices may be
requested by sending an email to don.miller@enron.com or jhoff2@enron.com.

5.  Any problems or issues that you may be encountering need to  be
directed to Jinsung Myung at 713-853-7330.

6.  We are prepared to schedule Q&A sessions.  Please contact Don Miller at
713-853-0492.

Regards,

Don Miller

This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information.  No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.
If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. CREDIT SUISSE GROUP and each of its subsidiaries each reserve
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.  Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except
where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state
them to be the views of any such entity.
Unless otherwise stated, any pricing information given in this message is
indicative only, is subject to change and does not constitute an offer to
deal at any price quoted.
Any reference to the terms of executed transactions should be treated as
preliminary only and subject to our formal written confirmation.

************************************************************************
This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain PECO-Energy
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject
to copyright belonging to the PECO-Energy family of Companies.  This
e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments
to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and
permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any
printout. Thank You.
************************************************************************


Mercury's Mountaineer debuted several years ago as an upscale version of the
best-selling Ford Explorer sport-utility vehicle. The problem was, Ford's
Explorer could be just as luxurious as the Mountaineer and, in some cases,
was even more expensive. For 2002, Mercury has attempted to further
distinguish their sport-ute from the popular Explorer. The result is a fine
SUV, with improved handling characteristics and generous feature content.
This near-luxury sport-ute comes with either a 4.0-liter V6 making 210
horsepower or a 4.6-liter V8 pumping out 240 ponies. Both engines come mated
to a five-speed automatic transmission. The new V8 offers copious and refined
power delivery, but unimpressive mileage numbers.
Mountaineer has been redesigned inside and out, and the results are pleasing.
Now easily distinguishable from the Explorer from the A-pillars forward, its
"New Edge" theme makes use of a satin-finish grille and bold headlamps.
Meanwhile, the interior gets satin-aluminum trim accents, lending a
distinctive, high-tech flavor to this former Explorer clone.
Improvements to the Mountaineer are much more than cosmetic, however. An
all-new independent rear suspension featuring a unique porthole-in-frame
design debuts this year. This setup allows the rear floor to drop 7 inches -
thereby making room for a third-row seat - while increasing ground clearance
to 9.2 inches. At the same time, ride and handling have been dramatically
improved. The Mountaineer now feels more stable on the road and exhibits
flatter cornering characteristics. A 2.5-inch wider stance improves handling
even more, while increasing interior room.
Noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) have also been improved in the 2002
Mountaineer. A 50-percent reduction of air leakage into the truck's cabin and
a refined automatic transmission make for a more serene driving environment,
although some vibration from the available all-wheel-drive system does
intrude through the floor.
New convenience features in the Mountaineer include a standard six-way power
adjustable driver's seat, along with optional adjustable pedals, heated front
seats and heated exterior mirrors. Among the Mountaineer's new safety
features are optional side curtain airbags, a stiffer body shell and a lower
front bumper for improved crash compatibility with other vehicles. Later in
the model year, rollover protection sensors, and a new AdvanceTrac
traction/stability control system will also be available.
The Mountaineer's strengths lie in its feature content, powerful engine
choices and improved rear suspension. There are plenty of SUVs on the market,
but if you want an Explorer, yet can't stomach the thought of owning the
golden retriever of sport-utility vehicles, the Mountaineer just might float
your boat.


I don't know a thing, but I think Mr. Goodell is an expert.

---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 04/19/2000 08:22
AM ---------------------------

Brenda H Fletcher
04/18/2000 12:45 PM
To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jeanne Wukasch/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: New Rate Zone - SeaCrest Company, LLC (SEAC)

Do you know anything about this new pipe?

BF
---------------------- Forwarded by Brenda H Fletcher/HOU/ECT on 04/18/2000
12:43 PM ---------------------------

Faye Ellis
04/18/2000 11:24 AM
To: Brenda H Fletcher/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sylvia A Campos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marlene Hilliard/HOU/ECT@ect
Subject: New Rate Zone - SeaCrest Company, LLC (SEAC)

Brenda,

I have set up a new intrastate pipe (SeaCreast Company,LLC (SEAC)).  I can
add a rate zone to match the pipe code.

Pipe Code: SEAC
Rate Zone: SEAC

Please notify me otherwise.

Thanks,
Faye


Please replace the prior version of the capacity release with the attached
version.  I found a typo.  In the 5th line of the Section 2.1, the number was
incorrect.