Notice # 01-186
June 1, 2001

TO:
All NYMEX Division and COMEX Division Clearing Members

FROM:
Neal L. Wolkoff, Executive Vice President

RE:
Implementation of Amendments on Use of Letters of Credit, Certain
Securities and Deliverable Warehouse Receipts as Margin  for NYMEX and
COMEX Transactions

DATE:
June 1, 2001
===========================================================

1. Implementation of Rule Amendments. As previously announced in Notice to
Members #01-147 (May 4, 2001), this Notice is to remind NYMEX and COMEX
Clearing Members of rule amendments that become effective today, June 1,
2001, that expand the types of non-cash assets that customers may deposit
with their Clearing Members for margin purposes.

2. Exchange Form for Pass-Through Letters of Credit. Clearing Members are
further advised that a form has been prepared by the Exchange that will
serve as the authorized  uniform form for irrevocable letters of credit for
use on a pass-through basis at the Exchange.  This form may be obtained
from the Exchange's Clearing Department.

3. Exchange Form for Pass-Through Letters of Credit: Specification of Joint
Beneficiary. The Pass-Through Letter of Credit differs from the Standard
Letter of Credit in that the Pass-Through Letter of Credit provides for
Joint Beneficiaries.  In this regard, a Pass-Through Letter of Credit to be
used as margin on the NYMEX Division should specify NYMEX as one of the
Joint Beneficiaries.  By comparison, a Pass-Through Letter of Credit to be
used as margin on the COMEX Division should specify the COMEX Clearing
Association as one of the Joint Beneficiaries.

4. Restriction on Issuers of Letters of Credit. Please note that, under
applicable NYMEX and COMEX rules, a Clearing Member that is a bank
subsidiary or is an affiliate of a bank may not deposit with the applicable
Clearing House a letter of credit issued or confirmed by such bank, bank
parent or affiliate bank.

As to the actual rule amendments, which are attached below, these rule
changes permit the use of letters of credit, certain securities and
deliverable warehouse receipts by customers to meet their margin
requirements. The rule changes provide for consistent treatment in the use
of such assets for both NYMEX and COMEX Divisions.

Letters of Credit.  As a result of the rule changes, letters of credit
(LCs) now will be allowed for customer margin on both divisions.

Use of Letters of Credit on Pass-Through Basis.  In addition, the rule
changes allow letters of credit to be used on a "pass-through" basis on
both divisions.  In other words, Clearing Members on both divisions will be
able to pledge to the applicable clearinghouse certain LCs posted by
customers. It should be noted that while securities and deliverable
warehouse receipts, as detailed below, may be used by customers for margin
purposes, such assets may not be used on a pass-through basis by a Clearing
Member to meet its margin obligations with the clearinghouse.

Securities. Customers also will be able to deposit with their Clearing
Members certain types of securities as margin. The types of acceptable
securities are the kinds of securities that have been accepted for some
time on the COMEX Division.  Specifically, the rule changes will permit
customers to deposit the following types of securities as margin with
Clearing Members on either division:

securities listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. or the
American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in the over-the-counter
market approved for margin by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
Board except that such securities must be free from liens and encumbrances;
can represent no more than 5% of the issued and outstanding shares of any
one issuer; and will be valued for purposes of margin at 75% of their
market value.

Deliverable Warehouse Receipts. On both divisions, deliverable warehouse
receipts for any of the commodities traded on the Exchange will be accepted
as customer margin provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at
no more than 75% of the value of the commodity.

If you have any questions concerning this change, please contact Bernard
Purta, Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Operations, at (212)
299- 2380; Arthur McCoy, Vice President, Financial Surveillance Section,
NYMEX Compliance Department, at (212) 299-2928; or Charles Bebel, Vice
President, Clearing Department, at (212) 299-2130.

AMENDMENTS TO NYMEX RULE 4.01 ("CUSTOMER'S MARGINS"), NYMEX RULE 9.05
("MARGINS") AND TO COMEX CLEARING ASSOCIATION RULE 48 ("DEPOSIT OF
SECURITIES AND LETTERS OF CREDIT AS ORIGINAL MARGIN")

(Asterisks indicate additions; brackets indicate deletions.)

Rule 4.01. CUSTOMER'S MARGINS

(A) Initial margin at least equal to the level set for customers shall be
required of all customers. In no case shall a customer's initial margin be
less than a specified amount per contract, or a specified percentage of the
market value at which any commodity is bought or sold, such customer's
margin to be determined and announced by the Board of Directors or its
designee.

 (B) Once the required initial margin has been deposited for each
individual transaction, such trade and such margin shall, for the purposes
of this rule, lose their individual identity and be commingled with all
other trades and margins in the same commodity for the same customer
account.

 (C) When the margin (Net Liquidating Value plus Non-Cash Deposits) in a
customer's account declines below the maintenance margin requirement
applicable to the open positions carried in such account, the Member Firm
carrying said account is required to collect (call) from the customer such
funds, which when deposited, will restore it to the then prevailing initial
margin requirement.

 (D) A Member Firm shall not accept orders for new trades on behalf of an
undermargined customer account other than those which reduce its initial
margin requirement unless such Member Firm has been given assurances by
said customer that funds sufficient to restore the account to its then
prevailing initial margin requirement are forthcoming and will be received
in a reasonable amount of time not to exceed one business day for Floor
Members and three business days for all other customers.

(E)(1) A Member Firm may accept deposits from its customers in one or more
of the following forms as margin to cover open NYMEX Division positions:

 (a) United States Currency; or any currency freely convertible to United
States currency; provided that if foreign currency is deposited, its value
shall be calculated so that at the current rate of exchange the U.S. dollar
equivalent of the foreign currency satisfies the customer's margin
obligation.

 (b) securities issued by the Department of the Treasury of the United
States maturing within ten (10) years of the date of the deposit and
guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States Government.
Such securities shall be valued at ninety five percent (95%) of par value.

*(c) securities which are listed for trading on the New York Stock
Exchange, Inc. or the American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in
the over-the-counter market approved for margin by the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve Board provided that such securities; (i) are free
from liens and encumbrances; (ii) represent no more than 5% of the issued
and outstanding shares of any one issuer; and (iii) are valued at 75% of
the market value thereof;

(d) a letter of credit in favor of a clearing member carrying an account,
or in the case of any letter or credit to be used on a pass-through basis
with the Clearing House a letter of credit in favor of the Exchange.  All
letters of credit shall be issued in such form as may be prescribed by the
Exchange and by a depository which has been approved by the Exchange for
issuance and confirmation of letters of credit drawn in favor of the
Clearing Members or in favor of the Exchange, as applicable.

(e) deliverable warehouse receipts for commodities traded on the Exchange
provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at no more than 75% of
the value of the commodity.*

[(c)] *(f)* The net liquidating value in a customer's account over the
initial margin requirements for the positions carried for such account.

(2) A Member Firm may accept deposits from its customers in one or more of
the following forms as margin to cover open COMEX Division positions:

(a) United States currency, checks payable in United States currency, or
currency freely convertible to United States currency; provided that if
foreign currency is deposited, its value shall be calculated so that at the
current rate of exchange the U.S. dollar equivalent of the foreign currency
satisfies the customer's margin obligations;

(b) the net liquidating value in a customer's account over the initial
margin requirements for the positions carried for such account;

(c) securities issued or guaranteed by the United States, provided that
such securities shall be valued at the lower of the par or market value
thereof;

(d) securities which are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange,
Inc. or the American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in the
over-the-counter market approved for margin by the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve Board provided that such securities; (i) are free from
liens and encumbrances; (ii) represent no more than 5% of the issued and
outstanding shares of any one issuer; and (iii) are valued at 75% of the
market value thereof;

(e) *deliverable* warehouse receipts *for commodities traded on the
Exchange provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at no more
than 75% of the value of the commodity*; [provided that such warehouse
receipts shall be valued in accordance with the following:

(i) if the warehouse receipt is for a deliverable grade of the commodity
underlying either the futures contract sold or the futures contract which
is the subject of the call options sold, not more than 90% of the value of
the commodity may be considered as margin; and;

(ii) if the warehouse receipt is for a deliverable grade of the futures
contract purchased or the put options sold, not more than 75% of the value
of the commodity may be considered as margin; and;

(iii) if the warehouse receipt is for either: (A) deliverable grade of a
commodity other than the commodity underlying the futures contract or
option to be margined; or (B) a form of silver or gold not deliverable
under a futures contract, then not more than 75% of the value of the
warehouse receipt may be considered as margin.]

(f) physical commodities (but not forward contracts therefor) if the
carrying member is in possession and control of negotiable documents
covering such commodities, provided, however, that the value of such
commodities shall be based upon the contract market price for the grade of
such commodity or if the commodity is not of a grade deliverable on a
contract market, then at the price for the grade of such commodity on the
spot market;

(g) a letter of credit in favor of a clearing member carrying an account*,
or in the case of any letter or credit to be used on a pass-through basis
with the Clearing House a letter of credit in favor of the Exchange.  All
letters of credit shall be* issued in such form as may be prescribed by the
Exchange and by a depository which has been approved by the Exchange for
issuance and confirmation of letters of credit drawn in favor of the
Clearing Members *or in favor of the Exchange, as applicable.*

 (3) Calls issued by Member Firms for additional margin from customers may
only be met by: deposits conforming to the requirements of Rule 4.01(E)(1)
for open NYMEX Division positions, or conforming to the requirements of
Rule 4.01(E)(2) for open COMEX Division positions, or, for open positions
on either division of the Exchange, favorable market movements which, when
taken into consideration and combined with any other monies available,
enable the customer's margin to equal or exceed the then prevailing initial
margin requirement.

 (F) Withdrawals of margin from a customer's account may only be permitted
by a Member Firm carrying such account if the remaining funds in such
account are equal to or in excess of the then prevailing initial margin
required of the applicable open positions at the time of said withdrawal
request.

(G) The customer's response to a margin call issued by a Member Firm must
be timely and complete. A Member Firm may call, at any time, for margins
above and beyond the minimums required by the Exchange. A Member Firm may
liquidate any or all positions maintained by a customer for failure to meet
a margin call. The customer will be liable for any loss or deficiency
resulting therefrom.

 (H) The margin requirements established by the Board or its designee may
vary for different commodities and may be changed from time to time by the
Board or its designee, and in the discretion of the Board or its designee,
may be made applicable to all open trades as well as new trades.

 (I) Arbitrage

(1) For the purposes of Exchange margin requirements, an arbitrage position
is a purchase or sale of an Exchange futures contract in one delivery month
which futures contract is offset by a futures contract to sell or to
purchase a similar quantity of a related commodity in the same or different
delivery month which offsetting futures contract is executed on or subject
to the rules of a different exchange. In order to qualify as an arbitrage
position, each contract long and short must be carried by the same member
firm for the same account.

(2) The Board of Directors, by resolution, may identify those futures
contracts, that are executable on and/or subject to the rules of a
different exchange, which shall be deemed to qualify as part of an
arbitrage position.

(3) The Board of Directors or its designee may set levels of margin for
arbitrage positions at a rate less than applicable to outright positions;
provided, however, that except for interdivision straddles, no such rate
shall be lower than the rates established for clearing members' margins.

Rule 9.05. MARGINS

*    *    *    *
(E) Clearing Members may meet original margin calls by depositing:

(1) Cash (U.S. Currency);

(2) Original Margin Certificates issued by an original margin depository,
in form acceptable to the Clearing House, for delivery to the order of the
Clearing House, representing securities issued by the Department of
Treasury of the United States of America maturing within ten (10) years
from the date of the deposit and guaranteed as to principal and interest by
the United States Government; such securities shall be valued at ninety
five percent (95%) of the par value; or

(3) Subject to a maximum limit of 50% of the Clearing Member's total
original margin obligations, Irrevocable Letters of Credit payable to the
order of the Clearing House *including such Letters of Credit that are
deposited with the Clearing Member in accordance with Exchange procedures
by a customer*, in form acceptable to the Clearing House, issued by or
confirmed by an original margin depository and having an expiration date of
not less than three (3) or more than eighteen (18) months from the date of
issuance; provided, however, that such Letter of Credit may not be used to
meet original margin obligations during the fifteen calendar days prior to
the expiration date thereof (if the fifteenth day prior to the expiration
of the Letter of Credit is not a business day, the period during which such
Letter of Credit may not be used to meet original margin obligations shall
begin on the business day immediately preceding that day); and, provided
further, that on the business day!
!
 preceding the fifteenth calendar day prior to the expiration of the Letter
of Credit, the Clearing House shall issue a call for original margin to be
deposited in a form and manner acceptable to the Clearing House for
positions held open as of the close of business on that day and margined by
the Letter of Credit. The Clearing House shall have the unqualified right
to call on any Letter of Credit at any time prior to expiration.

CCA Rule 48. DEPOSIT OF SECURITIES AND LETTERS OF CREDIT A ORIGINAL MARGIN

*    *    *    *
(b) Irrevocable Letters of Credit.

(i)  The Corporation will accept as original margin for the full face
amount thereof a letter of credit in favor of the Corporation issued by any
institution selected by the depositor *including such Letters of Credit in
favor of the Corporation that are deposited with the Clearing Member in
accordance with Exchange procedures by a customer*, provided that

(A)  such  institution has been approved by the Board as an approved
depository or such institution is organized under the laws of the United
States or the laws of any state and the letter of credit issued by such
institution has been confirmed by an approved depository;
(B)  that the aggregate amount of letters of credit which may be accepted
at any time from any one approved depository, or for the account of any one
Clearing Member may be limited by the Board from time to time;
(C)  that a letter of credit issued on behalf of a Clearing Member by an
institution which is an affiliated firm of such Clearing Member must be
confirmed by an institution which is not an affiliated firm of such
Clearing Member; and
(D)  such letter of credit shall be in form and substance approved by the
Board and shall be in such denominations as may be determined by the Board
from time to time; shall be irrevocable, shall be available to be drawn
upon by the Corporation by  a clean sight draft(s) or written demand(s) and
shall run for a period of not less than ninety (90) days from the date of
issue.


Thank you all in advance for contributing to Enron Research site!

Here is the new site's URL:  http://enaresearch.dev.corp.enron.com

When system requests login and password, please use the login and the
password that you use to login into the Enron Network.

Please send me your comments and suggestion,  so that they will be
incorporated into the site.

Sincerely, Elena

Elena Chilkina
713-853-4503


Can you please send your email addresses and fax numbers too.   (So I can
email you information)

Thank you.

   Maureen McVicker
   Steve Kean's Assistant

Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com> on 05/15/2001 05:23:14 PM
To: "'skean@enron.com'" <skean@enron.com>
cc: James Macias <Jmacias@calpine.com>

Subject: Governor's Generator Phone calls

Steve--I am at 925-600-2085, and Jim Macias is at 925-600-2306. Thanks.


Please review.  Note that on the attached letter, we will remove the rep. concernig the "presence" of hazardous materials".  According the Kyle, there may have been such material stored in the warehouse.  Kyle,  Please review the letter and let me know if you see any problems.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"P. Keith Daigle" <pkdaigle@neosoft.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Saturday, October 13, 2001 1:50 PM
To:	Nemec, Gerald
Subject:	Sale of Napoleonville, LA  property  our file ENR-02

Gerald:

I am attaching the following documents for your review:

1).  Purchase and  Sale Agreement,

2)  Draft of the body of a letter from LRCI to the Police Jury

I have revised the Purchase and Sale Agreement to add the language to
the suggested by Kim Torres (in ? 4) and to add Louisiana Resources,
Inc. and Louisiana Resources, L.P. as intervenors in the Cash Sale to
quitclaim the property to the Police Jury to solve the title problem.

Please contact me upon receipt to discuss and to fill in the blanks.

Keith

PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT

	This Purchase and Sale Agreement (together with all Exhibits hereto and made a part hereof, this "Agreement") is entered into effective the ___ day of __________, 2001 (the "Effective Date") by Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., Inc., a _________________________ corporation, having its principal place of business at ___________________________________ appearing herein through its duly appointed attorney-in-fact whose power of attorney has not been revoked or rescinded, as "Seller"; and The Police Jury for the Parish of Assumption, Louisiana, acting through its duly authorized President, Martin S. Triche, pursuant to Resolution No. _________ of the Assumption Parish Police Jury dated __________, 2001, as "Buyer", each a "Party" and together, the "Parties."

	Whereas, Seller is the owner of the following described property located in Section 66, Township 13 South, Range 14 East, Assumption Parish, Louisiana:

	Commencing at a corner common to the Northwest corner of Robin Street and the Northeast corner of property now or formerly owned by Clifton Naquin, proceed N 38  03' 43" E a distance along the Western right of way line of Robin Street a distance of 49.26', thence along the same course a distance of 227.81' to a point, thence N 51  58' 32" W, a distance of 260.32', thence along the rear property line a distance of 277.44' to a point, thence along the South property line a distance or 260.02'to the point of beginning, containing 2.269 acres, more or less, as further depicted on the Survey Plat showing a 5.081 Acre Tract of Land Belonging to Louisiana Resources Co., dated February 22, 1999, prepared by Harold J. Terracina, R.E., a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein for all purposes, together with all improvements located thereon and all appurtenances thereto, which property is hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property."  The improvements located on the Subject Property bear Municipal Address 119 Robin Street, Napoleonville, Louisiana, 70390.

Whereas, Seller is desirous of selling, and Buyer is desirous of purchasing, one hundred percent of Seller's interest in the Subject Property.

	Now Therefore, in consideration of the purchase price to be paid by Buyer to Seller and the mutual agreements contained herein, the Parties hereto acknowledge and agree as follows:

	1.	Description of Property.  Seller agrees to sell and Buyer agrees to purchase all of Seller's right, title and interest in the Subject Property. The actual sale of the Subject Property shall be by Cash Sale, containing special warranties, substantially in the form of Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes.

	2.	Purchase Price.  The purchase price for the Subject Property to be paid by Buyer to Seller for the Subject Property shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) in cash due and payable by cashier's check made payable to Seller and delivered to Seller contemporaneously with the receipt by Buyer of the Cash Sale executed by Seller and vesting all of Seller's ownership interest in and to the Subject Property in Buyer.

	3.	Not an Option.  This is not an option, but it is an executory contract to buy and sell and it shall be so construed in all respects.  No Party may withdraw from this Agreement all Parties grant unto each other and reserve unto themselves the absolute right to demand specific performance of this Agreement.

	4.	Warranties by Seller.  Seller's interest in and to the Subject Property is and will be transferred to and accepted by Buyer "AS IS, WHERE IS" AND IN ITS PRESENT CONDITION AND STATE OF REPAIR.  BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT SELLER HAS NOT MADE, AND SELLER HEREBY EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS AND NEGATES, ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY, EXPRESS, STATUTORY OR IMPLIED, RELATING TO THE CONDITION OR QUALITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY AND ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES UNDER APPLICABLE LAW NOW OR HEREAFTER IN EFFECT, AND ANY IMPLIED OR EXPRESS WARRANTY REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS. BUYER HAS INSPECTED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND HAS SATISFIED ITSELF AS TO THE PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION, BOTH SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE PRESENCE, RELEASE OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES.  BUYER EXPRESSLY WAIVES ALL CLAIMS TO ANY AND ALL REDHIBITORY DEFECTS AND/OR VICES AND ALL CLAIMS BASED ON THE FITNESS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY INTENDED PURPOSE.   BUYER IS RELYING SOLELY UPON ITS OWN INSPECTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND BUYER SHALL ACCEPT ALL OF THE SAME IN AN "AS IS, WHERE IS" CONDITION.  THERE ARE NO WARRANTIES THAT EXTEND BEYOND THE FACE OF THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

	Seller warrants that it is the record title owner of the Subject Property, and warrants that it has good and merchantable title, free and clear of any and all liens or encumbrances, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Buyer from and against all claims asserted by parties asserting adverse title, liens or encumbrances.

	Seller warrants that it is a corporation in good standing under the laws of the State of ______________ and that the person executing this Agreement and the Act of Cash Sale pursuant hereto on behalf of the Seller has valid and binding authority to do so.

	5.		INDEMNITIES.   BUYER SHALL INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, REIMBURSE AND HOLD SELLER, ITS PARENT AND AFFILIATES AND SUBSIDIARIES (THE "SELLER GROUP") FREE AND HARMLESS FROM ANY COSTS, CLAIMS, DAMAGES (WHETHER ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH OR ON ACCOUNT OR PROPERTY DAMAGE) OR CAUSES OF ACTION AND LOSSES OF WHATSOEVER NATURE (INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COURT COSTS) ARISING OUT OF, OR IN CONNECTION WITH OR IN ANY WAY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, ON OR AFTER THE CLOSING DATE, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT SUCH COSTS, CLAIMS, DAMAGES, CAUSES OF ACTION OR LOSSES ARE DUE TO SELLER'S GROSS NEGLIGENCE OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT.

	6.		Proration of Taxes.    All property, ad valorem and similar taxes applicable to the Subject Property shall be prorated as of the Effective Date between Seller and Buyer. Such proration shall be final and shall not be the subject of adjustment after the final bills are rendered.  Buyer shall be responsible for all taxes, except income taxes of Seller, and prepare all tax filings, in respect to the Subject Property that are required to be paid or filed after the Effective Date.  To the extent that any such taxes filed and paid by Buyer are prorated hereunder, Seller shall promptly pay, upon of receipt of an invoice therefor from Buyer, its pro rata share of same.  All taxes, except Seller's income taxes, occasioned by reason of this sale, whether real, personal or mixed, shall be borne and paid solely by Buyer.  If, for the current ad valorem tax year, the taxable value of the Subject Property that is the subject of this Agreement is determined by a special appraisal method that allows for appraisal of the property at less than market value, the person to whom the property is transferred may not be allowed to qualify the Subject Property for that special appraisal in a subsequent tax year and the Subject Property may then be appraised at its full market value.  In addition, the transfer of the Subject Property or a subsequent change in the use of the property may result in the imposition of an additional tax plus interest as a penalty for the transfer of the change in the use of the land. Buyer acknowledges that there shall be no proration for, and Buyer shall be responsible for, payment of any "roll back" taxes or any other redetermination of property taxes assessed or relating to the year of the closing and years preceding the year of closing due or based upon any change in the use of the Subject Property at and after the closing hereunder.

7.		Disputes.   Any dispute relating to this Agreement shall be resolved by binding, self-administered arbitration pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association ("AAA") and all such proceedings shall be subject to the Federal Arbitration Act.  A single arbitrator shall be selected under the expedited rules of the AAA.  Only damages allowed pursuant to this Agreement may be awarded and the arbitrator shall have no authority to award consequential, treble, exemplary or punitive damages of any type under any circumstances regardless of whether such damages may be available under Louisiana law. The arbitrator shall have the power to award the remedy of specific performance. The results of such arbitration shall be conclusive and binding, provided, however, that both Parties shall have the right to apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for such equitable relief as is necessary to preserve and enforce their rights under this Agreement.  Notwithstanding any of the foregoing provisions, either Party may join the other Party to any action, suit or proceeding with respect to which the Party seeking such joinder is a defendant, if the other Party is required to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless such defendant in accordance with the terms of the provisions hereof.   Judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having a jurisdiction hereof.

8.		Entirety and Severability.  This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties related to the purchase and sale of the Subject Property.  There are no prior or contemporaneous agreements or representations (whether oral or written) affecting the Subject Property other than those herein expressed.  In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provisions had never been herein contained.

9.		Governing Law.  THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE CONSTRUED UNDER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA AND FEDERAL LAW AS SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 7 ABOVE.

10.		Successors and Assigns.  This Agreement, and all of the terms and provisions hereof, shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto, and their respective successors and assigns.

11.	Counterparts.  This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and need not be signed by more than one of the Parties and all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement.

	12.	Further Assurances.  Each Party agrees that it will promptly perform all other acts and execute and deliver all other documents as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement.

	13.	Attorney's Fees.  In the event of the commencement of an arbitration proceeding or a breach of any of the provisions contained herein by either Party, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to collect from the other Party, as part of its damages for said breach, reasonable attorneys' fees associated with enforcing or defending any provision hereof.

	14.	Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only in writing signed by both Parties which expressly refers to this Agreement and states an intention to modify or amend it.  No such amendment or modification shall be effected by use of any purchase order, acknowledgment, invoice or other form of either Party and in the event of conflict between the terms of this Agreement and any such form, the terms of this Agreement shall control.

	15.	Waiver.  A waiver by either Party of a breach of any of the terms of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of the terms of this Agreement.  The failure of any Party to insist upon strict performance of any provisions of this Agreement or to exercise any right under it shall not constitute a waiver of that provision.

	16.	Termination.  This Agreement shall expire and shall be of no further force or effect Ninety (90) days from the Effective Date unless prior to such time the Parties have entered into an act of Cash Sale transferring the Subject Property from the Seller to the Buyer.

	Each Party does hereby execute this Agreement as of the ________ day of ______, 2001.

Witnesses:					Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., Inc.

________________________		By: _________________________							       _________________________
________________________		         Attorney-in-Fact

					 	The Police Jury of Assumption Parish Louisiana

________________________		By: _________________________
							Martin S. Triche, President

________________________

EXHIBIT "A"

EXHIBIT "B"
NOT FOR EXECUTION   EXHIBIT AS TO FORM ONLY

State of Louisiana
Parish of Assumption
ACT OF CASH SALE

	Be it Known, that on this ____ day of ________, 2001 before me, _____________________________, Notary Public, duly commissioned and qualified  within the jurisdiction indicated, and in the presence of the undersigned witnesses, personally came and appeared:

	Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., Inc., Tax I.D. No._________________a _________________________ corporation, having its principal place of business at ___________________________________ appearing herein through its duly appointed attorney-in-fact whose power of attorney has not been revoked or rescinded, hereafter referred to as "SELLER";

	LRCI, Inc., Tax I.D. No.________________a _________________________ corporation, having its principal place of business at ___________________________________ appearing herein through its duly appointed attorney-in-fact whose power of attorney has not been revoked or rescinded, hereafter referred to as "INTERVENOR NO. 1"; and,

	Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., L.P., Tax I.D. No.________________a _______________ limited partnership having its principal place of business at ___________________________________ appearing herein through its duly appointed attorney-in-fact whose power of attorney has not been revoked or rescinded, hereafter referred to as "INTERVENOR NO. 2";

who declared that for the price of One Hundred Thousand ($100,000.00) DOLLARS cash, receipt of which is acknowledged, SELLER hereby sells and delivers without any warranty of title whatsoever except for the acts of the SELLER, but with full subrogation to all rights and actions of warranty SELLER may have, unto:

	The Police Jury for the Parish of Assumption, Louisiana, Tax Identification Number _______________________, acting through its duly authorized President, Martin S Triche, pursuant to Resolution No. _________ of the Assumption Parish Police Jury dated __________, 2001, and whose present mailing address is _____________________, Napoleonville, LA, __________, hereafter referred to as "PURCHASER";

the following described property, with all its component parts, including all rights, ways, privileges, servitudes and appurtenances thereto belonging, the possession of which PURCHASER acknowledges:

	Section 66, Township 13 South, Range 14 East, Assumption Parish, Louisiana:

		Commencing at a corner common to the Northwest corner of Robin Street and the Northeast corner of property now or formerly owned by Clifton Naquin, proceed N 38  03' 43" E a distance along the Western right of way line of Robin Street a distance of 49.26', thence along the same course a distance of 227.81' to a point, thence N 51  58' 32" W, a distance of 260.32', thence along the rear property line a distance of 277.44' to a point, thence along the South property line a distance or 260.02'to the point of beginning, containing 2.269 acres, more or less, as further depicted on the Survey Plat showing a 5.081 Acre Tract of Land Belonging to Louisiana Resources Co., dated February 22, 1999, prepared by Harold J. Terracina, R.E., a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein for all purposes, together with all improvements located thereon and all appurtenances thereto. The improvements located on the Subject Property bear Municipal Address 119 Robin Street, Napoleonville, Louisiana, 70390.

	This Sale is made pursuant and subject to all of the provisions of that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated effective as of _____________________, 2001, by and between PURCHASER and SELLER, and the delivery of this Act of Cash Sale shall not affect, enlarge, diminish or otherwise impair any of the warranties, representations, disclaimers or covenants made in the Purchase and Sale Agreement and all of such warranties, representations, disclaimers and covenants shall survive the delivery of this Act of Cash Sale to the extent, and in the manner, set forth in the Purchase and Sale Agreement.

Taxes for the current year will be prorated.

All parties signing the within instrument have declared themselves to be of full legal capacity and have declared that the name, marital status, domicile and address of each is correct as set forth above.

All agreements and stipulations herein and all the obligations assumed herein shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the respective parties, and the PURCHASER, PURCHASER's heirs and assigns shall have and hold the described property in full ownership forever.

This conveyance is made and accepted, SUBJECT TO, any and all covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, and/or reservations which may appear of record in the public records of Assumption Parish, Louisiana, affecting the Subject Property. Appearers recognize that, except to the extent separately certified in writing, no title examination of said property has been performed by the undersigned Notary(s), and said parties release the undersigned Notary(s), from all liability therefor.

This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and need not be signed by more than one of the Parties and all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement.

INTERVENOR NO. 1 and INTERVENOR NO. 2, declare that they are appearing herein solely for the purpose of ratifying and agreeing to the sale of by SELLER to PURCHASER of the property described herein, and further that they transfer, set over, and quitclaim to the SELLER any rights they may have, if any, in and to the property described herein, without any warranty whatsoever.

	Thus Done and Passed in the presence of the undersigned competent witnesses, who sign with Appearers and the undersigned Notary(s), after due reading of the whole.

 Witnesses:				Seller:

_____________________		Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., Inc.

					By: _________________________					                _________________________
                                             	         Attorney-in-Fact

_____________________		Intervenor No. 1

					LRCI, Inc.

					By: _________________________					                _________________________
                                             	         Attorney-in-Fact

					Intervenor No. 2:

					Louisiana Resources Pipeline Co., L.P.

					By: _________________________					                _________________________
                                             	         Attorney-in-Fact

	__________________________________
	NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the
	 County of _____________, Texas
	My commission expires, ______________

Witnesses:		Buyer:

_____________________		Police Jury, Assumption Parish Louisiana

		By:__________________________
                                                	Martin S. Triche, President_____________________

	__________________________________
	NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the
	Parish of Assumption, Louisiana
	                  My commission expires, ______________

 - HazWasteLtr.rtf


I have a meeting at 1pm.  How about 2pm?

---------------------- Forwarded by Corey Hollander/Corp/Enron on 09/18/2000
04:51 PM ---------------------------
From: Tana Jones@ECT on 09/18/2000 04:40 PM
To: Corey Hollander/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Global Counterparty Next Generation Requirements

I should be available anytime this week, with the caveat, we have a big deal
we're trying to close by Friday, and it could heat up at any moment.  How
about tomorrow at 1:00 pm?

	Corey Hollander@ENRON
	09/18/2000 03:48 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Global Counterparty Next Generation Requirements

Tana,

I met with Mark Taylor two weeks ago to discuss legal's business requirements
for the next generation Global Counterparty System.  He told me that you
would be a better resource than he for counterparty issues.

Do you have time to meet with me this week for 30 minutes?  Attached is a
list of questions I have about your needs in relation to the GCP system.

Please let me know what time you will be available and I'll setup a meeting.

Regards,

Corey Hollander


Thanks for looking into this for me.

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Hector McLoughlin @ ENRON                           10/04/2000 02:06 PM

To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Later Transfer

Sally,
Lisa Cousino's transfer to EBS will be a lateral move in salary and position
per the offer letter that she will be receiving.
Hope this helps.    Let me know if there is any other information that you
need.
hgm


GREG WHALLEY: IN THE LINE OF FIRE
BusinessWeek, 09/10/01

Enron Wins Document Protection Order From Calif Judge
Dow Jones Energy Service, 09/06/01
Power regulators still debating decisions on key energy issues
Associated Press Newswires, 09/06/01
Black Hills Corp Buys Las Vegas Power Plant
Dow Jones News Service, 09/06/01

Enron's subsidiary serves arbitration notice on Indian government
Associated Press Newswires, 09/06/01
India Enron Subsidiary Serves Arbitration Notice On Govt
Dow Jones International News, 09/06/01
INDIA: US seeks India's cooperation in energy security.
Reuters English News Service, 09/06/01

SPRINGS DECLINES TO JOIN LAWSUIT ON POWER PLANT
South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 09/06/01

California Panel Delays Vote on Power-Provider Choice (Update1)
Bloomberg, 09/06/01

RWE Energy Trading Division to Set Up U.S. Unit, Take on Enron
Bloomberg, 09/06/01

In Business This Week: HEADLINER
GREG WHALLEY: IN THE LINE OF FIRE
By Stephanie Anderson Forest
Edited by Monica Roman

09/10/2001
BusinessWeek
56
(Copyright 2001 McGraw-Hill, Inc.)

Greg Whalley knows a thing or two about getting ready for battle. During the 1980s, the West Point graduate served with the U.S. Army. That experience could come in handy in his new job as president and chief operating officer of Houston energy trader Enron.
Since the beginning of the year, Enron shares have plunged 50% in the wake of dropping energy prices. The stock has also been hit by fallout from other issues, including the company's ailing broadband venture and the abrupt, Aug. 14 resignation of President and CEO Jeffrey Skilling.
Following Skilling's departure, Whalley, 39, was promoted along with Mark Frevert, who was named vice-chairman. Both were elevated to the office of the chairman.
Whalley is now seen by outsiders as the leading contender for Enron's top post. But Chairman Kenneth Lay, who reassumed Enron's CEO title when Skilling stepped down, cautions that the promotions should not be viewed as the last word in the company's succession plan.

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Enron Wins Document Protection Order From Calif Judge
By Jessica Berthold

09/06/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

OF DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- A Sacramento Superior Court judge Thursday ruled that Enron Corp (ENE) must comply with a legislative subpoena of financial documents, but reversed an earlier decision and granted the company a protective order of the documents, according to a copy of the ruling seen by Dow Jones Newswires.
Enron said the ruling was a victory, as the company has always maintained it would be happy to comply with the subpoena by the state Senate committee as long as the company received a protective order.
"We are obviously very happy with the ruling and look forward to working with the committee to come up with a protective order that truly protects our proprietary information," said Enron spokesman Mark Palmer.
The Senate Select Committee To Investigate Market Manipulation has already cited Enron and Reliant Energy, Inc (REI) with contempt for refusing to provide documents, a charge for which the companies could be fined.
Once Enron and the committee draft a protective order and the judge agrees to it, the company will hand over any documents that the committee wants, Palmer said.
However, an attorney for the committee expressed skepticism that the company would actually follow through.
"We have no indication from Enron that they would agree to produce the documents we've requested, even with the confidentiality order," said Larry Drivon, special counsel to the committee.
He added that he could not speculate if the committee would drop its contempt charge if Enron did produce all requested documents.
In his decision granting the protective order, Judge Charles Kobayashi wrote that he was not convinced the committee has solid standards in place to ensure Enron's protection.
"It is clear that there are no standards for determining what are the available protections, no procedure for determining what is a legitimately confidential, privileged, proprietary matter, no procedure for oversight and no prescribed remedy for (Enron) for any unauthorized disclosures," Kobayashi wrote.
Last week, a San Francisco Superior Court judge granted Enron a protective order in a separate investigation by the state attorney general.
-By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Power regulators still debating decisions on key energy issues
By KAREN GAUDETTE
Associated Press Writer

09/06/2001
Associated Press Newswires
Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators on Thursday once again delayed suspending the option that allows Californians to choose their electricity provider.
Though a mere 200,000 Californians switched from their local utility to companies such as Green Mountain Energy or Enron, the Legislature has ordered the Public Utilities Commission to temporarily end consumer choice to keep three struggling utilities from losing more customers.
Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas and Electric Co. are on the hook for the state's power-buying costs.
The PUC is expected to suspend direct access retroactively to July 1. Energy service providers, such as solar and wind-powered electricity seller Green Mountain Energy, say it's unconstitutional, and have vowed to fight the PUC in court.
The PUC also delayed voting on several key issues that would affect Californians' electric bills. It plans to take up these issues at a newly scheduled meeting Sept. 13:
- A proposal to grant the state's power-buying agency the authority to raise electric rates on its own without PUC review to ensure such rates are justified.
- A proposal to raise rates for San Diego Gas and Electric Co. residential customers by an average of 12 percent.
- A proposal that bills Pacific Gas and Electric Co. $6.5 billion, Southern California Edison Co. $4 billion and SDG&E $1.5 billion to help the state recoup its power-buying costs.
PUC President Loretta Lynch said the commission needs more time to review a flood of comments from utilities, consumer advocates and other parties to those decisions.
The state plans to recover some of the money it has spent buying power by collecting a portion of ratepayer money.
The more ratepayers each utility has, the lighter the blow to each customer's electric bill. But it would come at the expense of consumer choice, which lawmakers had promoted as the method by which deregulation would foster competition and lead to lower electric rates.
Rick Counihan, vice president and general manager of Green Mountain Energy, said if the PUC suspends consumer choice until the state stops buying power for the utilities - potentially a decade down the road - consumer choice is dead.
"(Direct access) was one of the few good things that came out of the restructuring," Counihan said.
Just as some environmentally conscious customers buy organic produce or recycled paper products, the option to leave their utility and buy power largely generated by the wind or sun was another way they could make a difference, he said.
Under the PUC plan, customers who signed up with an energy provider before July 1 could keep their contracts until they expire. Deals signed after that date would be nullified, and the customer would be forced to return to a local utility.
PUC Commissioner Richard Bilas, a vocal proponent of direct access, is hopeful it could resume after the finances of PG&E, Edison and SDG&E improve.
"When the utilities get back in the business - if they ever get back in the business of going out and buying electricity on behalf of themselves - that could open up direct access again," Bilas said. He predicted that could happen 18 months from now.
Counihan was less optimistic.
"I'm very skeptical that we, or other providers, will come back to California," Counihan said. "We'll very likely take our marketing activities and reallocate to other states that are more friendly."
Counihan also worried a temporary suspension would give the big three utilities no incentive to retain an infrastructure of computers and other technology put into place to process customers who switched to the alternative energy firms.
---
On the Net:
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Black Hills Corp Buys Las Vegas Power Plant

09/06/2001
Dow Jones News Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

RAPID CITY, S.D. -(Dow Jones)- Black Hills Corp.'s (BKH) independent energy unit Black Hills Energy Ventures completed the acquisition of a 273-megawatt gas-fired co-generation power plant in Las Vegas from Enron Corp.'s (ENE) Enron North America unit.
Black Hills Energy said in a press release Thursday the cost for the entire facility is expected to be about $330 million. The price of the transaction was previously undisclosed.
Black Hills is in the process of obtaining long-term financing, which primarily will be non-recourse project debt.
Black Hills Energy and Enron's unit signed a definitive agreement for the transaction in July.
New York Stock Exchange-listed shares of Black Hills traded recently at $31.81, down 5 cents, or 0.2%, on composite volume of 48,000 shares. Average daily volume is 178,092 shares.

Black Hills Energy said it minimizes its risk exposure while securing significant recurring revenue and earnings streams by linking the Las Vegas facility to long-term contracts and fuel provision requirements.
An expansion of the present 51-megawatt cogeneration plant is now underway. Most of the power from that facility is under a long-term contract expiring in 2024, with the remainder being merchant power.
Black Hills Energy has sold 50% of the 51-megawatt power plant to another party.
Construction of a new combined cycle generation facility adjacent to the existing plant will add about 222 megawatts of capacity to the existing plant site.
The new generation is expected to be fully operational by the third quarter of 2002.
The power of the expansion is sold under a long-term contract expiring in 2017. The contract requires the purchaser to provide fuel to the power plant when the plant is dispatched.
Company Web site: http://www.blackhillscorp.com
-Consella A. Lee; Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5400

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Enron's subsidiary serves arbitration notice on Indian government

09/06/2001
Associated Press Newswires
Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

NEW DELHI, India (AP) - The Indian subsidiary of power giant Enron Corp. has served an arbitration notice on Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government for payment of 1.02 billion rupees (dlrs 21.7 million) owed by a state utility company, a news report said Thursday.
The government had provided guarantees that it would meet the obligations of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board if the latter failed to pay for the electricity purchased from one of Houston-based Enron's plants in western India.
The plant stopped operation in May after its sole customer, the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, canceled a sevem-year-old power purchase agreement.
"We sent the arbitration notice on Sept. 4 to the government of India," Press Trust of India news agency quoted Jimmy Mogal, a spokesman for Enron's Indian subsidiary, Dabhol Power Corporation, as saying.
The arbitration proceedings will be held in London, PTI said. No date has been fixed so far.
Enron says the board did not have the right to cancel the agreement.
The state government says that DPC's electricity is overpriced and it favors renegotiation of the power purchase agreement between the company and the state utility. There is a court dispute between Dabhol and the electricity board over payment of outstanding bills.
(aks-gs)

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

India Enron Subsidiary Serves Arbitration Notice On Govt

09/06/2001
Dow Jones International News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW DELHI (AP)--The Indian subsidiary of power giant Enron Corp. (ENE) has served an arbitration notice on Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's government for payment of $21.7 million owed by a state utility company, a news report said Thursday.
The government had provided guarantees that it would meet the obligations of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board if the latter failed to pay for the electricity purchased from one of Houston-based Enron's plants in western India.
The plant stopped operation in May after its sole customer, the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, canceled a 7-year-old power-purchase agreement.
"We sent the arbitration notice on Sept. 4 to the government of India," Press Trust of India news agency quoted Jimmy Mogal, a spokesman for Enron's Indian subsidiary, Dabhol Power Corp., as saying.
The arbitration proceedings will take place in London, PTI said. No date has been fixed so far.
Enron says the board didn't have the right to cancel the agreement.
The state government says DPC's electricity is overpriced, and it favors renegotiation of the power-purchase agreement between the company and the state utility. There is a court dispute between Dabhol and the electricity board on payment of outstanding bills.

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

INDIA: US seeks India's cooperation in energy security.

09/06/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

BOMBAY, Sept 6 (Reuters) - The United States has sought India's cooperation in protecting oil and gas supplies from the the volatile Middle East region, the main supplier of crude oil for both the countries.
"The Persian Gulf, and the lines of communication connecting that region with the rest of the world remain critical for the security of both countries," U.S. Ambassador Robert D. Blackwill told a business conference on Thursday.
He said the United States and its allies depended on the Middle East for half of their crude oil imports, while India banked on the region for 90 percent of such imports.
"Consequently, the flow of oil and gas from the Middle East must be safeguarded and free of threats stemming either from military aggression or from acts of terrorism," he said.
"Parallel with efforts by the international community, the United States and India can work more closely together to achieve this objective."
He said both countries wanted a higher global supply of energy as the current production levels were inadequate.
"This implies that there will be increasing joint opportunities to exploit new technologies to increase energy supplies."
Blackwill said American energy firms were world leaders and their investments in the U.S. and abroad enhanced efficiencies.
"Despite current difficulties, we hope those U.S. firms can thrive in India."
U.S. energy firm, Enron Corp , is embroiled in a bitter payments dispute with a local utility and has declared it wants to sell its 65-percent stake in the $2.9-billion Dabhol power plant-the largest direct foreign investment in India.
Another American energy firm, AES Corp is also facing a payments dispute and said recently it wanted to sell its stake in a distribution company in the eastern state of Orissa.
Blackwill said problems faced by multinational investors had "darkened" India's investment climate.
"I know this personally from speaking with some of the premier American business executives with major investments in Asia."

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

LOCAL
SPRINGS DECLINES TO JOIN LAWSUIT ON POWER PLANT
Sallie James Staff Writer Staff Writer Jeremy Milarsky contributed to this report.

09/06/2001
South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Broward Metro
4B
(Copyright 2001 by the Sun-Sentinel)

A tiff may be brewing among three north Broward cities whose concerns about a power plant have already spawned a lawsuit.
So far, the city of Coconut Creek has sued the city of Deerfield Beach, claiming Deerfield illegally approved a site plan that would allow Enron Corp. to build a power plant east of Florida's Turnpike.
Now Coconut Creek officials are trying to draw Coral Springs into the fray, asking the city to join its lawsuit with some financial assistance and public backing. So far, Coral Springs has declined.
Coral Springs Commissioner Rhonda Calhoun called the maneuverings "treacherous," and the dialogue among city officials is becoming contentious.
The lawsuit, filed in July, accuses Deerfield Beach of illegally approving a site plan.
In the suit, Coconut Creek officials claim Deerfield Beach erroneously approved the plant because it overlooked a loophole in a zoning law. Because of a complicated 1990 annexation law, only City Hall staff members could decide whether Enron could build its plant in Deerfield Beach.
Staff members could reject the project only if they could prove the plant broke city laws.
Coral Springs is reluctant to sue a sister city and twice has delayed action on Coconut Creek's request to become a party to their lawsuit. Coconut Creek Vice Mayor Jim Waldman and Mayor Gloria Fantl both tried to convince Coral Springs officials they really would not be suing the city.
Just don't think of The City of Coconut Creek vs. the City of Deerfield Beach as a lawsuit, Waldman told Coral Springs commissioners on Tuesday. He suggested they view it as "empowerment" instead.
"It is not a city suing a city," said Waldman, even though Coral Springs City Attorney Sam Goren affirmed the litigation is most definitely a city suing a city. "What we are actually doing is empowering Deerfield Beach, their elected officials, to do what they wanted to do. The vehicle, unfortunately, is through the legal system, and it says we have to sue the party who made the decision."
Waldman's comments irked Deerfield Mayor Al Capellini.
"Our fellow commissioners in Coconut Creek ... they are ... trying to convince Coral Springs to join in their suit against Deerfield Beach. So next time you're going through Coconut Creek, think about that," Capellini said to the audience at Tuesday's Deerfield Beach commission meeting.
Afterward, he added, "If Jim Waldman was concerned about empowering us, why don't they pick up the phone and have a discussion with us? Do they think a lawsuit is a proper way to spend taxpayers' money? We find it offensive that they think our city attorney and our five commissioners don't know how to interpret the law."
Coral Springs Mayor John Sommerer also was also wary.
"I have heard commissioners from Deerfield Beach say they don't know what the heck Coconut Creek is trying to pull," Sommerer said.
Staff Writer Jeremy Milarsky contributed to this report.
Sallie James can be reached at sjames@sun-sentinel.com or 954-572- 2019.

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

California Panel Delays Vote on Power-Provider Choice (Update1)
2001-09-06 15:34 (New York)

California Panel Delays Vote on Power-Provider Choice (Update1)

     (Adds comments from PUC commissioner in seventh, eighth
paragraphs.)

     San Francisco, Sept. 6 (Bloomberg) -- California regulators
delayed a vote on a plan to suspend utility customers' right to
choose their own power provider, a move officials say is needed to
ensure there is a market for electricity the state is buying.

     The California Public Utilities Commission will consider the
issue of so-called ``direct access'' at a meeting on Sept. 13. The
delay gives customers of three state utilities more time to switch
power providers, leaving fewer customers behind to help the state
recover its costs, officials said.

     ``The longer that we drag this thing out, the more damage
that is going to be done,'' said Commissioner Carl Wood.

     The state has spent more than $8.6 billion buying power on
behalf of utilities owned by PG&E Corp., Edison International and
Sempra Energy. PG&E's Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison's Southern
California Edison became insolvent buying power for more than they
could charge customers. Rates paid by utility customers would help
reimburse the state for power-buying expenses.

     One of the promises of the deregulation of California's
electricity market was that customers would be allowed to leave
Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison or Sempra's San
Diego Gas & Electric and buy electricity provided by other
companies. Assembly Bill 1X, the legislation that allowed
California to buy power on behalf of utilities, called for the
suspension of direct access.

                         Bilas Delays Vote

     The vote was delayed by PUC member Richard Bilas. Bilas is
one of two commissioners appointed by former Governor Pete Wilson,
a Republican, and is a supporter of power-provider choice. The
other three commissioners were appointed by Governor Gray Davis,
who signed Assembly Bill 1X in February.

     After the meeting, Bilas said he delayed the vote to give
utility customers more time to switch their energy provider. Bilas
was able to delay the vote because he had an alternate proposal on
the issue on the PUC agenda.

     ``Direct access hasn't died yet,'' Bilas told reporters.
``It'll go to heaven next Thursday I believe -- probably on a 3-2
vote.''

     In July, the latest month for which data is available, 7,647
California customers switched to a direct-access power provider
from a utility, according to the PUC. Another 7,494 customers
switched to a utility from a direct-access provider.

     The PUC's plan to suspend direct access is opposed by the
Alliance for Retail Energy Markets, a group that includes such
power providers as Enron Corp., AES NewEnergy, Calpine Corp. and
Green Mountain Energy Co.

RWE Energy Trading Division to Set Up U.S. Unit, Take on Enron
2001-09-06 09:42 (New York)

RWE Energy Trading Division to Set Up U.S. Unit, Take on Enron

     Essen, Germany, Sept. 6 (Bloomberg) -- RWE AG, Europe's No. 4
power company, said it's setting up an energy trading unit in
Texas, bidding to take on Enron Corp. on its home turf.

     RWE Trading Americas will be run by Bill Coorsh, the German
company said in a faxed statement. As in Europe, RWE will trade
electricity, gas, coal and oil in the Americas, the company said.

     Chief Executive Dietmar Kuhnt has repeatedly said the Essen-
based company wants to expand its trading operations, and in June
singled out the U.S. market as one of the main expansion areas.

     ``We want to take advantage of the extremely attractive
opportunities in the U.S. energy trading market,'' RWE said.

     RWE will compete with Enron, the biggest energy trader that's
also based in Houston. RWE Trading has said it wants to become one
of Europe's top traders. The U.S. unit will be built up ``in
parallel'' with the European expansion, RWE said.


deus ex machina (DAY-uhs eks ma-kuh-nuh, -nah, MAK-uh-nuh) noun

   1. In Greek and Roman drama, a god lowered by stage machinery to resolve
      a plot or extricate the protagonist from a difficult situation.

   2. An unexpected, artificial, or improbable character, device, or event
      introduced suddenly in a work of fiction or drama to resolve a
      situation or untangle a plot.

   3. A person or event that provides a sudden and unexpected solution to
      a difficulty.

[New Latin deus ex machina : deus, god + ex, from + machina, machine
(translation of Greek theos apo mekhanes).]

   "In fact the duke acts as the deus ex machina of the piece, working in
   the background to ensure that everything turns out right and manipulating
   the characters' actions along the way."
   Robert Nott, Lust, justice and faith, The Santa Fe New Mexican, Jun 23,
   2000.

When we face a serious crisis we often look upwards for divine intervention.
In such hopeless times we pray to the gods to descend from heaven and
deliver us from whatever travail prevails. In ancient Greek and Roman drama,
the gods literally came down from above, though not from heaven, to help the
heros of the drama and save the plot.

As it turns out, the gods themselves needed a little bit of help coming
down. A crane was used to lower a god onto the stage and untangle the plot.
Thus he was known as deus ex machina, literally, a god from a machine. Soon
the figurative use of this device in a drama began to be described by the
same name. Greek dramatist Euripides (480-406 BC) was particularly fond
of it. We are all intimately familiar with this device thanks to popular
cinema. The hero who had supposedly drowned half-way through the story is
miraculously revived to accompany the heroine into the sunset.

This week we look at more words from the world of literature.       -Anu

P.S. I'll be in Oahu, Maui & Hawaii Islands and away from my email during
Nov 23 - Dec 2. AWAD will continue, however, there will be no AWADmail.

.............................................................................
I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether
I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man. -Chuang Tzu, mystic and philosopher
(c. 4th century BC)

Q: Some time ago you featured a quote/word about x in AWAD. Could you resend
it?
A: You may search the archives at http://wordsmith.org/awad/search.html
   or browse them at http://wordsmith.org/awad/archives.html All the
   words and quotes since the beginning of AWAD are available there.

Pronunciation:
http://wordsmith.org/words/deus_ex_machina.wav
http://wordsmith.org/words/deus_ex_machina.ram


Sally has arranged Brian Wood with Avistar to demo a desktop video conferencing product tomorrow (Wednesday), April 4, 1:00 -2:00 PM.  Brian will meet at Sally's office and take whoever is interested to another office location in the Enron Building for demonstration.  If you are interested in attending, please call me at x39106 so I can give Brian a headcount.

Thanks,
Patti x39106


Mon, 18 Sep 2000 18:42:47

Your  subscription to  the FRBNYRMAG1  list (Federal  Reserve Bank  of NY
Research Publications) has been accepted.

Please save this message for future  reference, especially if this is the
first time you are subscribing to an electronic mailing list. If you ever
need to leave  the list, you will find the  necessary instructions below.
Perhaps  more importantly,  saving a  copy of  this message  (and of  all
future subscription notices  from other mailing lists) in  a special mail
folder will give you instant access to the list of mailing lists that you
are subscribed  to. This may  prove very useful the  next time you  go on
vacation and  need to leave  the lists temporarily so  as not to  fill up
your  mailbox while  you  are away!  You should  also  save the  "welcome
messages" from the  list owners that you will  occasionally receive after
subscribing to a new list.

To send  a message to  all the people  currently subscribed to  the list,
just  send  mail  to   FRBNYRMAG1@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM.  This  is  called
"sending mail to the list," because you send mail to a single address and
LISTSERV  makes copies  for  all  the people  who  have subscribed.  This
address  (FRBNYRMAG1@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM)  is   also  called  the  "list
address." You must never  try to send any command to  that address, as it
would be distributed to all the  people who have subscribed. All commands
must be sent to the "LISTSERV address," LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM. It
is  very important  to understand  the  difference between  the two,  but
fortunately it  is not complicated.  The LISTSERV  address is like  a FAX
number that connects you to a machine, whereas the list address is like a
normal voice line connecting  you to a person. If you  make a mistake and
dial the FAX number when you wanted  to talk to someone on the phone, you
will quickly  realize that you used  the wrong number and  call again. No
harm will have been done. If on the other hand you accidentally make your
FAX call  someone's voice  line, the  person receiving  the call  will be
inconvenienced, especially if your FAX then re-dials every 5 minutes. The
fact that  most people  will eventually  connect the  FAX machine  to the
voice line to  allow the FAX to  go through and make the  calls stop does
not mean  that you  should continue  to send FAXes  to the  voice number.
People would just get mad at you.  It works pretty much the same way with
mailing  lists, with  the difference  that  you are  calling hundreds  or
thousands of people  at the same time, and consequently  you can expect a
lot of people to get upset if  you consistently send commands to the list
address.

You may  leave the  list at  any time by  sending a  "SIGNOFF FRBNYRMAG1"
command to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM. You  can also tell LISTSERV how
you want it to  confirm the receipt of messages you send  to the list. If
you do  not trust the system,  send a "SET FRBNYRMAG1  REPRO" command and
LISTSERV will send you  a copy of your own messages, so  that you can see
that the  message was  distributed and  did not get  damaged on  the way.
After a while  you may find that this is  getting annoying, especially if
your mail program does not tell you  that the message is from you when it
informs you that new mail has arrived from FRBNYRMAG1. If you send a "SET
FRBNYRMAG1  ACK  NOREPRO"  command,  LISTSERV   will  mail  you  a  short
acknowledgement  instead,  which  will  look different  in  your  mailbox
directory. With most mail programs you will know immediately that this is
an  acknowledgement  you  can  read  later. Finally,  you  can  turn  off
acknowledgements completely with "SET FRBNYRMAG1 NOACK NOREPRO".

Contributions sent to this list are automatically archived. You can get a
list  of the  available archive  files by  sending an  "INDEX FRBNYRMAG1"
command to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM. You  can then order these files
with a  "GET FRBNYRMAG1  LOGxxxx" command,  or using  LISTSERV's database
search facilities. Send  an "INFO DATABASE" command  for more information
on the latter.

IMPORTANT: This list is confidential. You should not publicly mention its
existence, or forward copies of information  you have obtained from it to
third  parties. Please  note  that the  "GIVE"  command is  automatically
disabled for all archive files.

More  information on  LISTSERV  commands  can be  found  in the  LISTSERV
reference  card, which  you can  retrieve  by sending  an "INFO  REFCARD"
command to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM.


Per Leslie's earlier email, she wants power trading for Tri-State only under
one entity, so I have shut down Tri-State Power Marketing (the division), and
have opened them up under Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association,
Inc., which, per my conv. w/Stephanie, is being amended to add "through its
Tri-State Power Marketing Division" to the PA.


TASK ASSIGNMENT

Task Priority:		2
Task Due On:
Task Start Date:


I will be out of the office visiting El Paso Electric and PNM through Friday evening. Please see Ryan with any questions regarding trading. I can be reached on my cell phone at 503-887-3449.
Thanks,

Bill


I apologize if there has been any confusion regarding this meeting.  It was originally scheduled for October 1, then moved to October 2, then moved again to October 22.
Please confirm your attendance via e-mail.  An agenda will be provided prior to the meeting.

Managing Director Meeting
Date:		Monday, October 22
Time:		8:30 - Noon (Central)
Location:	Hyatt Regency - Houston

Please call if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Joannie
3-1769


The MON data for MILL RUN,SOMERSET,KLONDIKE has already loaded into
development database.
The data has been loaded for indian mesa 2 for Jan_Feb directory.How ever
some turbines have less data because they do not having full month data.The
total number of records are 2770.

The MON files of feb 2002 for MONFORT has been loaded.Total number of records
are 558.

Please look at the data and let me know if any problems are there.

.


I will give you my 2nd, 5th, 8th  for your 2nd & 6th


so you guys want to come by P&C's before dinner at La Folie, or do just want to meet at the restaurant?  Be great if you could come by and have a glass of champagne first.

Best,
Jeff


Mark, FYI - In my estimation this business is no bigger than Mexico or the
Toronto business ie) $25 to $30M in real value with reasonably high risk.  I
see no value in having two different agendas being pushed in S. America.  I
also believe that we could cut overhead and right size the organization and
not loose any capability.  Early estimations are a reduction in budgeted OH
by at least a third to one-half.  Did you or Jeff speak with Jim?

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 11/22/2000
04:17 PM ---------------------------

David W Delainey
11/22/2000 04:08 PM
To: James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: See Attached

Jim, my understanding is that there continues to be some discussion on
whether there will be functional seperation of the retail and wholesale
businesses and to what extent and under what strategy these are undertaken.
I am not sure that we want to put ourselves in a box under any structure
until these things are completely ironed out eg) country managers et al.  I'm
not in agreement with any memo that further details the organization beyond
what was outlined in the original memo.  However, I am in agreement that this
needs to get resolved ASAP unfortunately Frevert and Skilling and most of the
first world is out this week.  I ask for your patience.

Lets discuss.

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 11/22/2000
04:00 PM ---------------------------

James M Bannantine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
11/22/2000 05:37 PM
To: David W Delainey@ECT, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Brett R
Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron, Orlando Gonzalez/SA/Enron@Enron, Miguel
Padron/SA/Enron@Enron, Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Randy Young@ECT
cc:
Subject: See Attached

Draft memo on the functional alignment of South America under the new
organization.  Would like to send out to the South America organization
tonight to give people partial information on work in progress.  Silence is
bothering people a lot and the company is at risk of losing people.
Definitive organization memo out in the coming days, after complete
coordination with wholesale and retail in Houston.  Look at the first version
of the memo.  Please reply with any comments asap.


----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/30/2001 06:41 PM -----

	Jean Munoz <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com>
	03/30/2001 01:31 PM

		 To: "'Andy Brown (E-mail)'" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, "'B Brown Andy (E-mail)'"
<andybrwn@earthlink.net>, "'Baker Carolyn (E-mail)'"
<cabaker@duke-energy.com>, "'Bob Escalante (E-mail)'"
<rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>, "'Bob Weisenmiller (E-mail)'"
<rbw@mrwassoc.com>, "'Curtis Kebler (E-mail)'"
<curtis_l_kebler@reliantenergy.com>, "Dean. Nistetter (E-mail)"
<Dean.Nistetter@dynegy.com>, "'Douglas Kerner (E-mail)'" <DKK@eslawfirm.com>,
"'Greg Blue (E-mail)'" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, "'Jan Smutny-Jones (E-mail)'"
<smutny@iepa.com>, "'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>,
"'Joe Ronan (E-mail)'" <joer@calpine.com>, "'John Larrea (E-mail)'"
<john.g.larrea@williams.com>, "'John Stout (E-mail)'"
<John_H_Stout@reliantenergy.com>, "'Julee Malinowski-Ball (E-mail)'"
<jmball@ns.net>, "'Kassandra Gough (E-mail)'" <kgough@calpine.com>, "'kent
Palmerton (E-mail)'" <kent.palmerton@williams.com>, "'Lynn Lednicky
(E-mail)'" <lale@dynegy.com>, "Marie Moretti (E-mail 2)"
<mmoretti@mccabeandcompany.net>, "'Marty Wilson (E-mail)'"
<mwilson@pstrategies.com>, "'McNally Ray (E-mail)'"
<rmcnally@mcnallytemple.com>, "''Nam Nguyen' (E-mail)'"
<nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, "'Norton Kelli (E-mail)'"
<knorton@mcnallytemple.com>, "'Paula Hall-Collins (E-mail)'"
<paula.hall-collins@williams.com>, "'Pigott Jack (E-mail)'"
<jackp@calpine.com>, "'Richard Hyde (E-mail)'" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>,
"'Roger Pelote (E-mail)'" <roger.pelote@williams.com>, "'Stephanie-Newell
(E-mail)'" <stephanie-newell@reliantenergy.com>, "'Sue Mara (E-mail)'"
<smara@enron.com>, "'Tom Ross (E-mail)'" <tross@mcnallytemple.com>, "Tom
Williams (E-mail)" <tcwillia@duke-energy.com>, "'Alex Sugaoka (E-mail)'"
<alex.sugaoka@uaecorp.com>, "'Bill Carlson (E-mail)'"
<william_carlson@wastemanagement.com>, "'Bill Woods (E-mail)'"
<billw@calpine.com>, "'Bob Ellery (E-mail)'" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, "'Bob
Gates (E-mail)'" <bob.gates@enron.com>, "'Cody Carter (E-mail)'"
<cody.carter@williams.com>, "'Curt Hatton (E-mail)'"
<Curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, "'David Parquet'" <david.parquet@enron.com>,
"'Dean Gosselin (E-mail)'" <dean_gosselin@fpl.com>, "'Doug Fernley (E-mail)'"
<fernley.doug@epenergy.com>, "'Duane Nelsen (E-mail)'"
<dnelsen@gwfpower.com>, "'Ed Tomeo (E-mail)'" <ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>,
"'Eileen Koch (E-mail)'" <eileenk@calpine.com>, "'Eric Eisenman (E-mail)'"
<eric.eisenman@gen.pge.com>, "'Frank DeRosa (E-mail)'"
<frank.derosa@gen.pge.com>, "Frazier Blaylock (E-mail)"
<frazier_blaylock@ogden-energy.com>, "'Hap Boyd (E-mail)'"
<Hap_Boyd@enron.com>, "'Hawks Jack (E-mail)'" <jack.hawks@gen.pge.com>, "'Jim
Willey (E-mail)'" <elliottsa@earthlink.net>, "'Joe Greco (E-mail)'"
<jgreco@caithnessenergy.com>, "'Jonathan Weisgall (E-mail)'"
<jweisgall@aol.com>, "'Kate Castillo (E-mail)'" <CCastillo@riobravo-gm.com>,
"'Kelly Lloyd (E-mail)'" <kellyl@enxco.com>, "'Ken Hoffman (E-mail)'"
<khoffman@caithnessenergy.com>, "'Kent Fickett (E-mail)'"
<kfickett@usgen.com>, "'Lynn Lednicky (E-mail)'"
<lynn.a.lednicky@dynegy.com>, "'Marty McFadden (E-mail)'"
<marty_mcfadden@ogden-energy.com>, "'Paula Soos'"
<paula_soos@ogden-energy.com>, "'Randy Hickok (E-mail)'"
<rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, "Rick S. Koebbe (E-mail)"
<rskoebbe@powerworksinc.com>, "'Rob Lamkin (E-mail)'"
<rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, "'Ross Ain (E-mail)'" <ain@worldnet.att.net>,
"'Steve Iliff'" <siliff@riobravo-gm.com>, "'Steve Ponder (E-mail)'"
<steve_ponder@fpl.com>, "'Tony Wetzel (E-mail)'" <twetzel@thermoecotek.com>,
"'William Hall (E-mail)'" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com>,
<trusso@mcnallytemple.com>, <sadlersa@earthlink.net>, <mstultz@epsa.org>,
<rtemple@mcnallytemple.com>, <tracy.fairchild@edelman.com>,
<megan.beiser@edelman.com>, <deborah.fiorito@dynegy.com>, <lchurch@epsa.org>,
Katie Kaplan <kaplan@iepa.com>, <tcwillia@duke-energy.com>,
<rwhyde@duke-energy.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Commerce Committee Letter

FYI, if you haven't already seen this, Congressional Democrats on the
Commerce Committee are leading an effort to send the attached letter to
President Bush.

Thanks,
Jean

--
Jean Munoz
McNally Temple Associates, Inc.
916-447-8186
916-447-6326 (fx)

______________________________________________________________________________
____
>     The Californian Members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Reps.
> Waxman, Eshoo, Capps, and Harman would like to encourage the Caucus to
> sign the attached letter to the President urging the President to
> intervene at FERC.  The letter asks the President to support the
> Governor's request regarding wholesale electricity sales this summer and
> to investigate recent allegations of overcharges.
>
>                         March 29, 2001
>
>     The Honorable George W. Bush
>     The President
>     The White House
>     Washington, DC
>
>     Dear Mr. President:
>
>         We are writing because our constituents and millions of
> Americans across the West need your intervention at the Federal Energy
> Regulatory Commission (FERC) in order to address serious problems with the
> Western energy market.
>
>         As you know, California has been experiencing an electricity
> crisis that has resulted in blackouts throughout the state, inconvenienced
> millions of citizens and businesses, and disrupted the state's and
> region's economy.  Indeed, this crisis seriously threatens to cause
> long-term damage to the economy of California, the Western region, and
> perhaps the entire country.
>
>         The crisis is the result of a dysfunctional energy market
> where wholesale prices of electricity have spiked exorbitantly.  For
> example, wholesale prices on December 15, 2000, ranged from $429 per Mwh
> to $565 per Mwh, compared to prices from $12 per Mwh to $29 per Mwh one
> year earlier.  Wholesale prices have jumped as high as $1400 per Mwh.  In
> fact, the California Independent System Operator (ISO), the state's power
> grid operator, has projected that electricity which cost $7 billion in
> 1999 will cost $70 billion this year.  These skyrocketing prices can only
> partly be explained by natural gas price increases and increased energy
> demand.
>
>         These exorbitant price spikes have led FERC Commissioner
> William L. Massey to state on February 8, 2001:
>
>         These high prices serve only to continue a massive wealth
> transfer out of the region.  Is it worth dragging down an entire regional
> economy, or perhaps even the national economy, for the theoretical purity
> of unfettered price signals?  I say no.  I call on my fellow commissioners
> to consider a time out now.  It's our statutory obligation. . . .  FERC's
> timidity  and hands-off approach is eroding consumer confidence and
> destroying the consensus that heretofore supported a market based
> approach.
>
>
>         The dysfunctional nature of the market has apparently
> allowed it to be manipulated.  The California ISO last week presented FERC
> with findings of a comprehensive study of pricing data in California's
> wholesale electricity market over the last 10 months.  According to the
> Los Angeles Times, the ISO's study found "evidence of market manipulation
> and consistent patterns of bidding far above costs" and that "suppliers
> commonly offered electricity at twice their costs."  The ISO has estimated
> the cost of the potential overcharges between May 2000 and last month are
> high as $6.3 billion.
>
>         Unfortunately, FERC actions have fallen far too short.  To
> date, FERC has not aggressively worked to address market manipulations,
> despite finding last fall that wholesale prices were not "just and
> reasonable."  Nor is FERC apparently willing to seriously consider
> addressing runaway wholesale rates.
>
>         The state of California is taking heroic measures, but this
> is an issue California cannot address alone.  In a February 28, 2001,
> meeting with the California delegation, FERC Chairman Curt Hebert
> confirmed the widespread understanding that the California market is not
> working.  He called the California market "broken," and acknowledged the
> regional problems posed by the market.  Additionally, Chairman Hebert
> stated that "I don't think there is any way California can pull itself out
> of this thing alone."  As Mr. Hebert knows, California has no authority
> over wholesale electricity sales.  These sales fall solely within the
> jurisdiction of the federal government.
>
>         Despite FERC's recognition that California cannot address
> this problem alone, FERC seems unwilling to assist California and the
> West.  FERC's March 9th order sets the arbitrary expectation that unjust
> and unreasonable prices cannot occur in the absence of a Stage 3
> Emergency.  Energy economist Severin Borenstein has stated that this
> expectation "defies economic logic."  The March 9th order is also
> inconsistent with FERC's December 15 order and ignores the fact that when
> market power exists, prices can be unreasonable even when supply is not
> within 1.5% of demand.
>
>         Mr. President, you have the authority to rein in the impacts
> of this dysfunctional market and protect the citizens of California from
> exorbitant wholesale price spikes.  In October 2000, when you were in
> California, you stated, "I believe so strongly that part of this region is
> going to suffer unless you have a president who is willing to tell the
> FERC to do what is right for the consumer."  Now, we are respectfully
> calling upon you to do just that.
>
>         This is not a partisan issue.  At the Western Governors
> Association meeting in early February, eight Western governors -- three
> Democrats and five Republicans -- requested that the Administration
> immediately impose wholesale price caps throughout the region.  Governor
> Davis of California, Governor Kitzhaber of Oregon, and Governor Locke of
> Washington have now reiterated this request to FERC with a short-term
> pragmatic proposal that will preserve adequate incentives to attract
additional generation.
>
>         We believe that electricity generators should make a
> reasonable profit and that these profits should be sufficient to encourage
> the development of needed generation.  Federal action to temporarily
> intervene in California's failed wholesale market can accommodate these
> needs.  Governors Davis, Kitzhaber, and Locke have referenced Commissioner
> Massey's suggestion of a temporary cost-based price cap on spot market
> sales in the Western interconnection, combined with an exemption for new
> generation sources to ensure that new sources of energy are encouraged.
> Such an approach could reinstate consumer confidence in wholesale sales,
> ensure generators receive sufficient market signals, and prevent future
economic hemorrhaging in the West.

        Mr. President, we request that you help protect California's
economy, and indeed that of the Western region and the nation.  Please
support the Governors' request on wholesale rates, investigate the recent
allegations of overcharges, and act to prevent a dysfunctional electricity
market from damaging our constituents and a major engine of the nation's
economy.

                        Sincerely,


sounds good to me- i'll bring the money over today

Kim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Calcagno, Suzanne
Sent:	Monday, October 15, 2001 9:23 AM
To:	Lamadrid, Victor; Jaquet, Tammy; Smith, George F.; Sullivan, Patti; Greif, Donna; Kinsey, Lisa; Olinger, Kimberly S.; Farmer, Daren J.
Subject:	Bosses Day
Importance:	High

Hi All-

Was thinking of doing a gift certificate to Mark's (a really great restaurant in Montrose) for Bob for Bosses day so he and Carolyn can have a night out.  If we each kick in $15, that will give us $120--am thinking that we could do a $100 GC, then I'll pick up a NYRangers shirt when I'm home this weekend with the other $20, or we could just do a $125 GC, whatever you guys want.  I've got a card for everyone to sign as well.  Any other suggestions are of course welcome--but either way, plese get me your $$ by the end of the day today since I'll run over there this afternoon and get the GC if we all agree on that.

Thanks,
Suzanne


Mr. Lay:

Is your Gulfstream going in for major maintenance?  If your answer is yes, you are possibly thinking charter to fill the gap.

Well, we have an idea!  Dry lease our client's GII SP for a period of six to 12 months.  This low-time aircraft is ready to go to work for you next week.

Give us a call at 520 544-0100.  It will be a pleasure to hear from you.

Weldon Riker
President
 - WRIKER.vcf


Attached are the first for TVA and ComEd (ERCOT is  sent on a separate list).
?

We will distribute these two indexes to you at no  charge via e-mail during
the beta testing period, which?concludes March 19.  On that date,?we will
formally launch the indexes on our Web site,  at:? www.tradersnewsenergy.com.

Your participation is vital to produce the most comprehensive and  accurate
indexes. You may e-mail your prices and volumes to
tradersnewsindexes@ipgdirect.com,  or fax them to 713-647-7552. For your
convenience, attached is an Excel file  you
can use to report your prices and volumes.

These three new indexes  join TradersNews' Cinergy, AEP and SPP/Entergy
hourly indexes, launched in Fall  2000.
NOTE: If you are using our Excel Upload feature,  hourly indexes for Feb. 16
will be featured until 3:30?p.m. CST, today  only, because of yesterday's
federal holiday. After 3:30 p.m. today, we will  feature those for Feb. 19.

?
If you are interested in receiving the ERCOT hourly  index during this month
of testing,?e-mail Suzanna Strangmeier, at suzanna.strangmeier@ipgdirect.com,
 or call her at 713/647-7325.

Bobette  Riner???????????????????????????????
Senior Power Markets Analyst??????
TradersNews Energy
713/647-8690
FAX: 713/647-7552
cell:  832/428-7008
bobette.riner@ipgdirect.com
http://www.tradersnewspower.com
?
?
 - tvahrly022101.doc
 - comedhrly022101.doc
 - 6ndxtemplate.xls


Stan.  This is the red-lined response from Southern regarding Elba Island.
We are meeting tomorrow to review and respond.

Rock
'

---------------------- Forwarded by Rockford Meyer/FGT/Enron on 01/11/2000
09:21 AM ---------------------------

"Beckham, Myra" <BeckhamM@EpEnergy.com> on 01/10/2000 03:46:46 PM
To: Rockford Meyer/FGT/Enron@ENRON
cc: Anne Jolibois/FGT/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Development Agreement

Rock,

Attached  is a red-lined draft of the Development Agreement as we discussed.

Jim Yardley

JY:mmb

 <<Development Agreemen2Jan10.doc>>

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the sender.
**********************************************************************
 - Development Agreemen2Jan10.doc


Checking to see if they were terminated, apparently, they are.  We will update our list.  Thank you for your help.

Mike B

-----Original Message-----
From: Shackleton, Sara
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Bridges, Michael
Cc: Bailey, Susan; 'bestes@cwt.com'
Subject: FW: Terminated

You should show "Hallwood" as the terminated party (see Louis's email below).  I don't know when the acquisition took place but we would normally hear from Global Contracts about name changes, acquisitions, etc.

What exactly do you need?  I believe the new entity is "HEP Pure" and the termination was effective 12/3/01.  You should follow up with Susan Bailey or Blake Estes.

Sara

-----Original Message-----
From: Dicarlo, Louis
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 2:28 PM
To: Shackleton, Sara
Cc: Garza, Maria
Subject: Terminated

As we build the matrix of data discussed yesterday in our meeting we are encountering some missing data.  Below is a list of counterparties which are listed as terminated (in at least one of the various lists of counterparties we have) but which don't have termination dates.

BP Corporation North America Inc.
ConAgra Trade Group, Inc.
Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch
Hallwood Energy Corporation
IGI Resources, Inc.
NJR Energy Corp.

Can you please reply with termination dates for these counterparties.  Let me know if you need additional information.

Thanks

PS: I have a few more requests coming shortly.

Louis R. DiCarlo
ENA Gas Structuring
Phone: 713-345-4666
Email: louis.dicarlo@enron.com


Narsimha/Michele,

Thanks for helping us with this index product issue.

We were initially planning to use an East Hub index with a basis of all uplifts, but Gillian and I agree with you on the advantages of using an index of PJM LMP zonal prices including all uplifts.  The product will certainly be more comparable to BGE's standard offer pricing, and it will eliminate the basis risk that you would have had with the East Hub index product.  A BGE zone index product will also eliminate the price comparison issues we had due to congestion.

Based on today's discussion we will modify the design of the BGE index product proposal to reflect a pass-through of LMP BGE zone prices and uplifts.  The basis for this product would simply be deal costs and origination margin.

Gillian and I will work with Berney's group on changes to the TC, and a modified Product Approval Template will be routed soon.

Thanks again,
Bob