Kay, see attached.  The monthly fee should be $13,003.  I took the $300k we
have all been discussing and backed out the $12,500 they paid under the ILA
terms.

Reagan C. Rorschach
Enron North America
1400 Smith Street
Houston, Texas 77002
713.345.3363

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 11:35 AM
To: Mann, Kay
Cc: Rorschach, Reagan; Kroll, Heather; Fairley, David; May, Tom
Subject: Re: Open items for MDEA

More:

We need internal agreement on the cancellation fee schedule, to be included
as an exhibit.

What is the status of the Yazoo City master gas agreement?  Do we still want
a master gas agreement for Clarksdale, also?  Do we want it now?

Thanks,

Kay

Kay Mann
05/23/2001 05:05 PM
To: Reagan Rorschach/Enron@EnronXGate, Heather Kroll/Enron@EnronXGate, David
Fairley/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom May/Enron@EnronXGate
cc:

Subject: Open items for MDEA

Here are issues which I'm unclear about, all of which impact the drafting of
the agreement:

How are we setting the heat rate?  Do we have the GADS (?)?  Is it a daily
average, weekly average?  Flat rate? Adjusted? If so, how often?

Are we comfortable that there are no permit restrictions?

We have determined that we won't deal with fuel oil, right?

We aren't making money on gas, right?

Do we have a defn of costs that we like yet, and if so, how does it fit in to
the picture?

Is there an up-to-date set of exhibits?

It would help if theh commercial part of the team could send me the
following, in words and/or formulae:

The defn and method of establishing the bogey (target production cost)
formula can be an exhibit, which would be great for the commercial team to
work on.   Are we determined how we should deal with imbalances (part of cost
of power)?  How are we setting the bogey?  Formula?  Subject to audit? Two
bogeys or one (gas and oil)?

What is defn of profit?  I think I have the general idea, but a sentence or
two would be helpful as a reality check.  What costs are included on the buy
and sell side?

Re stack model: a sentence or two describing what it is and how it is used.

Updated exhibit on facilities, contracted resources, operating limits.

What information does MDEA need for us to provide in order to split
costs/profits?  Are we clear that Cities buy gas, MDEA buys/sells power?

It would be great if I could get one set of answers to these
questions/issues, which has commercial buy in all around.

Thanks,

Kay


It is becoming increasingly clear that the development of eCommerce will have
a significant and continuing impact on the conduct of business in a broad
array of industries.  Through EnronOnLine, Enron has quickly become a major
catalyst for the transition to the web in the gas and electric industries.
EnronOnLine has been an enormous success since its launch.  Since launch, we
have completed 67,043 transactions on line, with a total dollar value of over
$25 billion.  EnronOnLine is now the largest eCommerce site in the world.

We believe that the competitive success of EnronOnLine is due to one very
specific reason.  In addition to providing a web-based platform for
transactions, Enron acts as principal to provide direct liquidity to the
site.  We stand ready at all times, in any market conditions, to buy and sell
at the posted price.  This converts a &bulletin board8 (the more typical
eCommerce concept) into a true market.  There are very few, if any,
competitors that can provide this capability.

We are increasingly convinced that this competitive advantage can be
dramatically expanded to other products and other geographies.  If we are
correct, this could provide an enormous new opportunity for growth for Enron.

Accordingly, we are initiating a major new effort to capture this
opportunity.  Effective today we are creating a new business, Enron Net
Works, to pursue new market development opportunities in eCommerce across a
broad range of industries.  It is likely that this business will ultimately
be our fifth business segment, joining transmission & distribution,
wholesale, retail and broadband services.

Included in this business will be our entire IT and technology group along
with significant talent and resources in market making and finance.
Initially, North America will provide primary direct support for staff
services and back office, however, over time we will be requesting support
services from virtually all Enron units to ensure continued growth and
success.  To facilitate the combining of commercial capabilities with these
new eCommerce platforms, Enron Net Works will work closely with the merchant
functions of North America, Europe, South America, CALME, Asia and Broadband.

Enron Net Works will be headed by Greg Whalley, Chief Executive Officer; Mike
McConnell, Chief Operating Officer; and Jeff McMahon, Chief Commercial
Officer.  These individuals will comprise the Office of the Chairman for
Enron Net Works and remain on the Executive Committee of Enron Corp.
Replacing Greg Whalley as President and Chief Operating Officer of Enron
North America is Dave Delainey, who will also join Enron,s Executive
Committee.

Global Technology will remain intact but will now be a part of Enron Net
Works.  It will maintain all of the same businesses and services as it did as
an Enron global function.  Philippe Bibi will remain the Chief Technology
Officer for all of Enron Corp. and continues to be responsible for the
development of worldwide technology standards and platforms.

EnronOnLine, headed by Louise Kitchen, will also remain intact and will now
be a part of Enron Net Works.  The success of EnronOnLine enables us to
utilize this site as a model as we explore other markets. In addition, the
following individuals are included in Enron Net Works along with their
current eCommerce initiatives: Harry Arora, Public Financial Securities; Jay
Fitzgerald, New Markets Identification; Bruce Garner, Metals; and Greg Piper,
Pulp and Paper.

Over the next several weeks we will complete staffing and organizational
design and will provide full details on this exciting new business
opportunity.


Please print and put in the Fuel Cell binder you  made me last week.  It is
on my desk, I think.
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 10/09/2000 05:08
PM ---------------------------

Dan Lyons@ECT
10/09/2000 11:13 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: smiller@bracepatt.com

Subject: FuelCell Schedule 13d Memo

Kay, please read this memo...Because you will be working with the originators
and will be the first lawyer to know when the condition of the orders is
filled you are probably the right person to blow the whistle for the 13D
filing...Let me know if you think otherwise
----- Forwarded by Dan Lyons/HOU/ECT on 10/09/2000 11:09 AM -----

	"Scott Miller" <smiller@bracepatt.com>
	10/05/2000 02:17 PM

		 To: <dan.lyons@enron.com>
		 cc: "W. Cleland Dade" <cdade@bracepatt.com>
		 Subject: FuelCell Schedule 13d Memo

Attached is the memo regarding the Schedule 13D filing requirements in
connection with the FuelCell transaction.

Please call me at (713) 221-1131 with your questions.

Thanks.
Scott

 - 13d Memo.pdf


Thanks,  please let me know how this plays out.

Debra Perlingiere
Enron North America Corp.
Legal Department
1400 Smith Street, EB 3885
Houston, Texas 77002
dperlin@enron.com
Phone 713-853-7658
Fax  713-646-3490


Here is the delta for today

I may not be in this morning, but you can reach me at 917-825-1251

Rgs

Lou

 - Delta12-4.xls


Sorry, I was on the phone.
Financial contracts are all 2-way.  Ignore my prior email

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dicarlo, Louis
Sent:	Monday, March 04, 2002 10:24 AM
To:	Shackleton, Sara
Subject:	RE: CP Contract Information

I thought you've been saying Financial are largely 2-way but a few are 1-way and we would need to check for those.  Now "financial contracts are 1-way."  I'm confused.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shackleton, Sara
Sent:	Monday, March 04, 2002 10:20 AM
To:	Dicarlo, Louis
Subject:	RE: CP Contract Information

financial contracts are 1-way

you can obtain global contract numbers

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dicarlo, Louis
Sent:	Monday, March 04, 2002 10:19 AM
To:	Shackleton, Sara
Cc:	Bridges, Michael; Garza, Maria; Rostant, Justin
Subject:	CP Contract Information

As we move forward with CPs we need to know weather there is 1-way or 2-way termination payment methodology in the contract.  (Plan is to add a column to our spreadsheet to track this.)  You have mentioned that almost all CPs are 2-way.  What is the best approach to determining which CPs are 1-way versus 2-way?

Additionally, there is other data we need to complete our spreadsheet, such as:
Contract type (ISDA, GTC, other)
Global contract number
What are your thoughts on getting this information?

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


The Research Group is a unique and extraordinarily valuable organization for
Enron.  The success of the group has led to widespread recognition of Enron's
leadership in quantitative finance as it relates to the energy markets.
Therefore, it is with great mixed emotions that I announce my resignation as
I move on to the next phase of my career.

 I have enjoyed getting to work with each of you and wish you continued
success for the future.

Highest regards,
Kevin Kindall

PS:   Comments, question, and anecdotes will be addressed in Thursday's
meeting.
          Shirley will have my contact info.


Just a reminder... I'm not able to login to westpower.


go ahead and copy from this and give it a go.  you will get a few returns,
but the rest should go.  if it completely crashes on you, let me know.  and
thanks for the summaries and updates.  please keep them coming.  what's your
cell phone #?best, jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/23/2001 12:35 PM -----

	Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	01/23/2001 11:36 AM

		 To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol
Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H
Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES,
Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy
Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward
Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES,
Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W
Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G
Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES,
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy
Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin
Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES,
Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,
Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike M Smith/HOU/EES@EES,
mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L
Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES,
Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES,
skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha
Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES,
Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran
Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/WSX/AZURIX@Exchange
		 cc:
		 Subject: Fw: CAISO Notice - CDWR RFB for Long Term Energy Contracts

----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/23/2001 11:30 AM -----

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woertz, Byron [mailto:BWoertz@caiso.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 7:30 PM
> To: ISO Market Participants
> Cc: 'rhart@water.ca.gov'; 'Donald Strickland'
> Subject: CAISO Notice - CDWR RFB for Long Term Energy Contracts
>
>
> ISO Market Participants:
>
> As a follow up to  our previous announcement of a Request
> for Bids tomorrow morning, the Governor has released his announcement as
> follows:
>
>   <<PR01 030 energy auction.doc>>
>
> PLEASE NOTE THAT THE RELEASE HAS AN OMISSION OF "ONE YEAR"
> IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH.  It should read as follows: "The contract bids
will
> extend for six months, one year, three years, five years and ten years
> respectively."
>
> Byron Woertz
> Director, Client Relations
>
>
>

 - PR01 030 energy auction.doc


Tana Jones is out of the office and will return Thursday, November 29.


Start Date: 4/20/01; HourAhead hour: 16;  No ancillary schedules awarded.
Variances detected.
Variances detected in Generation schedule.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001042016.txt

---- Generation Schedule ----
$$$ Variance found in table tblGEN_SCHEDULE.
     Details: (Hour: 16 / Preferred:  80.00 / Final:  79.97)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  SC_ID: ECTRT
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 4/20/01
  UNIT_ID: HARBGN_7_UNITS


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Floyd, Jodie
Sent:	Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:27 AM
To:	Johanson, Tim; Spraggins, Gary
Cc:	Ratliff, Dale; January, Steve; Blair, Lynn
Subject:	FW: LS Power

Tim and Gary,  Please review the attached spreadsheet for the hourly rates over the contractual limits.  If you have any questions give myself or Dale a call.  Thanks to Dale for the info.  j.  floyd

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ratliff, Dale
Sent:	Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:21 AM
To:	Floyd, Jodie
Cc:	January, Steve
Subject:	LS Power

Jodie,

Jodie,

The attached file contains the LS Power Whitewater's hourly rate from 12/20/01 to 6/17/01.  If you need data prior to 6/17/01 we will have retrieve it from microfiche.  The file has a column for the scan hour, hourly rate, and a YES if the hour exceeded 1900.0 mcf per hour.  If you have any questions call me at x31534

Dale


Governor's greased lighting
Davis criticized for accepting money from power companies
SF Gate News
November 16, 2001

India Dabhol Project Due Diligence To Start Next Week
Dow Jones Interactive
November 16, 2001

Ontario mulls alternative to Hydro deregulation
Dow Jones Interactive
November 16, 2001

Governor's greased lighting
Davis criticized for accepting money from power companies

Sacramento -- After having sworn off campaign contributions from energy companies, Gov. Gray Davis has started taking money from power providers seeking to do business with the state.

The two $25,000 contributions came during a series of fund-raisers the governor held when he made a trip last month to the East Coast to view the damage at the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

The Democratic governor, who has raised more than $30 million for his re- election campaign, has been criticized for taking money from groups that have interests before the administration.

Yesterday, Davis defended the decision to take the money, saying the worst of the energy crisis is behind us.

"My concern was in not taking money from people who were actively selling us power during the difficult early months in 2001," he said of his decision in January to stop taking contributions from utilities and power companies. "To my knowledge neither of those companies are active players in that process. "

But consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield blasted Davis for accepting the money and said it should be returned.

"If it was dirty money before, it is even dirtier now," said Rosenfield, who heads the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. Davis is mistaken to think that the energy crisis is over, Rosenfield said.

"Tell that to the 20 million Californians who have seen their rates increase an average of 50 percent," he said.

The two companies -- FPL Energy LLC and Caithness Energy LLC -- each gave $25,000 to Davis' campaign fund.

Both contributors have proposed projects pending in California.

Caithness Energy, a New York-based generator, is expected to file plans to build a power plant with the California Energy Commission later this month. The company wants to build a 560-megawatt natural gas fired plant in Riverside County.

And subsidiaries of FPL Energy, a Florida generator that operates power plants across the country, are in negotiations with the state's new Power Authority to construct wind turbines in Southern California. The state would buy energy from the turbines and have the option to own them.

In addition, Caithness and FPL are working together to building another power plant in Riverside County. That project was approved by the state's Energy Commission in March.

Garry South, Davis' political adviser, said the campaign's position had not changed with regard to collecting money from energy interests.

South said that the two companies had not been gouging the state and that the fact they had business pending with the state was irrelevant.

"It is not against the law to take money from a company that does business with the state," he said. South said the contributions had no bearing on any decisions made.

India Dabhol Project Due Diligence To Start Next Week

NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- Prospective buyers of the 85% foreign equity in India's 2,184-megawatt Dabhol Power Co. will start due diligence of the project next week, A.K. Doda, executive director of Industrial Development Bank of India (P.IDB), told Dow Jones Newswires Friday.

The possible buyers are Tata Power Co. Ltd. (P.TPW) and BSES Ltd. (P.BSX)

"After the due diligence is completed, price negotiations will start and thereafter, the transfer of shares and transfer of ownership will take place," Doda said.

U.S. energy company Enron Corp. (ENE) has a controlling 65% equity stake in Dabhol and wants to sell it because of payment defaults by the plant's sole customer - the Maharashtra State Electricity Board - and the Indian federal government's failure to honor payment guarantees. In August the U.S. company said it was willing to sell its equity at cost.

Dabhol is India's largest single foreign investment to date. MSEB has 15%, while U.S.-based companies General Electric Co. (GE) and Bechtel (X.BTL) own 10% each in DPC.

"The share price of the shareholding of Enron and its associates in DPC would be decided by the concerned parties, through mutual negotiations. Indian financial institutions propose to continue their efforts to ensure quick resolution of all issues at the earliest," Doda said.

Doda denied local media reports saying that India's state-owned firm National Thermal Power Corp. (P.NTP) was also a potential buyer of the foreign equity in Dabhol.

"So far, I am aware of only two companies - Tata Power and BSES. NTPC haven't sent us any expression of interest yet for the Dabhol project," he said.

Ontario mulls alternative to Hydro deregulation

The planned deregulation of the $35-billion Ontario electricity sector has been thrown in doubt by a radical proposal that would shackle the province's electricity transmission company, preventing it from becoming a significant player in an open North American power market.

The plan, known only to Ontario Premier Mike Harris and a few government and Bay Street insiders, would turn Hydro One into a not-for-profit entity instead of a fully commercial, privatized company. If this happens, Hydro One would lack the flexibility to raise equity capital, make acquisitions and form partnerships in an effort to become one of continent's premier transmission companies -- a goal plainly set out by chief executive officer Eleanor Clitheroe.

David Lindsay, the president and chief executive officer of Ontario SuperBuild Corp., the government's privatization adviser, confirmed that turning Hydro One into a not-for-profit organization, similar to Nav Canada, the civil air navigation service, is under serious consideration.

"We've been asked to evaluate all options for Hydro One's future, including this one," he said yesterday.

He would not provide details, though it is thought that the government wants to make a decision on Hydro One's future ownership structure by the conclusion of the year.

A senior official in the Ontario government, who did not want to be identified, said the proposal "is a step backward to the old days of Ontario Hydro." He was referring to the debt-laden utility that was split into Ontario Power Generation, the electricity generating arm, and Hydro One, whose network of high-voltage transmission lines spans 30,000 kilometres.

The Premier's office would not comment. A spokeswoman for Energy Minister Jim Wilson would say only that "there are a number of options on the table."

Sources on Bay Street and at Queen's Park said the idea of turning Hydro One into a not-for-profit entity is being propelled by Anthony Fell, the chairman of Royal Bank-owned RBC Dominion Securities, Bay Street's largest dealer. If the new Hydro One took this shape, it would raise about $10-billion through the sale of bonds to investors.

The dealers' commission on the sale of the bonds, which would rank among the biggest debt issues in history, would range from $25-million to $40-million, one Bay Street executive said.

Mr. Harris is said to be keen on the concept partly because all the money would go back to the government to help pay down the $21-billion in "stranded debt" racked up by the old Ontario Hydro. The generating and transmission giant's decades-long spending spree on nuclear plants and other assets tore a huge hole in the province's balance sheet.

Hydro One's cash flow, derived from sales to electricity users, would be used to pay the interest on the $10-billion of bonds. Presumably, consumers would face higher electricity charges if Hydro One lacked sufficient cash to pay the interest. If Hydro One were a private company instead, its financial risk would be borne by shareholders, not ratepayers. The United States has embraced deregulation partly because it shifts the financial risk of the electricity market from taxpayers to shareholders.

Executives at RBC Dominion declined to comment on the plan, citing client confidentiality concerns. Mr. Fell first proposed it to the government in the spring.

The government wants to open up the Ontario electricity market, in which buyers and sellers can negotiate prices, by next spring. The market overhaul contemplated turning Ontario Power Generation and Hydro One, both of which are 100 per cent owned by the government, into commercial companies. In Hydro One's case, the leading options were thought to be an outright sale, in which the utility would be bought by another company (presumably a rival utility), or an initial public offering, where the shares would be owned by private investors and traded on the stock exchange.

The third option -- converting Hydro One into a not-for-profit organization -- has come as a surprise. There has been no debate on this option, though rumours of its existence have jolted Bay Street and Hydro One, both of which were working on the assumption that the transmission business would eventually become a commercial enterprise.

Sources said that Hydro One management opposes the not-for-profit structure because it would deny Hydro One the flexibility and discipline of a typical commercial business. The not-for-profit structure would mean it would not have to pay taxes, which raises potential trade issues with the United States. American transmission companies might argue that Hydro One's non-taxable status gives it an unfair competitive advantage.

It would also deny Hydro One management the benefit of potentially lucrative share options.

Rod Taylor, Hydro One's executive vice-president, would not comment on the not-for-profit option being contemplated by the government. He said, however, that the company's strategy hinges on its ability to become a major player in the deregulated North American electricity market. "Our vision of the company is to become a fully commercial entity, and become in the transmission sector what Canadian National is to the rail sector," he said in a phone interview.

Stanley Hartt, the chairman of the Canadian office of Wall Street's Salomon Smith Barney, is among the Bay Street executives who opposes a not-for-profit structure for Hydro One (Salomon has a small role as an adviser to Hydro One's strategic business plan).

In a three-page letter sent this week to the top executives of several large power-using Ontario companies, he said that "this idea is short-sighted and bad for Ontario."

He argued that "the absence of an equity component in the capital structure of the not-for-profit corporation essentially transfers the equity risk to the ratepayers." He also said that, without financial flexibility, Hydro One would lack the resources to invest in "new bottleneck-eliminating connections" that would allow the company to become a significant electricity exporter. "Ontario would lose the prospect of becoming a true hub for North American Energy transmission," he said.

In a recent report on the power industry, TD Newcrest analyst David McCracken wrote, "With its operating expertise and strong balance sheet, Hydro One is well positioned to act as a consolidator of transmission grids in the northern United States, where ownership tends to be fragmented."

He noted that Hydro One is expected to be privatized in the next few years, and he said the utility has "the opportunity to lever strengths from traditional wires businesses into competitive high-growth initiatives."

According to sources familiar with the not-for-profit proposal, Hydro One would be governed in the best interests of all electricity users by stocking the board of directors with appointees from corporations that are heavy power users, such as auto and steel makers and paper companies. Such a structure exists at Nav Canada, with airline executives on the board, and the company has been able to cut the fees it charges customers.

Restructuring Hydro One with debt, rather than equity, is also presented as the most efficient way to capitalize the company.

"The problem with a Canadian National Rail-style IPO is that equity is much more expensive than debt," said one financier familiar with the proposal. "With a debt-based structure, every dollar earned is available to pay interest, while an equity-based structure means you pay federal taxes, provide a return to shareholders and make debt payments."

Dofasco Inc., the big Ontario steel producer that consumes about $100-million of electricity a year, supports the not-for-profit proposal. Gord Forstner, head of communications, said a bond sale would reduce Ontario Hydro's stranded debt by $10-billion immediately, paving the way for lower electricity charges. Currently, a special levy on all electricity bills is being used to whittle down the debt. The charge costs Dofasco alone about $15-million a year.

"We want to see the stranded debt paid down first," Mr. Forstner said. "Until that happens, we don't favour Hydro One going to the expense of expanding outside of Ontario's boundaries." Hydro One at a glance

Ontario's electricity transmission system split off from the former Ontario Hydro in May, 2000. It is the largest power distribution network in Canada and serves 1.2 million people.

Revenues: $3-billion in 2000, $2.4-billion through first nine months of 2001.

Total assets: $10-billion, including 141,000 kilometres of wire, 1,200 stations and sub-stations and connection facilities to New York, Michigan, Manitoba and Quebec.

EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization): $1.3-billion in 2000.

Net earnings: $378-million in 2000, $351-million through first nine months of 2001.

Common equity: $3.7-billion (owned by the Province of Ontario)

Employees: 4,500

Source: Hydro One


I am scheduled to be in London next week.  I would like to sit down and talk
to you about this.

	T Paul Johnson@ENRON
	02/20/2001 03:08 AM

		 To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Claims/Arbitration

Paul Simons suggested I wrote to you to inform you that I am presently
handling a number of small arbitration/claims matters on behalf of Enron
Metals, which are subject to English law and London arbitration (LME).  They
are generally for quite small amounts (presently from US$ 68,000 to US$
approx. 400,000).  I would be grateful if you could let me know the extent to
which you wish to be involved or to monitor these.

Paul Johnson


---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 06/16/2000 05:01 PM
---------------------------

"fletcher sturm" <fsturm@houston.rr.com> on 05/16/2000 07:55:00 PM
To: <scott.neal@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Natural Gas (NG, NYMEX) Daily Commodity Futures Price Chart June,
2000

Sneal,

Read the analysis below the chart to get frothy like a cup of latte!

Fletch

 http://tfc-charts.com/chart/NG/60

 - Natural Gas (NG, NYMEX) Daily Commodity Futures Price Chart June, 2000.url


Not quite sure who/what ponderosa is but we have sandhill Austin of which we control 100 MW thru Oct 03. We also have assorted asset management deals but they amount to advisory roles. We did have a deal in the works with the Cleburne Facility that was formerly owned by Tenaska. Carl Tricoli is your man on that one.

Met with Charles yesterday and outlined what I saw as needs and opportunities. He said he will be getting back to you on it.

Take care,

Doug

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Steffes, James D.
Sent:	Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:03 PM
To:	Nicolay, Christi L.; Gilbert-smith, Doug; Ward, Charles; Portz, David
Cc:	Shapiro, Richard
Subject:	Merger Analysis - ERCOT Market Share
Importance:	High

I am trying to identify generation assets owned and/or controlled in ERCOT by Enron and its affiliates.

The information I have been provided is that Enron only has Ponderosa Pine Energy Partners LTD - 263 MW.  Is this correct?

Do we have any long-term capacity over the DC Tie?
Do we have any construction in progress?
Any other positions (e.g., Capacity Auction) that may be considered by the PUCT in the merger?

Is there anyone else I should talk with about this information?

Thanks,

Jim


Dear Enron Employee:

Houston Ballet is presenting The Nutcracker through Sunday, December 30.  The production has been hailed by the Houston chronicle as "the crown jewel of holiday entertainment," and is a perfect introduction to the world of ballet for families and audiences of all ages.  Enron has been a long-time supporter of the Ballet, and we would like to thank you with a special invitation from Houston Ballet and TicketMaster for discount tickets to The Nutcracker.

Click on the following links below to receive a 25% discount on tickets to any of the selected performances of The Nutcracker.

To place your order, click on the link below to choose your day and time.  When requesting your tickets, you may choose from best available seats or a specific section, however, all ticket prices may not be available.  Ticketmaster service and handling charges will apply to your order.

Your company code is: NUT1.

Happy Holidays and enjoy Houston Ballet.

Performance Dates and Times:

Wednesday, December 26 at 7:30pm
https://ticketing.ticketmaster.com/cgi/purchasePage.asp?event_id=C003345C3DE86FB&event_code=EHL1226

Thursday, December 27 at 7:30pm
https://ticketing.ticketmaster.com/cgi/purchasePage.asp?event_id=C003345D10FB243&event_code=EHL1227

Saturday, December 29 at 2:00pm
https://ticketing.ticketmaster.com/cgi/purchasePage.asp?event_id=C003345CDB2A7A1&event_code=EHL1229M

Sunday, December 30 at 2:00pm
https://ticketing.ticketmaster.com/cgi/purchasePage.asp?event_id=C003345CDDBA7F9&event_code=EHL1230M


---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 08/31/2000 02:07
PM ---------------------------

Jeff Dasovich on 08/11/2000 07:10:41 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Kean,
Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Bruno
Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mary
Hain@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron, mpalmer@enron.com,
Susan M Landwehr/HOU/EES@EES, filuntz@aol.com, annab@luntz.com, Susan J
Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry
Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: DRAFT Message Points and Supporting Sources

Greetings All:

Here is a cut at message points and supporting sources to back them up.  All
errors are mine (unless, like Steve Peace, I can find someone convenient to
point a finger at.)  Particular thanks to Bruno, who helped enormously.  The
document is, of course, incomplete and will require considerable work, but
hope it offers a helpful point of departure.  We plan to continue working on
it on Monday.  If I've missed anyone on the distribution, please forward
along.  And if anyone has any questions, don't hesitate---415.782.7822.  I
can be reached at home this weekend at 415.621.8317.  Have a good weekend.

Best,
Jeff


I have raised these as appropriate items for discussion.  I would prefer not to make these cuts, but I think they are sufficiently in the zone of discretion that we would want to "stack" these up against other items under discussion.  The travel reduction mainly reflects the amount budgeted for staff/Member of Congress travel, with nearly one-half of it representing a proposed trip to London.  I think such trips have enormous value, but I also think we have flexibility as to whether they occur, if at all,  in 2002 or '03 or later.  Right now, I am for 2001, about $400,000 under budget.  About $200,000 of that is travel savings.  The amount I have set out for travel reduction in '02 is about the savings I achieved this year.

As for company memberships, $475K has been approved.  In my "ideal world" scenario, I requested $423,800.  The reductions I would make would leave me less than scenario two but more than my scenario three request for memberships.  The reductions would be achieved by cutting $100K for the Chamber, which we have agreed to drop.  The other cuts would be $60K for a Telecom Association, we no longer need.  The remaining amount in membership would be achieved through a combination of miscellaneous memberships, $55K of which would be CSI and AEI.

As for contributions, in scenario two I proposed $640K.  Right now $720K has approved in the budget.  I could reduce the $720 to $620 by adhering to the levels contained in scenario two; the additional $20K would be spread out over all  the accounts by reducing them $2 to 5K.

Again, I would prefer to keep the money described herein.  I do think as you look across the full range of government affairs, however, that you would want to have a full picture of potential (but within the zone of reasonableness) savings.  I would not air them but for the extraordinary times in which we find ourselves.  In sum, here is some food for thought.  I will be 100% supportive of whatever you decide.  Perhaps it is time to make some hard choices on personnel.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shapiro, Richard
Sent:	Tuesday, October 16, 2001 6:30 PM
To:	Robertson, Linda
Subject:	FW: Cut proposals for Enron Washington

Could you detail as to why this is not cutting beyond the point of reasonableness?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Linnell, Elizabeth
Sent:	Tuesday, October 16, 2001 5:26 PM
To:	Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda
Subject:	Cut proposals for Enron Washington

Rick - Linda and I had a "back of the envelope" discussion regarding the DC budget.  The numbers were proposed as follows:\

$200K in Travel (this includes $175K budgeted for Staff trips to Houston, Portland and London)

$275K in Company Memberships

$100 in Contributions
-------------------

$575K Total proposed cuts

You'll probably want to discuss the implications of these.  The cuts in Memberships and Contributions will bring these numbers below Scenario 2 proposal.

I will await direction from the two of you before making these changes in the worksheet.


Tom's in a meeting, but in his trade log he has APS crossed out and over it
he's written Pinnacle. So I'm going to wait to find out what happened. I'll
let you know.

Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/20/2001 12:46 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: deal 555159

Tom Alonso
deal 555159
Bloomberg shows cp as Arizona Public Service....we have Pinnacle West.

From my understanding from Rhonda trades can still be done under APS or
Pinncale West.  Please tell him to clarify which cp with the broker as the
trade is being done.

Thanks!!


Al,

Thanks for  the messages. I have come back from Europe last night
and I am in process of going through my mail.

Friday this week would be a good day to meet. I am going back to
Europe on Sunday and shall be gone for a week.

Vince

Al Arfsten <arfsten@bflassociates.com> on 09/22/2000 10:49:49 AM
Please respond to arfsten@bflassociates.com
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Al Arfsten Say Hello

Vince:  I hope all is well with you.  I look forward to chatting with
you soon.  Maybe we should have an early coffee meeting at the Hyatt
Regency when your schedule permits.  Al Arfsten


The report named: NG - PROPT P/L <http://trv.corp.enron.com/linkFromExcel.asp?report_cd=11&report_name=NG+-+PROPT+P/L&category_cd=5&category_name=FINANCIAL&toc_hide=1&sTV1=5&TV1Exp=Y&current_efct_date=11/19/2001>, published as of 11/19/2001 is now available for viewing on the website.


Rob Marvin of Inside FERC called for Mary Kay today with a couple questions.
I reviewed them with Mary Kay and reported back to him.  He wanted to know
what "Settlement Amount" and "Net Settlement Payment Due" meant on the
schedules.  I told him "Settlement Amount" was the Kansas ad valorem tax
refund obligation due under the Settlement, and that the "Net Settlement
Payment Due" was what was remaining due if the producer had already paid
money to Northern.  He then asked how the "Settlement Amount" was calculated
and I told him that was subject to settlement negotiation privilege and that
the parties agreed not to disclose any calculations or formulas in the
Settlement.  Jrt


Apologies that it took so long.  Just sent it.  Needed a hell of a lot of
work, including researching for cites.

Best,
Jeff

	Susan J Mara
	07/11/2001 01:13 AM

		 To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: 79167184@skytel.com
		 Subject: I NEVER RECEIVED A NEW DRAFT OF DUNN LETTER

Are we changing our strategy? If there is a new draft,  I won't have seen it
before the 6 AM PDT conference call.


I made one minor change.


I would add a sentence indicating that the contract and counterparty numbers will continue to fluctuate on a daily basis due to terminations.  Also, I would remove the org chart.

Regards,

Paul

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wax, Brandon
Sent:	Tuesday, January 29, 2002 11:11 AM
To:	Murphy, Harlan; Tweed, Sheila
Cc:	Richter, Brad; Baughman Jr., Don; Racicot, Paul
Subject:	Letter to E&Y

Attached is the letter we intend to send to E&Y.  Please forward any comments ASAP to Don Miller.

	WAX

 << File: 1-28EandYMemo.doc >>