attached is a notice from CERA re California bill AB 1 for your review and
files; please advise if additional material is requested - Eric Benson

===============

----- Forwarded by Eric Benson/NA/Enron on 02/05/2001 05:07 PM -----

	webmaster@cera.com
	02/05/2001 04:37 PM

		 To: insights@cera.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: California's Desperate Attempts to Avoid a Rate Increase - CERA
Alert

Title: California's Desperate Attempts to Avoid a Rate Increase
URL: http://www20.cera.com/eprofile?u=35&m=2241

California,s Desperate Attempts to Avoid a Rate Increase

On February 1, 2001, the California Assembly approved and the California
governor signed a new law intended to secure power supplies for California.
The
legislature has been meeting since early January in a &special extraordinary
session8 to address the power market crisis in the state, and the new law
represents their first significant piece of legislation. The bill, AB 1,
establishes a new mechanism for purchasing power for the state,s businesses
and
consumers. Whether the mechanism works will depend chiefly on whether the
limited revenue source used to pay for the power*collected by the state,s
investor-owned utilities (IOUs) under current retail rates*will cover
wholesale
power market costs incurred by the state. The law reflects the obsession by
California lawmakers with avoiding a rate increase rather than focusing on the
underlying flaws in California,s market structure.

AB 1 ushers in several important changes to the California market structure.
It
also contains several key provisions that capture the political mood in the
state. Highlights of the bill include

* Power buying authority transferred. The responsibility for purchasing power
for the customers of California,s IOUs has been transferred to the California
Department of Water Resources (CDWR). The California utilities will continue
to
operate and schedule their remaining generating facilities and contracts. The
difference between the utilities, total load and the sum of their resources
(referred to as the utilities, &net short8 amount) will be supplied by CDWR,
an
amount of energy that varies between 5,000 and 25,000 megawatts (MW),
depending
on the time of year, time of day, and utility plant availability. The
utilities
most recently performed this function themselves, buying energy from the
California Power Exchange (PX). However, CDWR has been buying electricity on
behalf of the IOUs since mid-January, when the near-bankruptcy of Southern
California Edison (SCE) and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) threatened to
disrupt
supplies to their customers. CDWR is a state agency that manages water
reservoirs and transportation systems in the state. CDWR uses an enormous
amount of electricity to transport water across California and provides
critical load-shedding capability to the independent system operator (ISO). In
addition, CDWR,s reservoirs generate power. The CDWR is thus well integrated
in
the state,s electric grid but in the past has not executed large, complicated
energy purchase arrangements to supply the customers of California,s
utilities.

* Portfolio of transactions. The intent of AB 1 is to allow CDWR to execute a
portfolio of contracts to stabilize the cost of power for the utilities and
their customers. CDWR has until January 2, 2003, to execute contracts. CDWR
will take title to power and is thereby not just acting as a clearinghouse. It
has issued a request for bids and seeks a variety of terms, including monthly,
annual, two-year, three-year, and longer. CDWR may also enter into options.
Thus, although CDWR,s role is intended to be temporary, the contracts that it
executes could extend many years.

* Power for munis. CDWR may purchase power on behalf of some California
municipal utilities at the municipal utilities, election.

* New payment scheme. CDWR will be entitled to a portion of existing utility
rates to pay for the cost of purchased power, interest on bonds, and
administrative expenses. This payment stream will be equal to the difference
between the generation component currently embedded in utility retail rates
(averaging about $0.07 per kilowatt-hour [kWh]) and the utilities,
costs to run
their own generation plants, costs of bilateral and qualifying facility
contracts, and the costs of ancillary services. The CDWR share of retail rates
is referred to as the California Purchase Adjustment (CPA). It is not clear
whether the CPA will cover wholesale power market costs. Current prices for
multiyear power contracts may lie above the CPA. In addition, if investors
believe that the CPA is inadequate to cover costs, the entire program may be
abandoned.

* New bonds. Bonds will be issued to secure power. The total amount of bonds
issued may not exceed four times the CPA. The state will transfer $500 million
from the general fund to jump-start the program, which begins immediately.
This
seed money and all bond proceeds must be recovered by CDWR from the California
utilities, customers (and municipal utilities if they opt in).

* New residential rate freeze. The California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) is prohibited from increasing residential customer rates until it has
completed paying all outstanding obligations. This locks in the recent 9
percent residential rate increase indefinitely. Governor Gray Davis thus keeps
his pledge not to increase rates further.

* Retail competition. To help secure a stable payment stream for the new
bonds,
AB 1 enables the CPUC to prohibit the utilities, retail customers from
choosing
an alternative electricity provider until CDWR,s obligations are paid.
Although
the CPUC has yet to act on this, the action would effectively halt the
competitive retail markets in the state for the duration of the CDWR program.

* Taxpayer protection. AB 1 directs that the new bonds clearly state &[
n]either
the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of California is
pledged
to the payment of the principal of or interest on this bond.8 Thus, the bonds
are secured only by the payment stream from utility rates.

*No assets affected. The CDWR is granted neither ownership nor control of
utility assets.

Ironically, the authority now granted CDWR is what California utilities had
essentially requested last summer when they sought to stabilize electricity
prices by executing a portfolio of transactions. The utilities were never
provided sufficient authority to execute term contracts. In addition, the
utilities have more experience to perform this function than CDWR.

Rather than aligning retail rates with wholesale electricity prices,
California
has sidestepped the issue by simply transferring the electricity purchasing
function. SCE and PG&E are still left to contend with uncollected costs from
past energy purchases, although they will no longer incur costs associated
with
buying power in the current wholesale market while charging frozen retail
rates. The utility liquidity crisis has not been resolved.

It is not clear whether the law,s prohibition on rate increases for
residential
customers can be achieved. The law is silent on rate increases for commercial
and industrial customers, providing a potential path for recovering
higher-than-
expected costs. Alternatively, CDWR could conceivably find contracts of
sufficient duration and low enough price that the rate pledge is met. These
contracts would lock in today,s retail rates for a long period of time.

AB 1 is just one of the steps that state officials hope will restore the power
system in California to a more stable footing. Key tasks remain.

* California,s wholesale market structure, which helped cause the supply
crisis
by ensuring that it was not profitable or possible to build generation in
California, remains unchanged. The term contracts CDWR is likely to sign will
provide a mechanism for mainly existing generators to lay off risk but will
not
be sufficient to encourage the build of sufficient new facilities. In
addition,
California,s siting and permitting process remains largely unchanged.

* The state must still address the need to expedite the development of new
power plants.

* AB 1 does not provide for the recovery of uncollected past wholesale energy
costs of California,s utilities. The state has been negotiating a deal with
the
utilities that may involve the transfer of generation or transmission assets
to
the state. However, the utilities have achieved recent court victories that
may
pave the way to a court-directed recovery of these costs. Recent audits
indicate that SCE and PG&E recovered their stranded costs early in 2000, which
should have triggered an end to their respective rate freezes. A legal
showdown
between the utilities and the state on this issue may be inevitable.

**end**

Follow above URL for full report.

*********************************************************
Come Shoot the Rapids with us at CERAWeek2001, "Shooting the Rapids:
Strategies and Risks for the Energy Future" in Houston, February 12-16, 2001!
For more information and to register, please visit
http://www20.cera.com/ceraweek/
*********************************************************

E-mail Category: Alert
CERA Knowledge Area(s): Western Energy,

**********************************************************************
To make changes to your cera.com account go to:
http://www20.cera.com/client/updateaccount

Forgot your username and password? Go to:
http://www20.cera.com/client/forgot

This electronic message and attachments, if any, contain information
from Cambridge Energy Research Associates, Inc. (CERA) which is
confidential and may be privileged. Unauthorized disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the contents of this message or any attachments,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited.
Terms of Use: http://www20.cera.com/tos
Questions/Comments: webmaster@cera.com
Copyright 2001. Cambridge Energy Research Associates


Hey Walter,  Thanks for stopping and leaving the note.  I'm glad I got to know you at the happy hours.  We will have to schedule another Gallant Knight evening sometime soon.  Good luck to you as well.  Take care.


Vince:

I am sorry I couldnt connect with you last week.  How would your Tuesday
morning first thing, say 800 or 830 am be to get together to discuss the
demo proposal and other issues?  I can come by your office very conveniently
then.  Give me an email shout if you could squeeze it in on Monday.  I look
forward to speaking with you.

Dale


please print
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:14 AM -----

	Chris Long
	10/13/2000 03:09 PM

		 To: Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia
Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/HOU/EES@EES
		 Subject: Commodity Futures Act - Talking Points

Tori:  We have contacted Senator Gramm and Majority Leader Armey about the
calls from Ken on Monday.  Because of the uncertainty of the Congressional
schedule, both offices told us to call on Monday morning to schedule the
call.  If Ken wants to make the calls unscheduled, we expect Armey and Gramm
to both be in DC by Monday morning.

The numbers are as follows:

Senator Gramm  (202) 224-2934
Majority Leader Armey (202) 225-4000

Here are the talking points

** CONFIDENTIAL **

Talking Points on Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000

Background:

We have hit an impasse on the CFTC Reauthorization legislation.  On legal
certainty, nearly all interested parties agree.  However, Senator Gramm
continues to raise objections unrelated to legal certainty for our business.
There are two issues (which we understand have primarily been advanced by
Senator Gramm, one on bank products and one on SEC jurisdiction). Majority
Leader Dick Armey is trying to gain consensus with the interested parties
which include Senator Gramm, the Chairmen of the House Agriculture, Commerce,
and Banking Committees, as well as the Department of Treasury, CFTC, and
SEC.  Meetings are occurring on a daily basis, but little concrete progress
has been made since draft legislation was released on October 9.

Talking Points:

We need your help to resolve outstanding differences so that the Commodities
Futures Modernization Act of 2000 can pass this year.  There are very few
legislative days left and movement now on this legislation is essential. Do
not let the Congressional calendar be the enemy of gaining legal certainty
for this dynamic and growing industry.

The current version of the legislation provides important legal certainty for
all physical commodity transactions (not including agricultural commodities)
entered into on a counterparty-to-counterparty basis or on an electronic
trading facility.  We strongly support these provisions.

The legislation eliminates concerns that our derivatives transactions may be
illegal or that our online platforms may be unregulated futures exchanges.
These provisions allow our businesses to grow and innovate.  Without this
legislation the industry will be crippled with legal uncertainty and these
platforms will develop overseas.

Virtually all of the issues in this very complex legislative package have
been resolved. We are indifferent to outstanding provisions, except to the
extent that they impede passage of the legislation.  We cannot allow the
great progress made to date, fail in the end.

If asked, about a possible solution to the logjam.  Answer:  Encourage
Majority Leader Armey, Senator Gramm, and Secretary Summers to meet
immediately to finalize the remaining issues.  Given time constraints, if
such a meeting does not occur in the next few days, there may not be enough
time to pass this important legislation.

Note: Congress will be going out on either October 20 or October 27.


----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 12/18/2000 02:02 PM -----

	"Woertz, Byron" <BWoertz@caiso.com>
	Sent by: "Grant, Colleen" <CGrant@caiso.com>
	12/18/2000 01:41 PM
	Please respond to "Sole, Jeanne"

		 To: ISO Market Participants
<IMCEAEX-_O=CAISO_OU=CORPORATE_CN=DISTRIBUTION+20LISTS_CN=ISO+20MARKET+20PARTI
CIPANTS@caiso.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: CAISO NOTICE: Bureau of State Audits supoena and document reques t

Market Participants and Scheduling Coordinators:

On December 4, 2000, the ISO provided notice regarding the subpoena and
document request it received from the Bureau of State Audits ("Bureau") for
information that is confidential under ISO Tariff Section 20.3.2.  This
notices requests Market Participants to treat the detailed data request
issued by the State Auditor as confidential.  In addition this notice
updates Market Participants on the ISO's schedule for compliance with the
State Auditor's subpoena and data request.

The December 4 notice included a detailed data request.  The State Auditor
has informed the ISO that it considers the detailed data request to be a
confidential document and has asked the ISO to inform Market Participants
that received the detailed data request that they should treat the document
as confidential.  The ISO hereby informs Market Participants on behalf of
the State Auditor that the detailed data request should be treated as a
confidential document.

The December 4 notice indicated that the ISO will seek protection for
information subject to Section 20.3.4 under the Confidentiality Agreement
executed by the ISO and the Bureau. The notice requested that any concerns
relating to the Bureau's subpoena and/or document request be communicated to
the ISO by 9:00 a.m., December 8th. In response to the notice, several
market participants have objected to disclosure of confidential information
to the Bureau.

Section 20.3.4 of the ISO Tariff provides, in pertinent part, that: "The
Market Participant may, at its sole discretion and own cost, direct any
challenge to or defense against the disclosure requirement and the ISO shall
cooperate with such affected Market Participant to the maximum extent
practicable to minimize disclosure of the information consistent with
applicable law." In accordance with that provision, objecting Market
Participants have the responsibility to pursue more restrictive
confidentiality protections to the extent they are disatisfied with the
protections in place.  Accordingly, the ISO through this notice places
Market Participant's on notice that it will release confidential information
requested by the State Auditor by the end of this week, if it does not
receive an order to the contrary from a Court or the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission by close of business Thursday December 21.

The Bureau contact related to the subpoena and document request is Sharon
Smagala who can be reached at (916) 445-0255 or sharons@bsa.ca.gov.

Generally, Market Participants wishing to contact the ISO in regard to the
State Auditor request should direct  correspondence and calls to Beth Ann
Burns at 916-608-7146 bburns@caiso.com <mailto:bburns@caiso.com>   with
copies to Charlie Robinson at crobinson@caiso.com
<mailto:crobinson@caiso.com>  and Norma Formanek at nformanek@fbm.com
<mailto:nformanek@fbm.com> .   This week, due to holiday vacations, Market
Participants should contact Jeanne Sol, 916-608-7144 jsole@caiso.com
<mailto:jsole@caiso.com>  with copies to Beth Ann Burns,  bburns@caiso.com
<mailto:bburns@caiso.com> , Charlie Robinson at crobinson@caiso.com
<mailto:crobinson@caiso.com>  and Norma Formanek at nformanek@fbm.com
<mailto:nformanek@fbm.com> .

Jeanne M. Sol,
Regulatory Counsel
California ISO
(916) 608-7144
____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________

The Foregoing e-Mail Communication (Together With Any Attachments Thereto)
Is Intended For The Designated Recipient(s) Only. Its Terms May Be
Confidential And Protected By Attorney/Client Privilege or Other Applicable
Privileges.  Unauthorized Use, Dissemination, Distribution, Or Reproduction
Of This Message Is Strictly Prohibited.


Rob Cass sent me the deal nos., and I have made a request to the confirm desk
to get the trade terms.  Thanks for your help.

	Sheri Thomas/ENRON@enronXgate
	04/25/2001 08:50 AM

		 To: Robert B Cass/ENRON@enronXgate, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Torrey Moorer/ENRON@enronXgate, Jennifer deBoisblanc
Denny/ENRON@enronXgate
		 Subject: RE: Request Termination Agreements for 4 EnronOnline Transactions

Tana is going to need the details of these trades - deal number, volume,
price, etc.

thanks
Sheri

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Cass, Robert B.
Sent: Tuesday, April  24, 2001 6:29 PM
To: Jones, Tana
Cc: Moorer, Torrey; Denny, Jennifer; Thomas, Sheri
Subject: Request Termination Agreements for 4 EnronOnline Transactions

Hi Tana -

We need your assistance in preparing termination letters for the transactions
listed on the attached spreadsheet and described as follows:

On Friday, April 20, 2001, four transactions occurred on EnronOnline that
were in error.  One transaction was with Coral Energy Holding L.P. and three
transactions were with Morgan Stanley Capital Group, Inc.  As mutually agreed
to by both the Enron commercial team and the respective counterparties, it
was decided that each of the four transactions would not be confirmed and
should be terminated.

The exact specifics are detailed as follows:

? The transactions occurred due to an inadvertent entry in the actual
production system of EnronOnline by a Product Control Group member, Melba
Lozano.  Melba activated a product assuming that she was in the EnronOnline
test system of EnronOnline.

? The product transacted upon is normally managed by Frank Ermis.  However,
in his absence on Friday, the product was managed by Matt Lenhart.

? Steve South, trader on the West Desk, called and notified both Morgan and
Coral that the product had been posted in error.  All parties agreed that the
transactions were not reflective of the normal pricing.  As a result they
further agreed that transaction confirmations would not be necessary and that
the deals would be "killed" on all sides.  (For reference of any telephone
tapes that may need to be pulled, the conversations with the counterparties
occurred around 2:00 pm.)

? No confirmations were generated as a result of the killing of the
transactions in TAGG.

? I spoke with Mike Grigsby on Monday (April 23, 2001) and advised him that
termination letters may be required by Legal.  He responded that he had no
problem with that.

Tana, please advise if additional information is required to complete the
termination letters or if another course of action is warranted.

Thank you,

Rob Cass
x35491


Enron's draft comments arguing against reimposing the max rate price cap for
short-term capacity releases into California are attached for your review and
comment.  They must be filed with FERC by June 11, which is next Monday.

[EES people -- please circulate to anyone else who needs to see them.]

If you have issues or comments, please contact Leslie Lawner or me as soon as
you can.  Leslie is at 505-623-6778 and my extension is 35840, or you can
e-mail us.


Two emails and still no response...was it something I said?!


Lindy,

I don't see any change to requirements.  Do you?  Kim.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Miller, Mary Kay
Sent:	Monday, September 24, 2001 5:45 PM
To:	Butler, Janet; Alvarez, Ray; Bagot, Nancy; Benner, Martha; Benson, Eric; Blair, Lynn; Boatman, Jack; Bradley, Rob; Branney, Theresa; Brennan, Lorna; Briggs, Tom; Comnes, Alan; Cordes, Bill; Corman, Shelley; Culwell, Christi; Daniel, Shonnie; Darveaux, Mary; Dietz, Rick; Dornan, Dari; Dushinske, John; Farrell, Sharon; Fossum, Drew; Fulton, Donna; Goodpasture, John; Hammond, Pearce; Harris, Steven; Hartsoe, Joe; Hass, Glen; Hayes, Robert; Hayslett, Rod; Heckerman, Bambi; Hess, Theresa; Hill, Robert; Holmes, Bradley; Holtzman, Staci; Hopkins, Tamara; Horton, Stanley; Huber, Lee; Janousek, Martha; January, Steven; Kean, Steven J.; Kilmer III, Robert; King Jr., Frazier; Kirk, Steve; Kissner, Tim; Lantefield, Laura; Lawrence, Linda L.; Lichtenwalter, Blair; Linnell, Elizabeth; Loeffler, Michael; Lokey, Teb; Lowry, Phil; Mann, Ruth; Mara, Susan; Martens, Donna; McCoppin, Dorothy; McGowan, Mike W.; Miller, Terri; Nacey, Sheila; Nelson, Kimberly (ETS); Neppl, Ray; Neubauer, Dave; Neufeld, Eva; Neustaedter, Robert; Nicolay, Christi L.; Novosel, Sarah; Paladino, Ranelle; Palmer, Maureen; Paschal, Zelda; Patterson, Geneva; Pavlou, Maria; Petersen, Keith; Place, Janet; Porter, Gregory J.; Pribble, Dan; Pryor, Tony; Raker, Colleen; Rice, Randy; Ringblom, Kathy; Robertson, Linda; Saunders, James; Sawyer, Lisa; Scott, Donna; Shafer, John; Shapiro, Richard; 'Smith, Mike'; Soldano, Louis; Stanton, Lon; Steffes, James D.; Sullivan, Kathleen; Talcott, Jim; Taylor, Gina; Tu, Denis; Van Norden, Mike; Veatch, Stephen; Vignaroli, Donald; Warner, Jody; Watson, Kimberly; Wilkie, Kim; Wilson, Rob; Winckowski, Michele; Wininger, James; Yoho, Lisa; Atkisson, Margaret; Bianchi, Rita; Bourg, Naomi; Lehn, Terry; Puetz, Fred
Subject:	RE: Two proceeding changes

Does this result in any change to the requirements to comply on 9/30?  I don't see any, but was curious??  Mary Kay

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Butler, Janet
Sent:	Monday, September 24, 2001 5:11 PM
To:	Alvarez, Ray; Bagot, Nancy; Benner, Martha; Benson, Eric; Blair, Lynn; Boatman, Jack; Bradley, Rob; Branney, Theresa; Brennan, Lorna; Briggs, Tom; Butler, Janet; Comnes, Alan; Cordes, Bill; Corman, Shelley; Culwell, Christi; Daniel, Shonnie; Darveaux, Mary; Dietz, Rick; Dornan, Dari; Dushinske, John; Farrell, Sharon; Fossum, Drew; Fulton, Donna; Goodpasture, John; Hammond, Pearce; Harris, Steven; Hartsoe, Joe; Hass, Glen; Hayes, Robert; Hayslett, Rod; Heckerman, Bambi; Hess, Theresa; Hill, Robert; Holmes, Bradley; Holtzman, Staci; Hopkins, Tamara; Horton, Stanley; Huber, Lee; Janousek, Martha; January, Steven; Kean, Steven J.; Kilmer III, Robert; King Jr., Frazier; Kirk, Steve; Kissner, Tim; Lantefield, Laura; Lawrence, Linda L.; Lichtenwalter, Blair; Linnell, Elizabeth; Loeffler, Michael; Lokey, Teb; Lowry, Phil; Mann, Ruth; Mara, Susan; Martens, Donna; McCoppin, Dorothy; McGowan, Mike W.; Miller, Mary Kay; Miller, Terri; Nacey, Sheila; Nelson, Kimberly (ETS); Neppl, Ray; Neubauer, Dave; Neufeld, Eva; Neustaedter, Robert; Nicolay, Christi L.; Novosel, Sarah; Paladino, Ranelle; Palmer, Maureen; Paschal, Zelda; Patterson, Geneva; Pavlou, Maria; Petersen, Keith; Place, Janet; Porter, Gregory J.; Pribble, Dan; Pryor, Tony; Raker, Colleen; Rice, Randy; Ringblom, Kathy; Robertson, Linda; Saunders, James; Sawyer, Lisa; Scott, Donna; Shafer, John; Shapiro, Richard; Smith, Mike; Soldano, Louis; Stanton, Lon; Steffes, James D.; Sullivan, Kathleen; Talcott, Jim; Taylor, Gina; Tu, Denis; Van Norden, Mike; Veatch, Stephen; Vignaroli, Donald; Warner, Jody; Watson, Kimberly; Wilkie, Kim; Wilson, Rob; Winckowski, Michele; Wininger, James; Yoho, Lisa; Atkisson, Margaret; Bianchi, Rita; Bourg, Naomi; Lehn, Terry; Puetz, Fred
Subject:	Two proceeding changes

FERC issued this tolling order today  on natural gas sales to California

http://cips.ferc.fed.us/Q/CIPS/RULES/RM/RM01-9.001.TXT

and issued a notice rescheduling the Sixth Interstate Facility Planning Seminar until October 26, 2001

http://cips.ferc.fed.us/Q/CIPS/MISC/M_MS/MS092401.000.TXT


---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Lokay/ET&S/Enron on 07/14/2000
07:49 AM ---------------------------

Jim & Michelle <jimboman@bigfoot.com> on 07/14/2000 01:14:06 AM
Please respond to jimboman@bigfoot.com
To: MLokay@enron.com
cc:

Subject: Jeff pics

Jeff - print.jpg is for printing (color or B&W)
Jeff - screen.jpg is for viewing as email or such on a computer monitor.

I figured these would be pretty self explanatory.  As always, let me
know if you have any trouble opening these.

Jim


My e-mail is: RGGDEE@AOL.com

home phone is 281-334-2360.

Will advise of cel # when I get one (soon).


Just a reminder for Monday to get this for me.  Too bad they didn't deliver
these!  Thanks.  --Sally
---------------------- Forwarded by Sally Beck/HOU/ECT on 07/07/2000 07:24 PM
---------------------------

Gwendolyn Williams@ENRON
07/07/2000 05:03 PM
To:
cc:  (bcc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT)
Subject: PRC Binders

Hello, my name is Gwendolyn Gray.  I am in the Associate/Analysts Human
Resources Department.  Your PRC Binders are ready to be picked up and are
located in EB 1197.  I will be in my location until 5:30 today and all day on
Monday, July 10.  Thanks in advance.


Please find attached the note I prepared in response to the request for information received last Monday (sorry, it is in Spanish, please let me know if you have someone who can quickly put it in English or if you would like me to translate and re-send it) .  I have limited the information to what was actually requested.  All of the data contained in the same is duly documented and can be checked in the stack of related documents I faxed you and Mark on Wednesday night.  Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Regards,

Andrea


Vince,

I agree.  If you think that this candidate would be good for your group
specifically - I would invite him in directly.

Hope all is well.
Ashley

Vince J Kaminski@ECT
10/24/2000 04:09 PM
To: Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: UC-Berkeley Graduate Student

Ashley,

This is one resume I got today. I think that it makes sense to invite him
for an interview directly with my group. He does not qualify as an analyst
candidate.
What do you think?

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000
04:14 PM ---------------------------

Rajnish Kamat <kamat@ieor.berkeley.edu> on 10/23/2000 07:55:31 PM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: UC-Berkeley Graduate Student

Dr. Vincent Kaminski
Managing Director and Head of Research
Enron Corp.

Dear Dr. Kaminski,
It was a pleasure talking with you and attending your talk today.
I am a graduate student in Industrial Engg. and Operations
Research working with Prof. Shmuel Oren
on topics in financial instrument pricing and design of
contracts in deregulated electricity markets. I am also
doing research in auction models and computable equilibrium
models with applications in electricity market design.

I am planning to graduate with a Ph.D. in May 2001 and would
appreciate hearing about any opportunities in your group at Enron.
I am attaching at copy of my resume (file: cvrkamat.doc) for your perusal.

Thanking you,
Sincerely,

Rajnish Kamat
Graduate Student
IEOR, UC-Berkeley

4135, Etcheverry Hall
Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research
University of California at Berkeley
Berkeley, CA, 94710

 - CVRKAMAT.DOC


It has been confirmed that the NNG Allocations data is correct - there is no allocation data to display.

Deborah
HotTap Helpdesk
for Chris Smith

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hottap HelpDesk
Sent:	Wednesday, December 26, 2001 6:58 AM
To:	Hottap HelpDesk; Kuehl, Toby; Holmes, Bradley; Buchanan, John; Kowalke, Terry; Schoolcraft, Darrell; Blair, Lynn; Nacey, Sheila
Cc:	Abshire, Scott; Hotte, Steve; Sawyer, Lisa; McFarland, Jean; Kedwaii, Hasan; Wagner, Glenda; Daze, Don; Karas, Phylis
Subject:	FW: All tests were NOT successfully executed

All testing was completed.  We have confirmed with the ENW Resolution Center that the Exchange servers are up.

NNG Allocations shows no information to display.  We are checking into the validity of that posting and will advise.

Deborah
HotTap Helpdesk
for Chris Smith


At the request of the NEB, TransCanada has sent out a notice to shippers and interested parties
for comments on TCPL's application addressing the proposed Mainline Services and Pricing
Settlement.  They are also requesting comments on "the need for and the nature of a further process
to consider the Application".   Comments must be filed by Wednesday, May 23,2001.

Kevin Heal from our Calgary Office, represented Enron in the Settlement discussions.  Enron elected
to abstain when the vote was taken to approve the Settlement.  Sithe/Independence voted to
oppose and litigate the Settlement.

To maximize the value of the Sithe/Independence TCPL capacity (i.e. St. Clair to Chippawa & Kirkwall
to Chippawa contracts), it is very important that Sithe continue to actively participate in the
NEB's regulatory process and file comments by the deadline.  Behind the scenes, I
recommend that we work with Sithe's legal counsel to coordinate a response to this
request in case this capacity is assigned to Enron at a later date.

I also recommend that Enron either change our earlier position from abstention to
opposition of the Settlement, or combine the Empress to Chippawa contract that is
dedicated to the Sithe/Independence deal with Sithe's other capacity.  Kevin has
provided the attached information of the other Toll Task Force members that voted to abstain,
oppose, or oppose and litigate the Settlement.  It appears that most of the marketers, cogens and
IPP's fall in this camp.

There are several features to the Settlement that may create additional value that
has not yet been captured in our restructuring analysis.  I believe that only by taking
an aggressive stand in the regulatory process, can this additional value be realized.  TCPL's
"FT Make-Up" and "AOS" features will create additional value for 2001 and 2002.   The "Turnback
Procedure" is designed to mitigate actual costs of TCPL's proposed Waddington and Niagara
expansions.  If some, or all of Sithe's capacity can be turned back to the pipeline, value may be
created starting in late 2002 and possibly through the termination of Sithe's contracts.

If there is any other information needed or I can assist in any way, please call me at x31667.

Ruth


<<IPW091701.pdf>>
Good Morning,

Our deepest sorrow and sympathy goes out to all those who have lost loved
ones and have suffered because of last Tuesday's national tragedy.

For those investors that are interested in understanding how last week's
tragedy might impact the sector we attached the latest issue of our
Independent Power Weekly and offer the following thoughts:

1. Framework for Analysis   From a broader equity market perspective, the
analytical challenge for investors is understanding how the prospect of
slower economic growth will impact the outlook for corporate earnings.
Another area for analysis is understanding how the negative impact of a
slowing economy will be offset by falling interest rates.

2. Sector is Well Positioned Relative to the Market   On both fronts, we
believe the power generation sector is well positioned relative to the
broader market.  Compared to the rest of the market, the growth prospects
for the industry are clearly less sensitive to economic conditions.
Providing support for this view, in 1991, when real GDP declined 0.5%,
electricity demand increased 2.0%, which compares with a 2.2% annual growth
rate from 1990-2000.  In addition, we believe the sector will benefit
disproportionately from falling interest rates.

3. Current Valuations Offer Downside Protection   Current valuations for the
sector offer downside protection relative to the market.  On average, the
pure play US IPPs are trading at 14.4 and 11.0 times our 2001 and 2002 EPS
estimates.  This valuation represents a 33% and 42% discount to the S&P 500,
despite an average growth rate of 28% for the IPPs versus 6% for the S&P
500.

4. Impact on the NY Power Market   How these tragedies will impact the
fundamentals of the New York power market has been the subject of
considerable speculation.  Our analysis indicates that even under the most
extreme demand reduction scenario, supply shortages will persist in the
region through mid-2006.  However, the magnitude of the potential shortfall
(measured in MW) is likely to decline by 12 - 30%.

5. Impact on Recent Power Market Activity   The World Trade Center tragedy
had a number of consequences for the power markets.  Most immediately, the
impact was felt in New York where significantly reduced demand from lower
Manhattan pushed down local power prices.  Throughout the country, the
situation resulted in well below normal trading volumes.  Finally, the
overall uncertainty served to push up forward prices in several parts of the
country.

Regards,

Neil Stein   212/325-4217

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


jsavitt@nyiso.com writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

The NYISO is reserving hours-beginning 8,9,16,17,18, and 20 in the 4 December
2000 real-time market to verify prices.
Prices for the 5 December 2000 Day-Ahead market are correct.
Pursuant to ECA20001006B the NYISO is reserving the following hours at the
following external proxy buses:
PJM: 00:00-03:00, 06:00
OH: 00:00 - 01:00, 06:00
HQ: 00:00 - 01:00, 05:00 - 06:00
NE: 00:00 - 01:00,  06:00


This reports on our meet and confer session with the AG's office today
regarding the subpoenas served upon Enron Energy Services. Mike Kirby and I
spoke with Deputy AGs Margaret Wrighter and Paul Stein for approximately two
hours.  These are the essential points we covered:
*	Non-waiver of objections:  They agreed that EES did not waive any
objections by attempting to negotiate compliance with the subpoena.  They
will agree that any interim production of  documents would not waive any of
EES's objections to the subpoena, except as to those documents actually
produced.
*	Territoriality:  We told them that EES would not produce documents
that resided outside the state.  Much of the conference was devoted to their
disagreement with this position.  Wrighter suggested that the AG may seek
prompt court relief on this issue or, in the alternative, file a lawsuit to
make EES a party in this litigation, then reach out of state documents
through ordinary discovery.  We are at an impasse on this issue.
*	Confidentiality:  The AG proposes a confidentiality order identical
to the order in place between Reliant and Dynegy in their litigation with
the AG in Los Angeles.  This order limits access to confidential documents
to less than 20 persons, but provides that persons outside the AG's office
at the PUC and other California governmental agencies may review produced
documents. The court in LA  has recently ruled that the confidentiality in
place with Reliant and Dynegy and Mirant may be amended to permit the
offices of the Attorneys General of Oregon and Washington to review produced
documents, subject to the confidentiality provisions of the agreement.
Reliant and Dynergy are challenging this provision of the order in the
appellate courts, but have not obtained an order staying their production
under this order.  The AG says they will not sign a different
confidentiality order with us.  We did not agree to these provisions.  We
are to give the AG a redlined confidentiality order on Monday that we would
accept in return for producing documents within California.
*	Production of electronic documents:  They insist that all documents
kept in electronic form be produced in  electronic form.  We discussed the
difficulties and burdens of doing this.  They say they will insist upon this
requirement.  We will consider compliance for electronic documents within
the state if it is not burdensome to do so.
*	Confidentiality of customer contracts:  They will agree to narrow
production to commercial customers. We explained that our commercial
contracts have confidentiality provisions with our customers.  We told them
most have approximately a ten day notice period which we will honor.  They
asked for an example of this provision, which I said we would provide. They
took the position that we should have been given notice to our customers
weeks ago and demanded production.  We told them we would not do so until,
at the earliest, July 30, after we had given appropriate notice.  They asked
that we begin to produce some documents before then.
*	Interim production: We told them that, subject to an acceptable
confidentiality order, we were prepared to produce documents which were
reasonably requested by their subpoena that reside within California
beginning July 30,  on the condition that it would not operate as a waiver
of any of our objections in later litigation. They said they would think
about this offer and call us back.  Wrighter called back this afternoon,
saying that they wish us to continue with the plans to make an interim
production. She did not promise not to file a lawsuit in the interim.
	Accordingly, we intend to prepare an acceptable confidentiality
agreement sufficient to protect the  production of EES's California
documents, then send it to the AG with a letter that set forth the terms of
any interim production under that agreement. If they do not agree to the
confidentiality agreement, or the terms of the interim production, we will
not produce any documents. We will send this letter to the AG early next
week after we have distributed a copy for your review.

=======================================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com
BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP
http://www.brobeck.com


The following reports have been waiting for your approval for more than 4 days.  Please review.

Owner: Joseph R Hartsoe
Report Name: Joe11/13/01
Days In Mgr. Queue: 7

Owner: George B Stanley
Report Name: GBS 102301 AMEX
Days In Mgr. Queue: 5


PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS E-MAIL--THIS ACCOUNT IS NOT MONITORED

AP User:

Attached is/are the payment proposal(s) for your business unit.  Please review and forward to your approver(s)/CAO.

Thank you.
SAP AP Team
 - 20020104-DENWW.XLS


Brett, under the assumption that we are not over-paying for the land and that
the site has option value beyond the Petrobras deal, I am ok with the
purchase.

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 12/18/2000
11:23 AM ---------------------------

Brett R Wiggs@ENRON
12/18/2000 12:03 PM
To: David W Delainey@ECT
cc:
Subject: Land Purchase

Dave:

Some time ago, I had received approval to purchase the primary block of land
for the Rio project site from Jim.  One year ago, we had acquired the rights
to purchase the land under an option agreement.  This agreement is about to
expire and we are currently closing the transaction to purchase the land.
The total purchase price of the block is $1.7 million.  This closing is to
take place tomorrow.  Given the changes, I thought I should run this by you
to make sure you would be in agreement.  I had hoped that this would be a
moot point with the Petrobras agreement closed.  However, I think we may be a
couple more days on that.  I am very concerned with waiting on the landowner
given that our option agreement will be expiring.  Please let me know if it
is ok to move forward with the land purchase.

Thanks,
Brett


SVMG Energy Committee Members and Liaison Representatives:

The CEC recently launched the Innovative Peak Load Reduction
Program which provides grants for reducing peak electrical demand.
Supporting the SVMG Energy Policy,  this program will pay up to $250
per kW, and up to 75% of the costs for projects that achieve load
reduction between the hours of 2:00PM-6:00PM, June through
September.  Attached is a flyer that gives an overview of the
program and the scheduled seminars that explain the grant program.

A seminar is being conducted on Tuesday, June 26, at the San
Francisco Airport Holiday Inn to explain the program and the
application process.  There is no charge for the seminar and a full
complementary breakfast will be provided.  The seminar starts at
7:00AM and is about an hour.

Take advantage of this opportunity to get a state grant to help defer
the cost of energy efficiency projects.

Thank you for your consideration.

Gary B. Clifford
XENERGY

(See attached file: Peak Load Program Flyers_fax.pdf)

 - Peak Load Program Flyers_fax.pdf


Hey freak-o!  How have you been?  I'm just taking a study break (finals,
ick!) and thought I would say hello.  What's new?  Have you moved into
your place yet?  Let me know if I can come and see it--I'll be home (in
college station) a week from Tuesday...am making a pit stop in Tahoe on
my way home...just gotta get thru these pesky exams first!

Greetings from la-la-land,
eleanor :-)

--
Eleanor Fraser
The Anderson School at UCLA, MBA 2002
Home 310.446.7735
Mobile 310.963.4474


Ben/Mike/Jeff,

Here is a quick update and a request for your assistance:

On Wednesday, November 22, ENA sent West LB a 5-day notice indicating our
intent to exercise the purchase option by Friday.
On Friday, November 30, ENA will execute the purchase option and at that time
own the 4 turbines for the Austin project.
Hopefully, by the end of the week, ENA and GE will execute the breakout
agreement which will ensure, primarily, that the GE warranties attached to
the 4 Austin turbines are completely conveyed to ENA.

Attached is the latest draft of the GE Breakout agreement between ENA and GE.
 In order to complete the breakout agreement, the lawyers need you guys to
review section 10 regarding site specific performance guarantees and provide
comments.  Also, please let us (Kay Mann and myself) know what Exhibit F and
U should contain.  The GE lawyers indicated they would provide the first
draft soon.

Let us know you thoughts as soon as possible.

Regards,

Eric

---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Boyt/Corp/Enron on 11/27/2000 11:15
AM ---------------------------

Kay Mann
11/27/2000 09:05 AM
To: Eric Boyt/Corp/Enron@Enron, Catherine Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stuart
Zisman/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roseann Engeldorf/Corp/Enron@ENRON

Subject: City of Austin Agreement

FYI.  I hope to have a conversation with GE today regarding finishing this
document, including the exhibits.

Kay

---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 11/27/2000 08:58
AM ---------------------------

"Thompson, Peter J." <peterthompson@akllp.com> on 11/22/2000 02:42:23 PM
To: "Kay Mann (E-mail)" <kay.mann@enron.com>
cc: "Pipitone, Paul" <paulpipitone@akllp.com>, "Cobb, Chris"
<chriscobb@akllp.com>

Subject: City of Austin Agreement

Attached please find a clean copy of the City of Austin Facility
Agreement, as well as a blackline showing changes to the document agreed
to by GE.  To complete the agreement the following needs to be inserted:

1. For the recitals, the kW capacity of its plant and  the location
of the plant.

2. All exhibits, including Exhibit N-3 (which is the original price
for each unit) and Exhibit U, which contains the Site specific material.
The Table of Contents should then be run to include all of the exhibits.

3. The agreement reference in 6.7.1

4. The payee and address for invoices in 6.7.2

5. The names, addresses, etc. for Sections 25.1 and 25.3
 <<Comparison of the Gas Turbine Agreement.DOC>>  <<Gas Turbine
Agreement Draft of 11/22/00.DOC>>
 - Comparison of the Gas Turbine Agreement.DOC
 - 00.DOC


Check out the latest version of Enron Business Online at home.enron.com.
Click on Publications, then on Enron Business and "Volume 4, 2000."  In this
issue, try your hand again at our Top 10 List ) winners will receive $25 gift
certificates to the Signature Shop!

Featured in this issue:

? Enron Net Works' unique eCommerce incubator;
? Project Gem improves Enron's worldwide systems;
? The year of communication and how we,re doing;
? Enron becomes a major player in world metals trading;
? Nigeria's breakthrough power deal; and
? The answers to last issue's "Enron Stumpers" quiz.  Sorry, we had no
winners.


----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Lay <mlay@houston.rr.com>
To: David Herrold <dherrold@enlineresources.com>; Elizabeth Lay
<lizard_ar@yahoo.com>; Judie Lay <jlaywp@aol.com>; Linda Lay
<mrslinda@lplpi.com>; Natalie Lay <nlay@att.net>; Robert "Beau" Herrold
<beau@lafam.com>; Robyn Vermeil <vermeil@ev1.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2000 5:06 PM
Subject: Zachary Fourth of July Pictures

> This kid will forever be known for the outfits we force him to wear before
> he is able to protest.
>
> Love,
> Natalie and Mark
>

 - July 4, 2000 Zach 1.gif
 - July 4, 2000 Zach 2.gif
 - July 4, 2000 Zach 3.gif
 - July 4, 2000 Zach 4.gif


eSource presents Global Access training

Global Access offers an online connection to complete company information and
filings via content that includes Disclosure, Worldscope, Datastream and
I/B/E/S.  The product is designed to allow users to get complete company
information such as financials, filings, databases and news for thousands of
US and International companies from a single source.

Training Agenda Includes:
? General Introduction.
? Basic Reference View Query (Which provides an itemized list of all
available source data.)
? Basic Business View Query (Which pulls source data from various Global
Access content, and displays it in a presentation summary).

Attend our Global Access Clinic:

May. 16 - 9:00 -10:00 AM  EB572

Seats fill up fast! To reserve a seat, please call Stephanie E. Taylor at
5-7928
Check the eSource training page at http://esource.enron.com/training.doc for
additional training sessions and vendor presentations

http://esource.enron.com


Aproved in both cases.

Vince Kaminski

From: Jameika Smikle@ENRON on 10/10/2000 04:19 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Erequest 3991

Peter Makkai is also requesting this access.

----- Forwarded by Jameika Smikle/Corp/Enron on 10/10/2000 04:19 PM -----

	Jameika Smikle
	10/10/2000 04:16 PM

		 To: Vince Kaminski
		 cc:
		 Subject: Erequest 3991

Stpehen Bennett is requesting Read/Write access to O:\research

Please advise.

Jameika
IRM


Tana:  The following people have requested a link;

Donna Lowry
Shemeika Landry
Shelli Smith

Shemeika and Shelli work with Donna in risk analytics.

Thanks.

Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
sara.shackleton@enron.com


Leslie, thank you for your comments.

From my understanding, we have a need for the following:

1. Talking points directed to a CA audience (similar to the number of
"one-pagers" we have already done for CA)
2. Talking points to circulate on the Hill
3. Points to include in a presentation to FERC on the 24th

It is not clear to me whether we should produce one document that fills all
of these needs or if we need more than one document.  Perhaps, as Leslie
mentioned in her message below, we should add some FERC-level solutions to
this document and use it for several purposes.

**If someone has some suggestions about FERC language, please send them to me
or call me and I will incorporate them and recirculate the document.**

I am re-attaching the draft talking points again, for your reference.

Thanks,

Jennifer

	Leslie Lawner
	05/17/2001 05:00 PM

		 To: Jennifer Thome/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: DRAFT talking points on gas in CA

I guess my only thought is focused on the presentation to FERC on the 24th.
The solutions you have identified are all at the state level.  Can we put in
something to address what the FERC can do?  I am not sure what it is, but
maybe it would include expeditious approval of projects to and WITHIN
California that have been filed with FERC, as opposed to PG&E and SoCalGas
projects, which would be within the province of the CPUC.  Something to think
about.


This is what the broker has --  I wonder if you could check it out and see if it's regulated flow or not.  Also we can use whatever proxy we want if you have any suggestions.


---------------------- Forwarded by Robin Rodrigue/HOU/ECT on 08/31/2000
09:36 PM ---------------------------

Becky Pitre
08/31/2000 01:29 PM
To: Brooklyn Couch/HOU/EES@EES, Shannon McPearson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robin
Rodrigue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Aggie Virus

You have just received the "Aggie Virus"!!!
As we don't have much programming experience, this
Virus works on the honor system.
Please manually delete all the files on your hard drive
and manually forward this Virus to everyone on your
mailing list.
Thanks for your cooperation.  Working together, we
can make this virus a worldwide success.


Shouldn't we go to LA Tuesday so we can be in the office on Monday after
being away Thurs and Fri?


THAT'S some pretty dark humor.

-----Original Message-----
From: chad knipe [mailto:knipe3@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 3:52 PM
To: EriK Wollam; Chet Fenner; Chris McComb; Joe Parks
Subject: Re: deer dollars

February was a killer month for orthopedics but we don't get paid for awhile yet..........I mean, uh..checks in the mail.

----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Wollam
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 3:41 PM
To: knipe3@msn.com; chet_fenner@bmc.com; cmccomb@austin-mccomb.com; Joe.Parks@enron.com
Subject: deer dollars

Brian has paid. Chris says his is coming.
All others, please issue your checks for $1,071.00 for each individual.
I have covered the initial $8,000 (!) payment.
Joe, pull the trigger on your 7mm and abortionist and give us the commitment
we need. Chet, your opportunity is slipping away....how's the NASDAQ today?
Come on, get it!
e.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com


We have already submitted our budget for PR, Govt' affairs, Facilities, corp HR etc.  Does the process below affect my numbers (please say no).

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Beck, Sally
Sent:	Friday, October 05, 2001 3:03 PM
To:	Bowen Jr., Raymond; Brown, Michael - COO London; Buy, Rick; Causey, Richard; Delainey, David; Derrick Jr., James; Dietrich, Janet; Fallon, Jim; Fastow, Andrew; Frevert, Mark; Glisan, Ben; Haedicke, Mark E.; Horton, Stanley; Hughes, James A.; Kean, Steven J.; Kitchen, Louise; Koenig, Mark; Lavorato, John; Lay, Kenneth; Mcconnell, Mike; McMahon, Jeffrey; Shankman, Jeffrey A.; Sherriff, John; Whalley, Greg
Cc:	Colwell, Wes; Roper, Kerry; Price, Brent A.; Castleman, Kent; Dyson, Fernley; Hayslett, Rod; Piper, Greg; Pickering, Mark
Subject:	Enron Net Works 2002 Budget Process

The 2002 Enron Net Works budget will for the first time combine allocations to business units for four key services:  Enron Online, IT Infrastructure, Risk Management Operations and IT Maintenance and Development.  We are providing a level of detail for expense and capital spend that is greater than that provided in past years, and that will allow business units to make informed choices regarding the services that they receive.

We are meeting with individual business unit Offices of the Chair to review in detail the four service areas delivered through Enron Net Works.  Some of these meetings have been completed and more will occur between now and October 12.  Please keep the following points in mind as we work with you to finalize budget:

Enron Networks today is very different from this time last year.  Additions to the 2002 ENW budget are Operations for EA, EIM and EGM.  Operations, IT Maintenance and Development, and IT Infrastructure for EES and EBS have been included under the ENW umbrella for the first time in the  2002  budget as well.  The 2001 budgets for these functions were approved and included in individual business units last year.   Any comparison of ENW's 2002 versus 2001 budget must be appropriately adjusted for these organizational changes to be relevant.

For further detail for each business unit, ENW's 2002 expense and capital dollars are organized to mirror each business unit's lines of business (products or commodities) in order to create a transparent view at a more granular level of the costs involved in supporting each of the lines of business.

The detail that is being provided to business units for IT costs delineates licensing fees, system maintenance costs and new development costs.  Detail on each IT development project identifies the purpose, business sponsor, line of business, "in progress" or "planned" designation, expense and capital spend, system impacted, and estimated completion date.   In order to finalize IT project budgets, decisions will be required from the business units on which projects to undertake in 2002.

If you have questions about the ENW budgets as we are working with you to finalize them,  please call one of us.

Greg Piper
Sally Beck
Mark Pickering


----- Forwarded by Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000 09:14 AM -----

	Janice R Moore
	10/26/2000 08:31 AM

		 To: Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Black Hills Pepperell tolling transaction

a followup note on this deal from Kevin Presto
Regards,
Janice

EB3861
Assistant General Counsel, Enron North America Corp.
713-853-1794 (Fax:  713-646-4842)
----- Forwarded by Janice R Moore/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000 08:30 AM -----

	Kevin M Presto
	10/26/2000 08:25 AM

		 To: John Llodra/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Janice R Moore/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tracy Ngo/PDX/ECT@ECT, Edward
Sacks/Corp/Enron@Enron, Edward D Baughman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Dana
Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Homco/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Black Hills Pepperell tolling transaction

John,

We need to make sure we are valuing the spread option using only No. 2 oil in
Dec, Jan & Feb.  We will almost certainly be curtailed during blow out events
in the winter and, therefore, it is not appropriate to use nat gas as the
winter fuel.


I wanted to let you know that the form of Enron Corp. Guaranty has been
agreed to with BNP Paribas and has been sent up to Enron Corp. for signature
today.  I will send you a copy of the Guaranty once it is fully executed.


We have received a termination notice from Ameren, which is one of the counterparties identified by David for resuming scheduling of power.  Let me know if you would like a copy of the notice.


are you staying with brit's parents??


Vince and Stinson,

Bob finished a comparison between our spread option model and
SciFinance spread option model.

SciFinance model is very accurate. In their model there is a knob to
control the accuracy, more accuracy needs more computation time.
Also for high correlation, the model runs significantly slow.

I forward Bob's mail below, if you get a chance, please take a look.

Zimin

---------------------- Forwarded by Zimin Lu/HOU/ECT on 11/30/2000 03:11 PM
---------------------------

Bob Lee@ENRON
11/28/2000 08:00 AM
To: Zimin Lu/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: SciFi/Exotica Comparisons

Zimin

The comparisons are attached (see Summary page on the Excel spreadsheet).
THe high level (Aspen) description of the finite difference code is attached
also.  I also included the finite difference xll, if you want to run some
cases.

Bob


Thanks.  I was hoping you would say that.

	Andrew Edison@ENRON
	05/07/2001 10:15 AM

		 To: Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Meeting Notes - Meeting between Crescendo and Cantera

Don't worry.  I'll take care of this.

----- Forwarded by Andrew Edison/NA/Enron on 05/07/2001 10:15 AM -----

	"Ken" <kckrisa@apex2000.net>
	05/06/2001 06:52 PM
	Please respond to kckrisa

		 To: "Andrew Edison \(E-mail\)" <andrew.edison@enron.com>, "Gerald R. Nemec
\(E-mail\)" <Gerald.Nemec@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Meeting Notes - Meeting between Crescendo and Cantera

Andrew, Gerald

Attached is the meeting notes from a 1 hour meeting we had with Cantera
Resources and Tom Brown on April 24.  We will be meeting with them again on
Monday, May 7 in Dallas.  This meeting will involve the president and
operations manager of Cantera as well.  While the last meeting was more of
introductions and high level "where we are"  and "what are the issues"
discusssion, this meeting will be more definitive where we plan to discuss
the pressure and curtailment issues in more detail, and we will be
discussing moving the Entrada from San Arroyo to our plant.  I am sure they
will also want to discuss some sort of agreement for us to move foreward
together on the low-Btu project.   Tom Brown representatives will be
involved via phone - as they must until the deal closes.  We told Cantera it
may be a very short meeting as there are certain things we won't talk about
in front of Tom Brown.

In our meeting on Monday - which will start at noon with lunch, I want to be
able to show them a couple of things.  I want to show them Graphs 2-2.1-A
and 2-2.1-B and Figure 2-2.2 out of section 3 of the Contract Issues book I
gave you.  I want to also show them Graphs 3-2.1-A and 3-2.1-B and Figures
3-1 out of section 4 of the book.   I was not planning on discussing the
monitary value associated with these graphs (the sum of these issues totals
just under $1MM economic harm to Crescendo as I calculated from June through
December 2000.)

Andrew, I will call you in the morning to discuss in more detail what we
should and should not show them or discuss concerning the issues.  I will be
on my cell phone at 915-349-8223 all morning.

Thanks,

Ken Krisa

 - meeting notes 4-24-01 Cantera.doc


David,

I think this point is moot for the time being because (as of last Tuesday) we
are not dealing with Bidder D.

I think it is ok legally to go this way -- although there is potential
liability under the WARN Act (the plant closing law).  We probably can
schedule around that exposure, though, by giving everyone who possibly may be
affected 60 days' notice.

Practically, however, this would not be my favorite approach.  I'd prefer it
if we could have the ability to compete for top performers, but we should be
able to manage that by working through the persons who we identify and
present for possible hiring by the buyer.

I would like more information about what is meant by "ENA does not interfere
with" the offers made by the buyer.  Does that mean no counteroffers?

To answer the question of whether we can bind all of Enron, I would say that
it is unlikely, unless we want to ask.  It is easier to commit only the
wholesale group, rather than ask Corp., EES, Broadband, etc.  whether they
will abide by the agreement, so I would recommend limiting it to that group,
if possible.  We may be able to include the pipelines, given that they have
been involved in this transaction.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Michelle

David Oxley
11/26/2000 06:50 PM
To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, Fran L Mayes/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Triple Lutz Employee Matters

What's your view?
---------------------- Forwarded by David Oxley/HOU/ECT on 11/26/2000 06:43
PM ---------------------------

Timothy J Detmering
11/15/2000 07:32 PM
To: David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian Redmond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Patrick
Wade/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anne C Koehler/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Triple Lutz Employee Matters

With respect to bidder D we are being asked not to compete with them for
those employees they would like to hire.  i.e. we have to sever them and
bidder D gets to hire them if they want to (in which case the severed
employees get no severance payment if they turn DFS down).  I would like to
propose something like the following:

 1.  We provide Bidder D with a list of all Designated Employees, their
position, historical compensation.
 2.  Bidder D covenants to make offers to ___% of certain pools of Designated
Employees e.g. commercial, operations, engineering, trading, etc.
 3.  Bidder D covenants to make offers that will not allow Designated
Employees to successfully claim constructive dismissal under our severance
plan.
 4.  Between signing and closing, Bidder D provide us with a list of Offerees
- Designated Employees to whom Bidder D intends to make offers of
employment.
 5.  ENA covenants that we will not interfere with Bidder D's offers (can we
bind all of Enron?).
 6.  If an Offeree turns down the offer (in writing) then ENA is free to
continue to employee Offeree.  However, if we do not continue to employ the
Offeree, no   severance is owed.

The intent of the above is to encourage Offerees to take the offers - they
give up severance rights if they don't - but provide us the opportunity to
continue to employee anyone who is bold enough to turn it down and that we
want to keep.  Also it caps our severance obligation by requiring Bidder D to
specify how many offers must be made.  Bidder D is certain to want more than
this but I am uncomfortable saying we can't continue to employee any of the
Offerees.

Please advise.


Bill,

Most recent Vincent's update on what's going on with the credit  model.

Another issue. I am increasingly concerned with our general approach to the
generation
of probabilities of default. Recent developments in the credit markets are
likely to
change completely the dynamics and levels of  interest rate spreads. I am
curious if
you looked at the credit reserve based on the current yield curves (as of the
last few days).

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/17/2000
09:05 AM ---------------------------

Vincent Tang
02/15/2000 05:12 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya Tamarchenko/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Credit reserve update


Kim Wilkie/ET&S/Enron wants to reschedule a meeting.

On   05/30/2000 01:00:00 PM CDT
For   1 hour
With:   John Ballentine/FGT/Enron (Chairperson)
  Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron (Invited)
  Michael Moran/ET&S/Enron (Invited)
  Alicia Goodrow/Corp/Enron (Invited)
  James Saunders/FGT/Enron (Invited)
  Shashi Patel/FGT/Enron (Invited)
  Kim Wilkie/ET&S/Enron (Invited)

Meeting to discuss GreenPipe Transaction in EB4054-MOVED TO TUESDAY


Attached is the ERMS Discounting Memo as of 9/26/01.

Please note that the 9/26/2001 balance is based on the new method of calculating the discounting amount.  The changes that were made are as followed:

			Old method	New method
Physical contract 	55 days		55 days
Financial contract	55 days		5 days
Financial calendar	55 days		38 days

Please let me know if you have questions.

Thanks
Anita


I think we should have this discussion at Stan's staff meetings next monday.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sutton, Lisa
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:49 PM
To: Saunders, James; Hayslett, Rod
Subject: RE: Important: Social and Environmental Risk baseline

Waiting to hear back from Shawn on the definition. I'll pass that on when he responds.

-----Original Message-----
From: Saunders, James
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:47 PM
To: Sutton, Lisa; Hayslett, Rod
Subject: RE: Important: Social and Environmental Risk baseline

I agree that you can develop a rpeliminary assessment thru Lou and Don, as to environmental.
What is social risk???????????????????????

-----Original Message-----
From: Sutton, Lisa
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:34 PM
To: Hayslett, Rod; Saunders, James
Subject: FW: Improtant: Social and Environmental Risk baseline

Should I work on this request? We will be doing our risk assessments for 2002 with Andersen in January but I could touch base with a few folks in the organization (Lou Soldano and Don Hawkins) if needed. Please advise.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kilchrist, Shawn
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:57 AM
To: Kilchrist, Shawn; Berggren, John; Sutton, Lisa; Atwood, Mechelle;
Gregorcyk, Vicky; Barrett, Misty; Bromley, Paul; Sloan, Mary
Subject: Improtant: Social and Environmental Risk baseline

As part of Ken Lays initiative to measure Enron's social and environmental risk, EAS has been requested to help with a baseline assessment of what our BU's are doing in those areas.  As such, please talk with your CAO's and/or BU leaders as part of your 2002 risk assessment and obtain answers to the following questions and send them back to me on or before Thanksgiving.  Please let me know if you're having any problems with this or need further clarification.

* Do the business units know the scope and nature of social and environmental risks associated with their business strategy, transactions, assets, countries where they operate, and/or counter parties?
* Do the business units have a process to identify social and environmental risk?
* If so, what process does the business units employ in order to identify and manage social and environmental risk?
* What process do the business units use to quantify and/or qualify these exposures?
* Who is responsible for managing this process in the business?
* Does the business review the quality of their social/environmental risk assessment and management activities?
* Is the business unit aware of the existing corporate function and processes?

This information will help Ken and his task team to  develop a proposed process for developing a consistent process for measuring social/environmental risk management performance across the business.  We may be asked for more assistance in this area in 2002.

Thank you for your assistance!

Shawn


Would you please try and arrange for 30 min. meetings for Andrea Calo with as
many of the following people as possible either Wednesday afternoon (from
2:00 to 6:00) or Thursday morning (from 9:00 to 10:30):

Mark Haedicke
Jeff Hodge
Dan Hyvl
Michelle Blaine
Rob Walls
Scott Neal
Pat Cini
Elizabeth Sager
Stacy Dickson
Clement Abrams

---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 10/21/99 05:00 PM
---------------------------

Andrea Calo@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
10/21/99 04:00 PM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Houston Trip

Great, I would appreciate a ride to the Woodlands. You really got me with the
anyone in particular question! There is so little time and so many people I'd
like to meet with, so lets say I'd specially like to spend some time with
Jeff, Dan, Sara, Michelle Blaine and you of course, and on the EI-side I'd
like to meet with Rob Walls for a few minutes if he is available. Also, if
possible, I'd like to stop by and say hi to Scott Neal and Pat Cini.

Mark Taylor@ECT
21/10/99 03:54 PM
To: Andrea Calo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Re: Houston Trip

There is no organized transport to the Woodlands but it will be easy to make
arrangements for you to ride with someone else leaving from the office - so I
guess it makes sense for you to come in Thursday morning as well.  I'll try
and set up a few meetings for you starting with lunch on Wednesday.  I was
thinking primarily of lawyers here - anyone in particular you would like on
the list?

Andrea Calo@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
10/21/99 01:20 PM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Houston Trip

Please feel free to arrange meetings for me with whoever you think
interesting. I will be arriving on Wednesday, October 27 at 9:00 a.m. and
will be staying at the Doubletree that night so I can go in to the office the
next morning as well if you find it convenient.

Has Enron arranged transportation to the Woodlands?   If so could you let me
know who I should talk to in order to get a ride? Thanks

To: Andrea Calo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Houston Trip

Would you like me to set up some meetings for you with people here in the
Houston office for the day before the Confernce?  If so, please let me know
what your schedule is & I will ask my assistant to set up some times for you.


pls print for me.  thanks. dF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 03/13/2000
12:22 PM ---------------------------

Dave Waymire
03/13/2000 10:44 AM
To: Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: TW Compressor Monetization

Attached is my analysis based on a sales price of $14.2MM and $14.8MM with a
buy back in the 7th year.  The loan structure for Hanover assumes that the
difference between the sales price and TW's buy back price would be amortized
over the contract term.  The remaining balance of the loan is assumed to be a
balloon payment at the end of the finance term.

I will put together some analysis on a 9 year term and forward this on to you
when it is completed.


Adrian has incorporated my edits, so I send it to you for any FINAL changes
you recommend.  Please contact Adrian directly--I am leaving town and he is
anxious to complete this and put it in the public domain.

I'd look carefully at the last 2 1/2 pages on alternatives to price
caps--state and federal reforms.

If this is turned around tomorrow, have Adrian send it to one of you for
distribution to Linda Robertson et al.

Thanks,

- Rob

----- Forwarded by Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron on 04/05/2001 09:51 AM -----

	Adriantm@aol.com
	04/04/2001 08:08 PM

		 To: Rob.Bradley@enron.com, lkiesling@lycos.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: price caps letter

Here is the yet-again revised draft of the letter. ?Is this ready to go? ?Or
did you have someone else to review it? ?Let me know right away, I would
like
to get the mailing started.

Adrian
 - Price controls letter 5.doc


Further to the Legal Requirements in my last email:

The following should be accomplished by Wednesday, to meet the upload
deadline. I realise this is a tight deadline and appreciate your cooperation
in addressing these concerns, which have only just recently come to light.

1) In the attached spreadsheet, identify the GTC which covers each Product
Type for the GTC's which you have written.

note I have completed the first U.S. Natgas as an example.

Please email your update on this spreadsheet to Andrew Thomas.

2) The MasterProductData Spreadsheet (MPS) is attached. It contains a tab
called Shortdesc. This tab shows a list of Product Types and an index of
Product Additional Information (PAI) fields which apply to each Product Type.
There are further tabs on the spreadsheet which correspond to the PAI's. The
descriptions which appear to the customers on the website will be comprised
of the Product description on the LongDesc tab and the descriptions from the
applicable parts of the applicable PAI tabs.  I have confirmed that this
spreadsheet contains all comments received to date, excluding financials,
which we are working on seperately.

Following is a suggested process:

-  List all of the variables in the GTC which would need to be quantified or
defined in the MPS. Think of the MPS as being the equivalent of the trader's
conversation with the customer (which is reflected in a final confirmation),
which covers the commercial, specific terms of the deal.

- Compare this list with the MPS. Confirm that the language of the MPS
conforms with the requirements of the GTC. Rember to check both the Product
description found on the LongDesc tab as well as the tabs for each of the
PAI's for that Product. The PAI's for each Product are listed on the
ShortDesc page.

- Don't worry about any missing entries for index types, locations, etc.
These should be filled for accuracy and completeness by the confirmations
groups. Any changes you make to Products language will be incorporated into
any new additions.

- Make any changes on the spreadsheet using a red font to highlight and email
it back to Andrew Thomas.

3) Once the above is complete, and all additions from the confirmations
groups have been incorporated, we will email back a complete set for final
approval.

Thanks,

Dave


Rod,

After reviewing the information you sent on Wednesday afternoon I am not certain I can break out the Red Rock revenues.  The RedRockExpansion bids appear to total 113,000 which exceeds the 107,000 capacity you mentioned.  I assume that the 106,700 in the pitchbook is correct.  Please let me know if this is not right.

Also, the finalTWrev spreadsheet is the information you included in the pitchbook, correct?  If I sum the four tabs does that constitute all of the exisitng capacity?  Is there any expansion capacity (Red Rock, Gallup) included?

Please let me know if I am not correctly interpreting the data.  Jayshree and I are meeting at 9am tomorrow if you would like to discuss.  We will also be on the call at 10am.

Thanks,
Sarah


----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/30/2000 07:29 AM -----

	"IssueAlert" <IssueAlert@scientech.com>
	10/27/2000 06:33 AM

		 To:
		 cc:
		 Subject: Toronto Hydro, Ontario Power Generation Launch EBT Express

http://www.consultrci.com

************************************************************************

Search SCIENTECH's PowerHitter archive to read about our interview with
a leader in the industy:
http://www.consultrci.com/web/infostore.nsf/Products/PowerHitter
************************************************************************
===============================================================
SCIENTECH IssueAlert, October 27, 2000
Toronto Hydro, Ontario Power Generation Launch EBT Express
By: Will McNamara, Director, Electric Industry Analysis
===============================================================

Toronto Hydro Corporation and Ontario Power Generation announced that they
have launched an electronic business transaction (EBT) "hub" that will
provide centralized electronic data management and transaction services
to local distribution companies (LDCs) and energy retailers in Ontario.
Called EBT Express, the exchange will become operational when Ontario's
new competitive electricity market opens next spring. Excelergy eXACTv,
developed by energy software solutions company Excelergy Corporation, will
provide the technology infrastructure for EBT Express.

ANALYSIS: This is a significant development, as EBT Express represents
the first hub in Canada for retail energy transactions. The site will serve
as the central clearinghouse for immediate communication of customer data
among hundreds of LDCs and energy retailers in Ontario, and possibly
throughout
Canada.  I spoke yesterday afternoon with George Caraghiaur, Exelergy's
vice president, Canada, about EBT Express. Caraghiaur believes that the
site "will provide the essential technology for opening Ontario's electricity
market in an efficient manner." That is no small undertaking as there are
an expected 300 players that will need to communicate with each other in
Ontario once competition begins.

Deregulation is happening in Canada on a province-by-province basis (much
like it is happening state-by-state in the U.S.). Thus far, only Ontario
and Alberta have set dates when electric customers will be able to select
a new energy supplier. Ontario is scheduled to become competitive next
spring, and presently is the only region in which EBT Express will be
operational.
Alberta uses a point-to-point transaction process, which represents a very
complex model. Caraghiaur believes that the value of EBT Express will be
clearly seen, and there will be many opportunities for the hub in Alberta
and elsewhere.

The Ontario Energy Board (OEB), which is the equivalent of a state PUC,
mandated the use of electronic business transactions (EBTs). The EBTs work
as follows: Once a customer selects a new energy supplier, the energy
supplier
and the local distribution company (LDC) must continue to share information
about that customer. This proprietary data, shared strictly on a one-to-one
basis between the energy supplier and the LDC only, will include billing,
usage and payment information. Essentially, an LDC will read the meter
and send usage information to the energy supplier, who will calculate its
portion of a customer's bill and in turn send this data back to the LDC,
which will submit the customer bill. This represents a common way for billing
in Ontario, although there are other options including consolidated billing
that originates from the energy supplier and split billing coming from
both the LDC and energy supplier. No customer information will be exchanged
until competition officially begins in Ontario, which now appears to be
in the spring of 2001, although the technology infrastructure supplied
by Excelergy is already in place.

In response to the OEB's mandate, Toronto Hydro Corp. and Ontario Power
Generation*the largest players in electricity distribution and generation
in Ontario* became equity partners in the $7.7 million joint venture to
create EBT Express. All customer data will be contained within EBT Express,
which is supported by the eXACT technology. Excelergy eXACT is a software
solution that translates, validates, manages and delivers data exchanged
among users. The functionality of eXACT has been used in several U.S. states,
including Pennsylvania and New Jersey. In fact, eXACT was introduced to
gas and electricity retailers in the United States in 1999 as a component
of Excelergy ABPv, a billing and customer information solution. Allegheny
Energy Supply, a subsidiary of Allegheny Energy, was one U.S. utility that
I know of that used the Excelergy technology.

Caraghiaur contends that EBT Express will play an important role in enhancing
the competitive market in Ontario. "There are presently 37 licensed retailers
in Ontario, 15 pending retailers and 246 LDCs," Caraghiaur told me. "You
can imagine the cloud of communication pathways that would occur between
all these players without a centralized hub such as EBT Express." The number
of LDCs seemed awfully high to me, but Caraghiaur explained that in Ontario
many LDCs serve only a small number of customers, often 100 customers or
less. This should change as consolidation reduces the number of LDCs in
Ontario but, when compared to the United States, Ontario still will have
a comparatively high number of distribution companies.

Caraghiaur cited Pennsylvania as an example of a market that has tried
to assimilate communication among many market participants. Pennsylvania,
along with most other U.S. states, still uses electronic data interchange
(EDI) as its standard, wherein every LDC has a slightly different
interpretation
of data that is shared through the EDI. This can often cause communication
inconsistencies and retailers may have a difficult time in getting ready
for deregulation. "EBT Express will be in the position to enforce standards,"
says Caraghiaur. "The use of XML in particular will enhance communication
between market participants."

In fact, XML (extensible market language) is the cornerstone of eXACT as
it constructs a standardized language so that data can be exchanged but
still understood by different applications. Caraghiaur claims that Excelergy
is on the forefront of XML technology, which was expressly stipulated in
the EBT standards developed by the Advisory Committee to the Ontario Energy
Board. XML is a common language used on the Internet that makes it easier
and more cost-effective for buyers and sellers to exchange data between
applications and data sources that otherwise might have been incompatible.
In addition, Excelergy's eXACT software is object-oriented, allowing for
easy and rapid change from one program to another.

Clearinghouse exchanges are definitely a trend in the energy industry.
Whereas states that previously deregulated, such as California and
Pennsylvania,
did not use a centralized clearinghouse for customer information, states
and provinces now formulating their restructuring plans often mandate them.
For instance, Excelergy's competitor Logica has a market data clearinghouse
built for the Midwest market. Also, the ERCOT-ISO has teamed with Andersen
Consulting on a similar market data clearinghouse for the Texas unbundling,
scheduled for pilot in the summer of 2001 and full market opening in January
2002.

One concern that market participants may have is the sharing of customer
data through EBT Express, especially when it is backed by potential
competitors
in the Ontario market such as Toronto Hydro and Ontario Power. Caraghiaur
responded to this by saying that the OEB mandated the exchange of customer
information through an EBT structure. However, market participants are
not mandated to participate in EBT Express. They could opt to still exchange
information on a point-to-point basis, although Caraghiaur believes that
EBT Express offers a much more efficient forum for the transfer of customer
data. In addition, Caraghiaur reiterated that no proprietary or competitive
information would be accessible between any parties other than the LDC
and energy supplier involved in the exchange.

Interestingly, Toronto Hydro and Ontario Power may be competitors when
the Ontario market opens next year. Toronto Hydro Corp. owns Toronto
Hydro-Electric
System Limited, a regulated electricity distribution system, and Toronto
Hydro Energy Services, a competitive energy service company. Ontario Power
Generation is an electricity generating company, so Toronto Hydro and Ontario
Power will be competing on the retail level to acquire energy supply
contracts
with lucrative customers. And rumor has it that venerable retail giant
Sears is also taking a look into becoming an energy retailer in Canada
next year. As Canada continues to deregulate and attract energy suppliers,
Excelergy anticipates that the EBT Express could serve a national market.

===============================================================
For a an in-depth perspective on the market potential of distributed
technologies,
SCIENTECH is offering Stephens Inc.'s (Investment Banker) 97-page report,

"Powering the Digital Economy" on its Website at:
http://www.consultrci.com/web/infostore.nsf/Product-Preview/UtilityAdvisor

free for a limited time only.
===============================================================

SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free, daily IssueAlert. Let
us know if we can help you with in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH
information products. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive
our free, daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include their
full name and email address or register directly at:

http://www.consultrci.com/web/infostore.nsf/Products/IssueAlert

Sincerely,

Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis
wmcnamara@scientech.com
===============================================================
Feedback regarding SCIENTECH's IssueAlert should be sent to
wmcnamara@scientech.com
===============================================================

SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are compiled based on independent analysis by
SCIENTECH
consultants.  The opinions expressed in SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are not
intended to predict financial performance of companies discussed or to
be the basis for investment decisions of any kind.  SCIENTECH's sole purpose
in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer an independent perspective
regarding
the key events occurring in the energy industry, based on its long-standing
reputation as an expert on energy and telecommunications issues.

Copyright 2000.  SCIENTECH, Inc.

If you do not wish to receive any further IssueAlerts from SCIENTECH, please
reply to this message and in the body of the email type "remove."


Hector and Shanna,
My three outstanding reviews have been turned into HR this afternoon.
No other reviews are outstanding for my group.
Thanks. Sheila


Will do.

	Steven J Kean
	05/11/2001 08:35 AM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject:

Ken Lay spoke with several California CEOs this morning and urged them to get
personally involved in pushing for a comprehensive set of reforms.  Three
expressed willingness to help.

Scott McNealy (Sun):  contact person - Piper Cole (piper.cole@sun.com);
scott.mcnealy@engeng.sun.com.  Mcnealy wants, by close of business today, a
"cheat sheet" of the talking points to use with politicians (the "8 or 10
elements of the solution") with the expected comeback he may hear from the
political leaders and our response to that comeback.  He says he hasn't spent
time working on issues in Sacremento so we may also want to include a list of
suggested contacts.
Kevin Sharer (Amgen): contact person - Sarah Jensen, VP of Engineering and
Operations (805.447.6785); ksharer@amgen.com.  Sharer wants the same
information as McNealy and he and McNealy both indicated their willingness to
call a meeting of other California CEOs.  Sharer will also be having
breakfast with Hertzberg one week from today.
Robert Day (Trust Co of the West):  said that he is very close to the mayor
of Los Angeles.  He urged Ken to call the mayor (mentioning Day).  Ken would
like some talking points for that call.

Jeff - please put these items together.


UPDATE

Cancellation of System Outage Notification

Outage Description:

We had previously communicated that all SAP systems (including Financial Production, HR Production, Interfaces , iBuyIt, and iPayIt) would be shutdown over the weekend in order to upgrade our storage hardware. We are temporarily postponing these activities and will send you additional communications to inform you of the new date(s) in the near future.

Date & Time of Outage:

The scheduled System Outage has been postponed

Contacts:

Contact:

Contact Information:

ISC Customer Care

713-345-4727


Dear Hilda,

Jeff has asked me to forward Sophia's resume to Celeste Roberts, director of
the associate and analyst program, and to Beth Tilney, who oversees
recruiting for marketing and communication graduates.  They will review her
resume and determine if there is a match between Enron's needs and Sophia's
background and skillset.

Thank you, Hilda, for forwarding Sophia's resume.

Regards,
Sherri Sera
Assistant to Jeff Skilling
713.853.5984
713.646.8381 (fax)

Hilda Lindley
04/20/2000 07:47 AM
To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: summer internship

Dear Jeff:

Here is my daughter Sophia's resume, she is really interested in Enron's
opportunities. Sophia is a Junior  at Brigham Young University and is
majoring in Communications/English with minor in Business Management.   Could
you help her in getting a summer job?. Your assistance will be greatly
appreciated. Hilda

------------------- Forwarded by Hilda Lindley/FGT/Enron on 04/17/2000 08:36
AM ---------------------------

"Sophia Lindley" <smlindley@hotmail.com> on 04/08/2000 04:36:00 PM
To: hilda.lindley@enron.com
cc:

Subject: Fwd: Re: Summer Employment

>Dear Jeff Skilling,
>
>   My name is Sophia Lindley, I am Hilda Lindley's daughter, my mother is
 an Enron's employee for the last eleven years.  She has suggested to contact
 you to let you know that I am looking for a summer internship.
>
>I am a sophomore at Brigham Young University (BYU).  My major is
>Communications/Public Relations with a minor in Business Management.  I am
>hoping that Enron will have an opportunity for me in the Public Relations,
 Communications or Marketing area.
>
>I am always eager to learn new concepts, which will allow me to gain a
>greater appreciation for my studies.
>
>I look forward to hear from you.
>
>I am available to work from April 24th (Monday) till August 23rd,
>2000.
>
>Since BYU, semester end earlier than other universities, I am hoping
>this will benefit with a potential intern position with Enron.
>Thank you for you time and assistance.  Please see a copy of my
>resume attached.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>Sophia Lindley


Here is the current draft for your review.  In addition to the changes which
were made, there were some valid comments made by Beck and Christi, which I
think need to be addressed, but can be addressed in the definitive agreements.

Please revise carefully and let me know if you have any comments.

Kay


the party invite, remember

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lesley Maser <llmaser@degeurinrealty.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:20 AM
To:	Dean, Clint
Subject:	Re:

email you what???

---- "Dean, Clint" <Clint.Dean@ENRON.com> wrote:
> email me, please
>
>
>
******************************************************
****************
> This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or
its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential
and privileged material for the sole use of the
intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution
or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If
you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to
receive for the recipient), please contact the sender
or reply to Enron Corp. at
enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete
all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any
attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer
(or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a
binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp.
(or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient
or any other party, and may not be relied on by
anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or
otherwise. Thank you.
>
******************************************************
****************
>
>


When: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:00 AM-11:00 AM (GMT-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada).
Where: ECS  6990

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

If you have any questions, please call Lisa Kinsey @ x37628.

Thank you,

Irena Hogan


Hey Guys,

Just sat down to read about the first write up that is due
this Thursday, and realized that this is supposed to be a
group assignment!!  Ooops - I had no idea... Did you ;-)
Anyone read the case and/or taken a crack at it? Should
we try and co-ordinate a conference call?

Carolyn is out for the week and excused from the
assignment - just had a baby girl last Fri!!
Jeff, did you hear from teacher if OK to join ?

-Anil


I don't know if you heard but I resigned on Friday, but I will be around
until Feb. 28.  My plan is to retire for a while. I have attached a picture
of a cabinet I made to give you an idea of how I will be keeping my hands
busy.  You know what they say - "Idle hands are the devil's workshop".

Beija

Rob


---------------------- Forwarded by Shanna Husser/HOU/EES on 11/20/2000 08:53
AM ---------------------------

Ann Sanchez@ENRON
11/20/2000 08:49 AM
To: Jennifer Kennedy/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Joseph/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Leon
Branom/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris Ochoa/NA/Enron@Enron, Jason
Sharp/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt, Sherri Kathol/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Lynna Kacal/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Shanna Husser/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Late Breaking News

>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >Memo:
>> >
>> >Re: 2001 Federal Holiday Schedule
>> >
>> >The office of Personnel Management for the
>> Federal Government, today
>> >announced the 2001 Holiday Schedule for Federal
>> Employees.
>> >
>> >There will be two less Holidays in Washington DC
>> next year. Halloween and
>> >Thanksgiving have been canceled.
>> >
>> >The reason for this change:  The witch is moving
>> to New York and taking the
>> >Turkey with her.
>> >
>> >Thanks for your continued support.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


Steve:

I spoke with Sam Behrends, Adam Wenner (FERC attorneys) and Joanne Rutkowski
(SEC attorney) about your question on a third quarter close.   On the FERC
side, protests to the merger application are due on May 3.  We are expecting
protests, but until we see the extent of the opposition, its hard to estimate
the likelihood of a July order.  However, we all agree that based on the
facts of the merger and the types of protests we expect to see, a July order
is within the realm of possibility.  FERC just issued an order approving the
PECO/ComEd merger earlier this week.  The order was issued 142 days after the
merger application was filed.  If FERC does not find the opposition to the
PGE/Sierra merger overwhelming, it could issue an order before FERC goes on
August recess (this would also allow FERC to meet its 150 day target for
acting on merger petitions).

Even if a FERC order is issued by the end of July, we will still need SEC
approval.  (The SEC will not issue its order until FERC has approved the
merger.)  Joanne Rutkowski thinks that although a September order from the
SEC is possible, it is not likely, due mainly to the fact that several other
big merger proceedings (NSP, AEP, Energy East, ComEd) are in the queue ahead
of the PGE/Sierra merger awaiting SEC approval.

With regard to the Hart-Scott-Rodino filing with DOJ, DOJ approval is
normally not a problem, but attorneys with DOJ have expressed some concern
that the merged Sierra/PGE company could have potential market power in
transmission going into southern California.  DOJ has submitted a request for
information to Sierra and PGE, and we are working on the response to that
request now.  Our attorneys and Sierra's attorneys do not think at this point
that obtaining DOJ approval of the merger will be a problem, but until we
receive final DOJ sign-off on the merger, DOJ review will continue to be an
open issue.  We should have a better idea of whether DOJ is going to raise
any significant problems with the merger within the next couple of months.

I see that Paul sent you a separate email on the status of the state
proceedings.

I hope this is helpful.  Please call me if you have any questions.

Sarah

Steven J Kean@EES
04/12/2000 08:02 PM
To: Paul Kaufman@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES
cc:

Subject: Granite Update

What are our chances of final approval at FERC at the JUly meeting.  Jeff
still thinks this is a third quarter close.  Do we have any chance of making
that happen?
---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/12/2000 06:59
PM ---------------------------

Paul Kaufman@ECT
04/12/2000 09:02 AM
To: Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, awalia@ei.enron.com, Ann
Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, kfullenweider@velaw.com, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES,
Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: Granite Update

Attached is the April 12 update.  Also attached is an electronic copy of a
prior update faxed last week.


In connection with Enron's PATS offering, we're attaching a Cover Letter and
clean and marked drafts of the revised Preliminary Offering Circular, Purchase
Agreement, Remarketing Agreement and Trust Agreement.

Best regards,

Hazel Mukuna

(See attached file: Cover Letter.doc)

(See attached file: Preliminary Offering Circular.doc)  (See attached file:
Preliminary Offering Circular.REDLINE.doc)

(See attached file: Purchase Agreement.doc)        (See attached file:
Purchase
Agreement.REDLINE.doc)

(See attached file: Remarketing Agreement.doc)     (See attached file:
Remarketing Agreement.REDLINE.doc)

(See attached file: Trust Agreement.doc)           (See attached file: Trust
Agreement.REDLINE.doc)

______________________________________
This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from
disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this
message,or any attachment, is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
this message in error, please notify the original sender (or the WSPR
Help Desk) immediately by telephone (212-858-1000) or by return
E-mail and delete the message, along with any attachments, from
your computer.  Thank you.

 - Cover Letter.doc
 - Preliminary Offering Circular.doc
 - Preliminary Offering Circular.REDLINE.doc
 - Purchase Agreement.doc
 - Purchase Agreement.REDLINE.doc
 - Remarketing Agreement.doc
 - Remarketing Agreement.REDLINE.doc
 - Trust Agreement.doc
 - Trust Agreement.REDLINE.doc


Such flattery!

	Genia FitzGerald
	02/13/2001 04:03 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Guaranty Form

You are all right, I don't care what Marie and Reggie say.

Thanks!

	Tana Jones
	02/13/2001 03:58 PM

		 To: Genia FitzGerald/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Guaranty Form

You'll see that I asked our group to keep you updated on the guaranty form.
Carol St. Clair just wanted to make sure that you had our latest form of
guaranty, so I am sending it to you at her request.


Either day is fine for me.