-----Original Message-----
From: Imai, Rika
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:06 AM
To: Freije, William; Ha, Amie; Jenkins IV, Daniel; Larkworthy, Carrie;
Lowell, Thomas; Moore, Castlen; Raque, Michele; Schneider, Bryce;
Williams, Ryan
Subject: FW: Net Generation and Utility Retail SalesApril 2001

Please note that the April utility information was released yesterday.  You may want to add the information in :)

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Johnson [mailto:Charles.Johnson@eia.doe.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 5:44 AM
To: Electric Power Monthly Summary
Subject: Net Generation and Utility Retail SalesApril 2001

******  ******      **       *************************************
**        **       *  *      ***   U.S. Department of Energy    **
****      **      ******     * Energy Information Administration *
**        **     **    **    ** To unsubscribe see the message ***
******  ******  **      **   ************* footnote **************
EIA, the Nation's clearinghouse for energy statistics. ***********
******************************************************************

(NOTE: To best view this document, your email software should
be set to view the item in an 80 character format, using a
"non-proportional" font, e.g. courier)
******************************************************************

Contacts:

Utility Generation, Consumption, and Stocks : Melvin Johnson
Phone: (202) 287-1754
e-mail: melvin.johnson@eia.doe.gov

Electricity Sales, Revenue, and Average Revenue per kWh:
Deborah Johnson Phone: (202) 287-1970
e-mail: deborah.johnson@eia.doe.gov

Nonutility Generation, Consumption, and Stocks : Barbara Rucker
Phone: (202) 287-1765
e-mail: barbara.rucker@eia.doe.gov

Fuel Receipts, Costs, and Quality : Kenneth McClevey
Phone: (202) 287-1732
e-mail: kenneth.mcclevey@eia.doe.gov

For more information, please see the Electric Power Monthly at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html.

Net Generation Year-to-Date 2001

During the first 4 months of the year, total U.S. net generation of
electricity was 1,214 billion kilowatthours, 2.3 percent more than
the amount reported during the corresponding period in 2000.  More
than half (53 percent) of the generation was produced by coal-fired
plants.  This was followed by 20 percent from nuclear, 14 percent from
gas, 6 percent from hydro, 4 percent from petroleum, and 2 percent from
other renewables.

Net Generation and Utility Retail
Sales-April 2001

Net Generation.  Total U.S. net generation of electricity was 282
billion kilowatthours, 1 percent more than the amount reported in
April 2000. Electric utilities generated 200 billion kilowatthours
(71 percent of the total) and nonutility power producers generated
82 billion kilowatthours (29 percent of total generation).  At
utilities, fossil fuels (primarily coal) accounted for 73 percent
of net generation, followed by 19 percent from nuclear, and 8 percent
from renewable resources (including hydro).  At nonutilities, fossil
fuels (primarily coal) accounted for 68 percent of total generation,
followed by 21 percent from nuclear, and 11 percent from renewables
(including hydro).

Utility Retail Sales. Total sales of electricity to ultimate consumers
in the United States were 255 billion kilowatthours, 8 billion
kilowatthours (3 percent) more than the amount reported in April 2000.
The residential sector had sales of 83 billion kilowatthours, 10
percent more than the amount reported in April 2000.  Retail sales
in the commercial sector were 6 percent higher while sales in the
industrial sector were 5 percent lower than amounts reported a year
ago.

Utility Fuel Receipts, Costs, and
Quality-March 2001

Coal. Receipts of coal at electric utilities totaled 64 million
short  tons, down 5 million short tons from the
level reported in
March 2000.  The decrease from the prior year level is due partly
to the sale and reclassification of utility plants as nonutility
plants.  Plants recently reclassified as nonutility and no longer
required to report fuel receipts on the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) Form 423 include those operated by Atlantic City
Electric Company, Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, Cajun Electric
Power Cooperative, Central Hudson Gas & Electric Company, Duquesne
Light Company, PECO Energy, Pennsylvania Power & Light Company,
Potomac Edison Company, Potomac Electric Power Company, and Public
Service Electric & Gas Company of New Jersey.  In addition, data for
the Tennessee Valley Authority was not available at the time of
publication and is not included in this report.

Petroleum.  Receipts of petroleum totaled 10 million barrels, up
nearly 6 million barrels from the level reported in March 2000. While
the sale and reclassification of plants has reduced fuel oil receipts
over the past year, this increase in petroleum receipts is due partly
to utilities switching from natural gas to a less expensive fuel oil
as a replacement fuel. Also, the increase in consumption of fuel oil
during December through February required some rebuilding of stocks.
The average delivered cost of fuel oil was $4.20 per million Btu, up
from $4.03 per million Btu reported in March 2000.

Gas.  Receipts of gas totaled 142 billion cubic feet (Bcf), down from
191 Bcf reported in March  2000.  The average cost of gas delivered
to electric utilities was $5.74 per million Btu, compared to $2.93 per
million Btu reported in March 2000.  As with coal and petroleum, the
sale and reclassification of electric plants is having a large effect
on gas receipt data presented at the New England, Middle Atlantic, and
Pacific Contiguous Census Divisions, as well as at the National level.

   Table 2.  U.S. Electric Power Industry Summary Statistics
   _________________________________________________________________________
                                 |              |              |
                                 |              |              |
                                 |    April     |    March     |    April
               Items             |     2001     |     2001     |     2000
                                 |              |              |
                                 |              |              |
   ______________________________|______________|______________|____________

   Electric Power Industry
     Net Generation (Million kWh)
       Coal......................      143,937        158,573        139,585
       Petroleum3/...............       10,935         11,519          4,900
       Gas.......................       46,324         45,518         42,648
       Nuclear Power.............       55,953         62,092         56,252
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/.............         -598           -539           -383
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).......       18,317         20,606         28,546
         Geothermal..............        1,107          1,208          1,109
         Biomass.................        5,402          5,373          5,263
         Wind....................          691            614            493
         Photovoltaic............           60             44             69
       All Energy Sources........      282,128        305,007        278,481
     Consumption2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...       72,900         80,761         69,715
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/.............       18,109         18,756          7,282
       Gas (1,000 Mcf)...........      499,942        474,958        441,203
     Stocks (end-of-month)2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...      128,238        119,544        144,904
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)6/.............       48,749         48,192         43,170
   Nonutility
     Net Generation (Million
        kWh)1/
       Coal......................       26,003         29,058         17,148
       Petroleum3/...............        4,055          4,682          1,791
       Gas.......................       25,759         28,860         21,712
       Nuclear Power.............       16,961         18,664          1,737
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/.............          -52            -49            -41
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).......        2,370          1,987          2,374
         Geothermal..............        1,094          1,195          1,095
         Biomass.................        5,220          5,183          5,074
         Wind....................          686            610            491
         Photovoltaic............           60             44             69
       All Energy Sources........       82,157         90,234         51,450
     Consumption1/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...       13,062         14,695          8,501
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/.............        6,717          7,605          2,236
       Gas (1,000 Mcf)...........      289,158        303,526        226,604
     Stocks (end-of-month)1/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...       24,386         23,743         16,235
       Petroleum (1,000 barrels).       16,061         15,346          7,336
   Electric Utility
     Net Generation (Million
        kWh)2/
       Coal......................      117,933        129,514        122,437
       Petroleum3/...............        6,879          6,836          3,110
       Gas.......................       20,565         16,658         20,937
       Nuclear Power.............       38,992         43,428         54,514
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/.............         -546           -490           -342
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).......       15,947         18,619         26,172
         Geothermal..............           13             14             13
         Biomass.................          182            190            189
         Wind....................            5              4              2
         Photovoltaic............        *              *              *
       All Energy Sources........      199,971        214,773        227,031
     Consumption2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...       59,839         66,066         61,214
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/.............       11,392         11,150          5,046
       Gas (1,000 Mcf)...........      210,784        171,432        214,599
     Stocks (end-of-month)2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons)...      103,851         95,801        128,669
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)6/.............       32,688         32,846         35,834
     Retail Sales (Million kWh)7/
       Residential...............       83,273         93,534         75,934
       Commercial................       81,066         83,565         76,460
       Industrial................       81,859         82,357         85,708
       Other8/...................        8,431          8,615          8,330
         All Sectors.............      254,629        268,071        246,434
     Revenue (Million Dollars)7/
       Residential...............        7,011          7,660          6,170
       Commercial................        6,146          6,274          5,310
       Industrial................        4,026          4,036          3,597
       Other8/...................          532            536            541
         All Sectors.............       17,715         18,505         15,618
     Average Revenue/kWh
        (Cents)7/
       Residential...............         8.42           8.19           8.13
       Commercial................         7.58           7.51           6.94
       Industrial................         4.92           4.90           4.20
       Other8/...................         6.31           6.22           6.49
         All Sectors.............         6.96           6.90           6.34
                                  __________________________________________
                                 |              |              |
                                 |              |              |
                                 |    March     |   February   |    March
                                 |   2001 9/    |   2001 9/    |   2000 9/
                                 |              |              |
                                 |              |              |
                                 |______________|______________|____________

   Receipts
     Coal (1,000 short tons).....       64,359         57,397         69,703
     Petroleum (1,000 barrels)10/        9,635          9,799          4,066
     Gas (1,000 Mcf).............      141,653        114,039        191,465
   Cost (cents/million Btu)11/
     Coal........................        122.6          123.9          121.2
     Petroleum12/................        419.6          455.8          402.7
     Gas13/......................        573.8          694.7          293.0
   ___________________________________________________________________________
                                 |
                                 |                Year To Date
                                 |____________________________________________
               Items             |              |              |
                                 |     2001     |     2000     |  Difference
                                 |              |              |  (percent)
   ______________________________|______________|______________|______________

   Electric Power Industry
     Net Generation (Million kW
       Coal....................         637,230        621,666         2.5
       Petroleum3/.............          52,177         23,824       119.0
       Gas.....................         174,424        165,698         5.3
       Nuclear Power...........         247,925        246,446          .6
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/...........          -2,067         -1,836        12.6
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).....          75,569        103,351       -26.9
         Geothermal............           4,792          4,446         7.8
         Biomass...............          21,227         21,329         -.5
         Wind..................           2,132          1,678        27.0
         Photovoltaic..........             129            211       -38.7
       All Energy Sources......       1,213,538      1,186,813         2.3
     Consumption2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).         323,446        311,410         3.9
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/...........          87,109         36,168       140.8
       Gas (1,000 Mcf).........       1,846,456      1,716,790         7.5
     Stocks (end-of-month)2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).         --             --             --
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)6/...........         --             --             --
   Nonutility
     Net Generation (Million
        kWh)1/
       Coal....................         119,546         72,552        64.8
       Petroleum3/.............          21,089          9,785       115.5
       Gas.....................         108,150         90,256        19.8
       Nuclear Power...........          73,182          6,961       951.3
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/...........            -200            -89       125.6
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).....           7,857          8,713        -9.8
         Geothermal............           4,739          4,394         7.9
         Biomass...............          20,503         20,620         -.6
         Wind..................           2,114          1,668        26.8
         Photovoltaic..........             129            211       -38.8
       All Energy Sources......         357,110        215,070        66.0
     Consumption1/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).          59,658         35,738        66.9
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/...........          34,781         13,235       162.8
       Gas (1,000 Mcf).........       1,164,880        937,489        24.3
     Stocks (end-of-month)1/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).         --             --             --
       Petroleum (1,000 barrels         --             --             --
   Electric Utility
     Net Generation (Million
        kWh)2/
       Coal....................         517,684        549,115        -5.7
       Petroleum3/.............          31,088         14,039       121.4
       Gas.....................          66,274         75,441       -12.1
       Nuclear Power...........         174,743        239,485       -27.0
       Hydroelectric (Pumped
          Storage)4/...........          -1,867         -1,747         6.9
       Renewable
         Hydroelectric
            (Conventional).....          67,712         94,638       -28.4
         Geothermal............              53             52          .3
         Biomass...............             724            709         2.1
         Wind..................              18             10        74.4
         Photovoltaic..........               1         *             38.2
       All Energy Sources......         856,428        971,743       -11.9
     Consumption2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).         263,788        275,671        -4.3
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)5/...........          52,328         22,933       128.2
       Gas (1,000 Mcf).........         681,576        779,302       -12.5
     Stocks (end-of-month)2/
       Coal (1,000 short tons).         --             --             --
       Petroleum (1,000
          barrels)6/...........         --             --             --
     Retail Sales (Million kWh)
       Residential.............         405,285        367,136        10.4
       Commercial..............         334,214        315,924         5.8
       Industrial..............         330,400        345,712        -4.4
       Other8/.................          34,809         34,625          .5
         All Sectors...........       1,104,678      1,063,398         3.9
     Revenue (Million Dollars)7
       Residential.............          32,631         28,786        13.4
       Commercial..............          25,271         21,731        16.3
       Industrial..............          16,409         14,384        14.1
       Other8/.................           2,152          2,187        -1.6
         All Sectors...........          76,462         67,089        14.0
     Average Revenue/kWh
        (Cents)7/
       Residential.............            8.05           7.84         2.7
       Commercial..............            7.56           6.88         9.9
       Industrial..............            4.97           4.16        19.4
       Other8/.................            6.18           6.32        -2.1
         All Sectors...........            6.92           6.31         9.7
                               _______________________________________________
                                 |
                                 |                Year To Date
                                 |____________________________________________
                                 |              |              |
                                 |   2001 9/    |   2000 9/    |  Difference
                                 |              |              |  (percent)
                               __|______________|______________|______________

   Receipts
     Coal (1,000 short tons)...        189,225        206,373         -8.3
     Petroleum (1,000 barrels)1         36,688         11,373        222.6
     Gas (1,000 Mcf)...........        390,240        512,734        -23.9
   Cost (cents/million Btu)11/
     Coal......................          122.9          120.8          1.8
     Petroleum12/..............          453.6          402.5         12.7
     Gas13/....................          728.8          284.8        155.8
   ___________________________________________________________________________

      1/  Values are estimates based on a cutoff sample; see
   Technical Notes for a discussion of the sample design for Form
   EIA-900.
      2/  Values for 2001 are estimates based on a cutoff model
   sample; see Technical Notes for a discussion of the sample design
   for the Form EIA-759; 2000 estimates have been adjusted to reflect
   the Form EIA-759 census data and are final; see Technical Notes
   for adjustment methodology.
      3/  Includes petroleum coke.
      4/  Represents total pumped storage facility production minus
   energy used for pumping. Pumping energy used at pumped storage
   plants for April 2001  was 2,326 million kilowatthours.
      5/  The April 2001 petroleum coke consumption was 53,224 short
   tons for electric utilities and 307,009 short tons for
   nonutilities.
      6/  The April 2001 petroleum coke stocks were 140,428 short
tons.
      7/  ?Values for 2000 are preliminary.  ?Values for 2001 are
   estimates based on a cutoff model sample; see Technical Notes for
   a discussion of the sample design for the Form EIA-826.  See
   Technical Notes for the adjustment methodology.  Retail revenue
   and retail average revenue per kilowatthour do not include taxes
   such as sales and excise taxes that are assessed on the consumer
   and collected through the utility.  Retail sales and net
   generation may not correspond exactly for a particular month for a
   variety of reasons (i.e., sales data may include purchases of
   electricity from nonutilities or imported electricity). Net
   generation is for the calendar month while retail sales and
   associated revenue accumulate from bills collected for periods of
   time (28 to 35 days) that vary dependent upon customer class and
   consumption occur-ring in and outside the calendar month.
      8/  Includes public street and highway lighting, other sales to
   public authorities, sales to railroads and railways, sales to
   farms for irrigation, and interdepartmental sales.
      9/  Values are preliminary for 2001 and final for 2000.
      10/  The March 2001 petroleum coke receipts were 121,499 short
tons.
      11/  Average cost of fuel delivered to electric generating
plants;  cost values are weighted values.
      12/  March 2001 petroleum coke cost was  72.6  cents per
million Btu.
      13/  Includes small amounts of coke-oven, refinery, and
blast-furnace gas.
      *  = For detailed data, the absolute value is less than 0.5;
   for percentage calculations, the absolute value is less than 0.05
   percent.
          NA = Data are not available.
          NM = This value may not be applicable or the percent
difference calculation is not meaningful.
          Notes:   ?Totals may not equal sum of components because of
   independent rounding.  ?Percent difference is calcu-lated before
   rounding.  ?kWh=kilowatthours, and Mcf=thousand cubic feet.
   ?Monetary values are expressed in nominal terms.
          Sources: ?Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-759,
   "Monthly Power Plant Report";  Form EIA-826, "Monthly Electric
   Utility Sales and Revenue Report with State Distributions"; Form
   EIA-900, "Monthly Nonutility Power Report"; Form EIA-906, "Power
   Plant Report"; ?Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC Form
   423, "Monthly Report of Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric
   Plants."

--------------------------  To Unsubscribe  -----------------------------
You are currently subscribed to epms as: [rika.imai@enron.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-epms-127003C@tonto.eia.doe.gov.
Please do not use the reply button.


Mike,

The reason my mistake was not caught on the benchmark signoff procedure is
that the postid in question did not have a net position.  The procedure
Rahmann showed you is where we check GERMS positions to the position reports
we run using Excel queries.  If a postid has a net position and is not
officialized, it will be caught using this procedure.  It will not, however,
if the postid does not have a position.  I understand the importance of
officializing postid's, as does the entire West desk.  Thanks.

DG    3-9573
---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
11:07 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Jeffrey C Gossett                           10/16/2000 11:02 AM

To: Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
11:01 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Michael E Moscoso                           10/16/2000 10:14 AM

To: Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

Jeff,

FYI - Darron Giron didn't officialize the West-NW-GDL book on Friday.  Please
re-emphasize the importance of not forgetting.  Also, Rahmann showed me a
control he has to catch books not officialized each night which looked like
an effective tool.  I wonder why he didn't see this book on Friday.

Mike
---------------------- Forwarded by Michael E Moscoso/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
10:11 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Michael E Moscoso                           10/16/2000 09:59 AM

To: Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT, John
Swinney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric Groves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tracy Beardmore/NA/Enron@Enron,
Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

We have been tracking books that are not officialized on a daily basis.  This
list goes to Sally Beck and is reviewed at the end of each week by Rick Buy.
Rick has been vocal about taking corrective action if people forget to
officialize.   It is imperative that we take extra care to ensure that all
books are marked official each night before going home.  A control process
should be implemented immediately to absolutely avoid being on the list.

Please contact me if you have any questions (x-35242).

Thanks,
Mike


Joan,  I received a copy of this Exhibit "A" a couple of weeks back.
Unfortunately I found the same thing you did, that all San Arroyo properties
are dedicated.

	Joan Quick
	09/11/2000 04:29 PM

		 To: Mark Whitt/NA/Enron@Enron, Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Dan J Bump/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Josey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Barbara N
Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Crescendo/Wildhorse Gathering Agreement

Ken has faxed me a copy of Exhibit "A" - San Arroyo properties encumbered by
the Gathering Agreement.  I was hoping that maybe just the Dakota, or just
the Entrada properties were tied to this contract, but it is all the San
Arroyo properties.

Gerald - I will give you your copy Tues am.
Mark - I will send a copy to you via interoffice mail.  I will not fax, since
what I have is already hard to read.

joan


Hey Thrillseekers,

Concerning the City of Houston and the needs of EMCA:  "YOU DON'T GET
ANYTHING UNLESS YOU ASK" ; and " IF YOU PUT UP WITH IT,  YOU DESERVE
IT".

Harry Kirmon
--

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

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


I'll get you for this.

	JcjCal02@aol.com
	10/07/2000 12:11 PM

		 To: Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Case

had your second date yet?


in

Bryan Hull
10/30/2000 11:18 AM
To: Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT, O'Neal D Winfree/HOU/ECT@ECT, Matthew
Lenhart/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Denver Plachy/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Game at 6:00

Our game is at 6 this week.  Let me know if you can make it so I can find
subs if you can't.


back on 32.  it is only about 25% full now.  do you want to meet in the morning, around 9:30?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Scott, Susan M.
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 3:04 PM
To:	Rabon, Chance
Subject:	RE: West Curves

where are you these days?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Rabon, Chance
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 2:57 PM
To:	Scott, Susan M.
Subject:	RE: West Curves

what are you needing, i have the points that are needing to be reconstucted.  Not all of them will need to be, just the ones with positions.  PWC is currently making files for each point to be stored in.  So we may need to touch base before starting.  let me know.

thanks,
chance

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Scott, Susan M.
Sent:	Tuesday, February 12, 2002 2:44 PM
To:	Rabon, Chance
Subject:	West Curves

Hey Chance,

I'm going to be working on west curve validation...do you have any of the information.  Joe Parks told me to contact you.

Susan


---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/10/2001 11:57
AM ---------------------------

Kay Mann
04/06/2001 11:25 AM
To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

I would really appreciate your advice.  I have to learn it somehow, and I
know that you have an excellent idea of what works.

Thanks,

Kay

From: Sheila Tweed@ECT on 04/06/2001 11:22 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

Mark is the signer of opinions and I know what he will sign and what he
won't, so I'll be glad to help you through it but it's

	Kay Mann@ENRON
	04/06/2001 10:47 AM

		 To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

They have a financing out in the letter agreement.  We have to use
commercially reasonable efforts to deliver GE consents, but I don't recall
anything about in other financing docs.

Is someone in the dept designated as the opinion reviewer?

Kay

From: Sheila Tweed@ECT on 04/06/2001 10:19 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

I guess I'm not sure I know what's in the letter agreement.  If it's a done
deal, I'd say no or at least maybe.  We only give due authority opinions and
we try to narrow our obligations to lenders under Consent Agreements

	Kay Mann@ENRON
	04/06/2001 09:15 AM

		 To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

Nice touch, sending this the day after the letter agreement was signed.  Can
you enlighten me on the ENA procedures and sensitivities to these types of
docs?

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/06/2001 09:14
AM ---------------------------

"PARKER, Isabel" <isabel.parker@freshfields.com> on 04/06/2001 09:07:25 AM
To: "Carolyn Campbell (E-mail)" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com>, "John Keffer (E-mail)"
<JKeffer@KSLAW.com>, "Kay Mann (E-mail)" <kay.mann@enron.com>, "Rick Vicens
(E-mail)" <rvicens@deltapower.com>, "Gregory F. Lang (E-mail)"
<gregorylang@paulhastings.com>
cc: "John Tisdale (E-mail)" <jtisdale@jhancock.com>, "Dan Revers (E-mail)"
<drevers@arclightcapital.com>, "Amy Weed (E-mail)" <aweed@jhancock.com>,
"BURKE, Ted (TDB)" <ted.burke@freshfields.com>

Subject: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you
have received it in error, you are on notice of its status.  Please notify us
immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system.
Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to
any other person:  to do so could be a breach of confidence.  Thank you for
your co-operation.  Please contact our
IT Helpdesk on +44 (0) 20 7936 4000 Ext.2000 or email ITHelp@freshfields.com
if you need assistance.

We understand that the Letter Agreement is to be signed today, and attach
for your comments a form of ENA consent to collateral assignment of the
Letter Agreement and a form of legal opinion to be issued by in-house
counsel to ENA.  Both documents are conditions precedent to funding.

Kind regards
Isabel

 - NY003700425.DOC
 - NY003699617.DOC


Hi Bob,

Does this have anything to do with the Wisconsin site you mentioned in the
staff meeting?

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 09/07/2000 02:16
PM ---------------------------

Fred Mitro@ECT
09/06/2000 12:08 PM
To: Scott Healy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rusty Stevens/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gregg
Penman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Herman Manis/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: WEPCO term sheet - Plano

Attached is the draft term sheet for the WEPCO term sheet on the Plano site.
I have used the 9/01 clean version of the ComEd Plano term sheet as the
template for this document.

I have made some changes to reflect our discussions with WEPCO including the
following:

 1. Term (3 and 5 year)
 2. Contract Base Capacity Charge ($ amount may be subject to further change)
 3. Scheduling (day-ahead only)
 4. Project Updates (term modification dates changed to reflect 3 or 5 year
term)
 5. Commercial Operation Date Guarantee (dates change to reflect '02 start
date/termination right triggered off of 6/1/01 notice by Seller)
 6. Delay/Early Completion Penalties/Bonus (changed to reflect different
Capacity Charge)
 7. Availability LD's (changed to reflect different Capacity Charge)

Please review and send me your comments.  I am planning to send this document
to WEPCO tomorrow afternoon.

Thanks,
Fred


A couple of suggestions on which I would appreciate your response:

	1.  I believe we need to have internal due diligence/factual investigation done on whether any of the Enron entities served--Enron Corp.(of which Northern was a division for a period of time), Enron Gas Marketing, Inc. (EGM) or Intratex ever gathered gas, was the first measurer of gas, or provided measurement of gas on which ad valorem taxes were calculated, for Zapata County or communitized wells in adjacent counties that included leases located in whole or in part in Zapata County.  The petition specifically mentions that it includes acts going back to 1974 and earlier, so I would like to see how far back we can fairly easily put together a chronology.  What I hope to have is a time line of who did what and during what period of time, and locate the most important documents to show this.

	I am assuming that EGM was at all times only a marketer, although we need to do the due diligence to make sure.  Enron Corp. will be pretty easy, although Northern was for a brief period of time in the early 90s a division of Enron Corp., and Northern had non-contiguous gathering in South Texas that stopped right at the Zapata County line.  If that gathering system took gas from, say, a well in an adjacent county that was communitized with a lease in Zapata County, Enron Corp. may stay in the picture.  Last, with respect to Intratex, I am told by Lou that we no longer have the Intratex documents; did they go with HPL as a result of the sale?

	Becky and I are stretched thin on various matters right now and would like to suggest that we retain Marianne Salinas on this project immediately.

	2. I think it would be helpful to snag a first-rate gas measurement consultant now, before they all get taken.  I know Ken Cessac, who works here, very well, and think a great deal of him.  I know Andy has used him extensively already in Grynberg-related matters.  You may want to save money and not retain our own consultant, and instead rely on Ken; however, I know that Ken is being kept very busy.  On the other hand, I also think it is likely that we will wind up sharing at least the testifying gas measurement experts and their costs.  So, this is a judgment call.  However, I would be inclined to go ahead and retain Paul LaNasa, who sits on several AGA committees, as an Enron-only consulting expert, even though I don't think he is up to speed on the Grynberg allegations.  Both Grant Harvy and I were very impressed by him during the Northern v. ONEOK arbitration, during which we worked with him extensively and presented him as an expert witness (although I don't proposed to use him as a testifying expert here).  My point would be that if there was anything wrong with Enron's measurement that was either worse than or better than our co-defendants' measurement,  or put us in a different position, I am very confident he could point it out to us.

	I appreciate your thoughts.

	Britt


Hi Dierdre,

I got your name from Christie Patrick as a contact for the Columbia Women in
Business Conference.  Sally Beck will be attending in place of Christie
Patrick.  Can you forward me exact address of conference site so I can
include on Sally's itinerary.  I read in your note to Christie that you would
be sending invitation w/ directions and address - can you send me a copy
also?  If not by e-mail, is it something that can be faxed? My fax number is
713-345-8100.

Thanks for your assistance.  Sally is excited about participating in your
conference and looks forward to meeting you.

Patti Thompson
Sally Beck's Assistant
713-853-9106
patti.thompson@enron.com


----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 11/16/2000 06:20 PM -----

	"Lynn Coldwater" <lcoldwater-slx@xcert.com>
	11/16/2000 01:02 PM

		 To: <skean@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Xcert secures your data in real time

Dear Steven,

In the Internet/Intranet security world time is everything.  Some security
vendors are using Certificate Revocation Lists (CRL) to revoke user
privileges.  This can be very dangerous to your data!

We would like to show you how Xcert enables its customers to immediately
revoke all network privileges from former employees, customers and business
partners while protecting their company data and assets.  We are the only
digital certificate company that provides this real-time revocation
capability because our products were built on the Internet to work on the
Internet.

Please call 800-721-9191 or send us an email so that we can arrange for you
to talk to one of our
Account Representatives who can show you how Xcert protects your data in
real-time.

Thanks,

Xcert Inside Sales
info@xcert.com


check out the following websites for airfare:

www.orbitz.com - the best so far.
www.cheaptickets.com
www.hotwire.com - with this one, you see the offer but won't know the airline or flight times until you lift the offer

register for sidestep and it will show you what priceline offers anytime you look for airfare under any other platform

Then of course, there is expedia and travelocity - but they tend to be more expensive.  Also, sometimes when you check the same website again 5 minutes later, it will show a better price.  Don't forget - tomarrow is 7 days in advance (that might matter)

p.s.  If you want to see how UN attractive my friends are - we are going to be a the wine bucket (new place - W. Alabama just east of Kirby) at 6 pm tonight.  Suzanne, Camille, Jeanie, Lori, Elizabeth.  You can check Camille out for yourself.  Bring others along.


Dear all:

We have downloaded all of the parts of the FERC report from the website (we
have a very fast Internet connection). The FERC website is slow due to
traffic. Let me know if you want me to email a zipped version of the pdf
files. It takes about 20 minutes to download it otherwise.

Seab


thanks Taffy!

	Taffy Milligan
	04/23/2001 04:20 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Dinner Reservations in San Antonio

Reservations made:
Party 14, indoors, non-smoking, 7pm, Wed.-5/2/01--Mark Taylor (no card needed)

	Tana Jones
	04/23/2001 03:58 PM

		 To: Brent Hendry/NA/Enron@Enron, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samantha Boyd/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert
Bruce/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Frank
Sayre/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Cheryl Nelson/NA/Enron@Enron,
Francisco Pinto Leite/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark
Greenberg/NA/Enron@ENRON, Anne C Koehler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marie Heard/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc: Taffy Milligan/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Dinner Reservations in San Antonio

Upon consultation with various members of the Swap Group, I am having Taffy
make dinner reservations for 7:00 pm at La Fogata in San Antonio for 14
people on Wednesday night.  This is not obligatory, so if you have other
dinner plans, please do not feel under any pressure to join us, just let me
know.  Of course, if any one comes up with a better place, I'm open to
suggestions..., but at least we'll have something!


Kevin,

Ok.  Go ahead and turn the next draft with Pinnacle West, too.
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


From Rick:
1. $1mm approval authorization request needs to be completed (Lisa is
tracking down signatures)
2. PRC is 12/1
3. Audit committee will view internal control recaps this year by business
unit (Lisa is coordinating ETS data)
4. Tod has developed a proposed capital structure by business unit for
prospective capital charging (separate document to Rod)
5. Mark Lindsey needs 2000 Goal status (separate documents to Rod)
6. Mark Lindsey needs 2001 revised plan for ETS (Tracy to provide?)


Tino,  this was easier than I thought!  Just eyeballing the numbers, it looks
like $2.00 may even be on the high side on a 24 month or 18 month average
basis.   I wasn't sure which email to use so I used both.  Let me know how
your meeting goes.  DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 07/10/2000
04:26 PM ---------------------------

Lorna Brennan
07/10/2000 04:13 PM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: San Juan Prices

Drew,

I pulled TW San Juan (Blanco) prices off the RDI database for January 1, 1998
through June 8, 2000 (the most current in the database).  If you need to have
the remainder of June and the first part of July input, let me know.  The
file is attached and is saved in Excel so you can edit as needed.

Lorna


hurry hurry

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hayden, Frank
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 12:07 PM
To:	Lavorato, John
Subject:	RE: New Shorts

Waiting on Arnold and Presto
Should have shortly

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lavorato, John
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 12:06 PM
To:	Hayden, Frank
Subject:	RE: New Shorts

I've bought 5800 contracts non pv'd.  I think Zufferli has bought 3000 non pv'd..

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hayden, Frank
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 11:59 AM
To:	Lavorato, John; Port, David
Subject:	New Shorts

John,
TDS is estimating that the desk is getting shorter price.  We are confirming with desk heads and will have exact number shortly.
Frank


Attached pls find credit wkst.  call if you have quesitons

thanks,
tanya


FYI....
---------------------- Forwarded by Carol Moffett/HOU/EES on 05/09/2001 08:48
AM ---------------------------

	Enron Energy Services

	From:  Marty Sunde                           05/09/2001 08:16 AM
	Phone No: 713 853-7797 Phone
  888-953-9478 SkyTel Pager
  EB 889

To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES
(bcc: Carol Moffett/HOU/EES)
Subject: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed, California State
University System

Rosalee,

I have left Ken a voicemail request but thought I would follow up with a note
to you that might help clarify the request.

As Ken knows, Enron Energy Services recently won a STAY by the 9th Circuit
Court of an order by a lower court to require us to provide electricity
service to the UC/CSU systems directly versus via using PG&E and SCE
service.  The formal court hearing of the appeal is still scheduled for 60 to
90 days from now.
We would like Ken to phone Charlie Reed, Chancellor of CSU,  and solicit
Charlie's support for Enron, CSU, and the UC system to get back together to
attempt to work out a commercial resolution to these issues.
We believe that sponsorship and support coming from the most senior
executives' offices will help bring the parties together.
Additionally, if CSU and UC are interested in working out a settlement, we
would like to solicit their joint request for a delay in the court calendar.
This would allow both teams to focus on a commercial resolution versus
splitting their focus between a settlement and preparing briefs for the
appeal appearance.  We would like to see a delay request of one month, as
long as the setttlement discussions progress.
A desirable way to kick off settlement discussions would be to ask Ken to
have lunch with the Head of UC , Charlie Reed of CSU, and perhaps one
business lead (in this case, this could be me).  I am not sure that Ken's
schedule could accomadate that, but I thought I would ask.  If timing is bad
for a meeting like this, we can find a different alternative.

I will follow up with a phone call to you.  Hope this helps.


Matt-

I am unsure as to what Mike Dahlke is referencing when utilizing the term
"Business Model Patent".  If you believe it appropriate, perhaps you could
clarify this with him.

I note, that yesterday I was requested by Mike Grimes to join in on a
conference call that was in progress.  The question that Jae Moo had raised
was as to whether we could state to the Korean authorities that the Japanese
authorities had arrived at the conclusion that weather derivatives should be
categorized as a  commodity derivative, as opposed to a financial
derivative.  I informed the participants on the call that in Japan, weather
derivatives are considered financial in nature, most analagous under the
Japanese regulatory framework to FX and interest rate transactions. The basis
for this, is that there can be no physical delivery with a weather
derivative, as would be possible in a commodity type transaction, therefore
resulting in the classification of a financial derivative.

If I may be of further assistance, please contact me.  My office phone number
in Tokyo is 81-3 5219-4578.

Cheers,

John

	Matthias Lee@ECT
	07/20/2000 02:32 AM

		 To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, David
Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, John
Viverito/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Angeline Poon/SIN/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Meeting with Kim & Chang - EOL Korean legal survey

Alan, Mark,David, John, Edmund

I had a telephone conference with Kim & Chang/Enron Korea this afternoon. The
meeting was initiated by Mike Dahlke (APACHI Regulatory Affairs) and Jae Moo
Lee (Enron Korea).

Attendence:
Mike Dahlke (Enron)
Jae Moo Lee (Enron)
Michelle Lee (Enron)
Matt Lee (Enron- by telephone)
SK Hong (Kim & Chang)

Summary of issues discussed:

1. Whether Weather Derivatives will be classified as a Commodity Derivative
or a Financial Derivative, since Korea has no experience with such a product.

2. Commodity Derivatives are defined in the FETR but does not seem to capture
Weather Derivatives as reference is made to products that can be delivered or
received. Financial Derivatives are not defined.

3. Commodity Derivatives require a prior reporting the the Bank of Korea for
each trade. Financial Derivatives require prior approval from the Bank of
Korea for each trade. Failure to make report or obtain approval means the
Counterparty would not be able to remit funds to make payment.

4. Bank of Korea has informally advised K&C that, for Commodity Derivatives,
the report can be made by the foreign counterparty (ie. Enron) and,
notwithstanding it ought to be a prior report,  can be done as soon as
possible after the trade confirmation. However, Bank of Korea has the
discretion to reject any report made. This would make a trade effectively
unperformable or unenforceable.

5. Bank of Korea took on the role to receive such reports in April 1999 and
informally informed K&C that they have yet to receive a single report. Prior
to April 1999, reports were made to certain designated banks.

6. K&C advised that if the report is made by a Korean counterparty, it would
have to declare why it is entering into the transaction and the risk it is
hedging, but this requirement would not be applicable if the foreign
copunterparty makes the report. I am of the opinion that this statement
should be viewed with caution, especially since there is really no expereince
in Korea of such reports being filed with the Bank of Korea.

7. For Financial Derivatives, prior approval is required before a trade is
done and may take 3 to 5 days.

8. The reporting and approval requirements apply only to onshore Korean
entities.

9. In order to determine how Weather Derivatives would be classified, K&C
recommends approaching the Bank of Korea to make a detailed presentation. The
Ministry of Finance and Economy (which is the legislative authority) may have
to be approached if Bank of Korea is unable/unwilling to make a decision.
Such lobbying is likely to be protracted. I have asked K&C to make informal
enquiries as to whether Bank of Korea would likely classify Weather
Derivatives as Commodity Derivatives or Financial Derivatives, and whether it
would be receptive to presentation on Weather Derivatives.

10. K&C also advised that it would be preferred if the overtures to Bank of
Korea can be made by Korean companies with a real interest in doing Weather
Derivatives. K&C was of the view that Bank of Korea is conservative and may
view Enron with some suspicion as a foreign company "out to make lots of
money".

11. Mike Dahlke also brought up the issue of Business Model Patent in Japan
which he had spoken with John V. about. John - could you fill me in, in case
applicable to Korea?

It seems to me the main obstacle is the issue of reporting to/approval from
Bank of Korea.  The reporting requirement applies to Liquid Fuel Derivatives,
and the approval requirement would apply to the Financial Derivatives
potentially offered out of Enron Japan. The Korean regulations do not seem to
accomodate prompt telephone derivative trading, let alone instantaneous
online derivative trading.

Please advise next steps, in particular, do the commercial guys want to
proceed with approaching Bank of Korea and how would it be coordinated.

Meanwhile, I attach my comments and queries of K&C's memorandum for your
review. Please let me know as soon as possible if you have other comments for
me to revert to K&C.

Regards
Matt


You need that for a 1 month index deal?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Chavez, Alejandra
Sent:	Thursday, October 25, 2001 5:31 PM
To:	Germany, Chris
Subject:	deal

Hi Chris!

I noticed you entered sitara 1135849 today.  I need you to please write a ticket a.s.a.p.  so I can hedge the deal and book it financially.

Thank you,
Alejandra


Alan -

Appreciate your thoughts.

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From:	"Turnure, James" <JTurnure@icfconsulting.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Wed 8/29/2001 3:16 PM
To:	Steffes, James D.
Cc:
Subject:	Concept piece: Regional market analysis at the FERC

Jim,

I thought you might be interested in the attached 3-pager.  I leave it
to you to let me know if you'd like to talk further, or get together
when you are in town.

Best of luck

--Jim

 <<Concept Piece_FERC Analysis.doc>>
 - Concept Piece_FERC Analysis.doc <<Concept Piece_FERC Analysis.doc>>


mark and carole,

please advise on this note from linda araujo.

thanks,

sb
----- Forwarded by Shirley Birch/EPSC/HOU/ECT on 05/30/2001 09:47 AM -----

	Linda_Araujo@IronMountain.Com
	05/30/2001 09:45 AM

		 To: Shirley.Birch@enron.com
		 cc: Carole.Rogers@enron.com
		 Subject: Enron to El Paso transfer

Shirley,

Regarding charges for permanent removal, we know nothing of the
negotiations between Enron and El Paso.  Therefore, from our side it will
be billed with the box (i.e. perm out charge billed to Enron account).

Linda Araujo


thanks Vince.  We'll talk to him this week.

--Dan

Vince J Kaminski
02/02/2001 05:03 PM
To: Daniel Reck/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: message from Bogdan

Dan,

I am sending you a resume of one of my compatriots who
lives in Houston. I met him socially a few times.

He graduated from the same university I did.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/02/2001
05:00 PM ---------------------------

Awenda2000@cs.com on 02/01/2001 09:57:42 AM
To: Vince.j.kaminski@enron.com
cc:
Subject: message from Bogdan

Hi Vince,
I am enclosing my resume, as per our most recent conversation.
Best regards,
Bogdan M. Szopa

 - BOGDAN  res..doc


-----Original Message-----
From: 	james_mcdonnell@ca.campbellsoup.com@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-james+5Fmcdonnell+40ca+2Ecampbellsoup+2Ecom+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Thursday, September 27, 2001 2:26 PM
To:	james.galea@sympatico.ca
Cc:	mvanrassel@rpmtec.com; mitchmilestone@home.com; CJONES@mackenziefinancial.com; jonch@magic.pmh.on.ca; lavorato@enron.com; Richard.C.Glover@fritolay.com
Subject:	Re: real picture or not

Scary yes, but how can you even consider it's reality?  How the hell do you
think they developed the film?  It's not likely, given their proximity to
the approaching plane, that they would have had a rat's ass chance in hell
of escape.  Use your noodle you MBA pencil neck!

MMMPPPACKER

james.galea@sympatico.ca on 09/27/2001 02:02:14 PM

Please respond to james.galea@sympatico.ca

 To:       mvanrassel@rpmtec.com

 cc:       mitchmilestone@home.com, James
           McDonnell/CA/CAMPSOUP/CSC@CSC,
           CJONES@mackenziefinancial.com,
           jonch@magic.pmh.on.ca, lavorato@enron.com,
           Richard.C.Glover@fritolay.com

 Subject:  real picture or not

Guys:

I'm not sure this picture is for real, but it's scary enough anyway.

James

(See attached file: missing.jpg)

**********************************************************************
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain
confidential information and is intended solely for use by
the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you received
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender, do not
disclose its contents to others and delete it from your
system.

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

 - missing.jpg


I may be wrong, but I believe the version sent to day is the same one I sent
to Rose, Lisa et al on April 24.

Kay

"Thompson, Peter J." <pthompson@akllp.com> on 05/01/2001 12:40:33 PM
To: "Williams, Bill" <Bill.Williams@enron.com>, "Mann, Kay"
<Kay.Mann@enron.com>, "THOMAS CONSTANTINE" <TCONSTAN@LLGM.COM>
cc: "Rasmussen, Dale" <Dale.Rasmussen@enron.com>, "Engeldorf, Roseann"
<Roseann.Engeldorf@enron.com>, "Bills, Lisa" <Lisa.Bills@enron.com>

Subject: RE: LV Co Gen

I have already incorporated Lee's comment in a new Version 7.  I am just
waiting for any additional comments.

-----Original Message-----
From: Williams, Bill [mailto:Bill.Williams@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 1:36 PM
To: Mann, Kay; THOMAS CONSTANTINE
Cc: Rasmussen, Dale; Thompson, Peter J.; Engeldorf, Roseann; Bills, Lisa
Subject: RE: LV Co Gen

Kay - I just checked the April 24th draft.  The addition is not there
now, and it need to be.  By this e mail, Tom and Peter, please
incorporate those comments.

>  -----Original Message-----
> From:    Mann, Kay
> Sent:   Tuesday, May 01, 2001 10:12 AM
> To:   THOMAS CONSTANTINE
> Cc:   Mann, Kay; Williams, Bill; Rasmussen, Dale; pthompson@akllp.com;
> Engeldorf, Roseann; Bills, Lisa
> Subject:   RE: LV Co Gen
>
>
> I sent this email from GE to Dale/Bill after I received it.  Since
> Peter's last draft was April 24, I'm I assume this wasn't included:
>
>
>
>
>
> Kay/Bill,
>
> Bill says he agrees and accepts our comments to the A&A.
>
> One change required to the Rev 5 document.  In Exhibit B, Add item
> "27)One
> additional Human Machine Interface (HMI) per Unit (desktop PC type)"
>
> Include these changes and we can get this done tomorrow.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lee


Now that that lady is irritating you maybe you'll finally miss me.  Well, I
might finally be getting somewhere on my move.   I now have an informal offer
that is acceptable.  I just need it in writing now.  But it looks like I'll
be in Chicago by March 12th.  Yikes...I have a lot to do before then.  We
need to all go to lunch before I leave.

Good luck ignoring your neighbor.  RR

Becky Pitre
02/21/2001 10:28 AM
To: Robin Rodrigue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: To Do

Need something to do?  The lady that sits in your old spot is helping her
brother with his divorce.  In fact he may not have to anything but show up in
court!  The details I don't care to hear, but I can't help it.  I can hear
everything and every day there is some new personal matter that needs to be
taken care of.  Maybe if she stuck to just her own business she wouldn't be
on the phone so much and I wouldn't have to hear all the junk.  Gag.  B.


Genia:
I'm looking for the file that contains the September 17, 1997 Master Energy
Purchase and Sale Agreement between EPMI and the above counterparty.  Do you
know where that file is?
Carol St. Clair
EB 3889
713-853-3989 (Phone)
713-646-3393 (Fax)
carol.st.clair@enron.com


CALENDAR ENTRY:	REMINDER

Description:
	Monica - Vacation

Date:		10/16/2000
Time:		8:00 AM (Central Standard Time)

Chairperson:	Outlook Migration Team

Detailed Description:


I don't know what my user name an password are for the system.

Chris Dorland


I didn't buy it yet.   But I going to take a serious look at it.

"Jerry W Germany" <germanj@notes.basf-corp.com> on 08/22/2000 12:53:21 PM
To: Chris Germany <Chris.Germany@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Re: Yo

Did you buy it?   Remember, I'll look after you buy.   Computer on my Jeep
died,
after market security knocks the cotton pickers out.  New computer cost
$535.00,
I found a used one for $250   MMMM, four down Nissan pickup beginning to look
good.

Chris Germany <Chris.Germany@enron.com> on 08/22/2000 07:54:44 AM
To:   Jerry W Germany
cc:
Subject:  Yo

1995 Yamaha Virago 1100 with about 5500 miles .  Inspection sticker has
expired,
no windshield ----     $4,000.00 bucks.


Attached is a Draft Decision approving SDG&E's Emergency Motion for authority
to enter into bilateral contracts.

The decision directs to enter into bilateral agreements that will expire by
12/02.  It provides similar reasonableness guidance as provided to SCE
(bilateral contracts must be within 5% of actual annual procurement costs).

The draft decision rejects SDG&E's request to allocate those contracts to
residential and small commercial customers.  It rejects SDG&E's request for
an exemption from the affiliate rules, which would have allowed SDG&E to
enter into bilateral agreements with its trading affiliate without posting
those transactions or providing an opportunity for a bid process.

Because this decision adopts the same principles in the SCE and PG&E
Decisions, I give a low probability to changing the decision language.
However, if folks would still like us to weigh in on an issue, please let me
know asap.  Thanks.

Mona
---------------------- Forwarded by Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES on 08/28/2000
03:18 PM ---------------------------

"Daniel Douglass" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 08/25/2000 05:26:31 PM
To: <JBarthrop@electric.com>, <mnelson@electric.com>,
<rschlanert@electric.com>, <Bruno_Gaillard@enron.com>, <kmagrude@enron.com>,
<mpetroch@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <athomas@newenergy.com>,
<Jeff.Hanson@phaser.com>, <anchau@shellus.com>, <andrew.madden@utility.com>,
<ben.reyes@utility.com>, <chris.king@utility.com>, <david.bayless@utility.com>
cc:
Subject: Draft Decision Issued in SDG&E Emergency Motion

ALJ Cooke has issued the attached draft decision with regard to the August
9, 2000, emergency motion filed by SDG&E to enter into bilateral power
contracts.? SDG&E sought similar authority to that granted to Edison  and
PG&E in D.00-08-023.? The draft decision would grant the motion,  but would
impose certain conditions different from those requested by the  utility.?
The differences are summarized below:
?
Background
Under the terms of the  Commission,s D.00-08-021, SDG&E is currently
authorized to participate  in the PX forward markets for energy services,
subject to seasonal trading  limits, through the end of the last utility rate
freeze.? SDG&E is not  proposing an increase to the limits approved in
D.00-08-021 and will treat its  capacity purchases under those limits,
although it reserves the right to request  expanded authority in the future.?
The draft decision also notes that  SDG&E proposes that costs associated
with, and gains/losses from these  bilateral contracts should be attributed
only to small commercial and  residential customers.? It also notes that
intervenors focused on four  general areas of concern regarding the specific
authority requested by  SDG&E: duration of contracts, reasonableness
standards, request for  exemption from affiliate rules, and ratemaking.
?
Duration of  Contracts
SDG&E requested  authority to enter into bilateral contracts that expire on
or before December  31, 2005.? The ALJ notes that the Commission recently
instituted an  investigation into the impact of the functioning of the
wholesale electric  market on retail rates in SDG&E,s service territory and
that the OII  will consider whether SDG&E should be removed from that default
provider  role.? The ALJ states that, "the Commission should not compromise
future long-term solutions by affording SDG&E greater purchasing authority
than is needed to address the current emergency situation.? For this  reason,
we limit SDG&E,s authority to what we described in D.00-08-023  as near-term
bilateral contracting authority, that is, contracts with delivery  occurring
on or before December 31, 2002."
?
Reasonableness  Standards
The draft decision  suggests that the OII provides a forum to establish a
common framework for all  three utilities for determining the reasonableness
of their bilateral  purchases.? However, in the interim, it adopts the same
reasonableness  standard for near-term contracts as it did for SCE.? "If the
average  price of SDG&E,s bilateral transactions, delivered or requiring
delivery, over the course of an annual period exceeds the average price of
SDG&E,s corresponding portfolio of transactions, delivered or  requiring
deliver over the same period, by more than 5%, then the Commission  will
initiate a reasonableness review.? Reasonableness reviews, to the  extent
needed, will take place as part of SDG&E,s Annual Transition  Cost
Proceeding."
?
Affiliate Rules  Exemption
SDG&E's request to be  exempted from the affiliate rules for any purchases
from affiliates was  denied.
?
Ratemaking
TURN  urged the Commission to reject SDG&E,s request to limit the ratemaking
impacts of the bilateral contracts to its residential and small commercial
customers, saying that, "the potential risks and benefits should be spread
among all customers."? The draft decision states that, "we do not  believe it
prudent to limit the cost exposure for these contracts solely to  residential
and small commercial customers.? This aspect of  SDG&E,s motion is denied."
?
Transparency  Considerations
The ALJ orders SDG&E  to disclose all bilateral transactions to the Energy
Division on a confidential  basis in a monthly report.? The draft decision
notes that, "WPTF and  ARM argue that additional transparency of bilateral
transactions is required,  compared to that proposed by SDG&E.? We adopt
consistent disclosure  standards for SDG&E bilateral contracts as that
adopted in D.00-08-023 for  PG&E and SCE.? This issue may be revisited on a
going forward basis in  I.00-08-002."
?
Response Time
The normal response time  has been shortened.? Parties to the proceeding may
file comments on the  draft decision no later than noon on September 5,
2000.? I suggest that  comments be filed agreeing with the thrust of the
decision, but strongly  advocating that SDG&E be required to publicly post
its transactions, as it  agreed to do in Advice Letter 1234-E, with regard to
SDG&E's participation  in the Block Forward Market.? In addition, we should
consider whether to  refight the issue of limiting the ratemaking impacts of
the bilateral contracts  to SDG&E's residential and small commercial
customers.
?
Comments or  suggestions???
?
Dan

 - ALJ Cooke Draft Decision.doc


The Supreme Court hearing for the case in India regarding the alleged
improper bidding and award of the Panna/Mukta block concluded today.  Our
legal team's opinion is very optimistic based on the way the proceeding
progressed and also on the actions of the chief judge during the concluding
arguments of the case today in India.

The panel of three judges will now take approximately 2 months to write their
opinion and that should complete this case.  While I probably shouldn't
speculate on the outcome, I will summarize my opinion of the important
points:  1) there is little doubt that the Panna/Mukta award to
Enron/Reliance/ONGC will stand, and  2) it is highly unlikely that the judges
will request the PSC to be renegotiated, the contract was portrayed and
generally accepted by the panel as a very fair deal for the GOI.  According
to my general counsel, Stephen Wallace, the only concern our team has is that
the judges were quite critical of the CBI (the government group that
investigated Reliance for wrong doing in the bid process) during that portion
of the testimony and there is a possibility that they could request an
additional investigation.  Our team puts the likelihood of the judges
ordering a new investigation at less than 50%.  There is downside to such a
decision in that it creates uncertainty, but the focus would be on Reliance,
not Enron.

Enron was very prepared on the commercial and the legal front and our team,
as expected, carried the load for this case even though we were not the
primary defendants.  Enron presented the major rebuttal to the CPIL
assertions because the others were not prepared and then later "coached" the
others to help them prepare appropriately.   This was a much more intensive
case than people were assuming it would be last year and we were very
fortunate to be extremely well prepared and well represented.

Based on the above information,  I do not think this issue "CPIL lawsuit"
should  impact any future decisions we make regarding the Panna/ Mukta/Tapti
assets.  This outcome basically eliminates one of the two issues impeding the
progress of  the  project I showed Joe, our proposal to sell
Panna/Mukta/Tapti, that we call Project Janus.  We believe we have a unique
opportunity to realize exceptional value for these assets through an
arrangement with our partner.  The strategy we have mapped out should  allow
us to close the transaction prior to year-end and it has very positive cash
flow and neutral financial implications (minimal if any gain due to the
step-up last year) for the company.   The only remaining hurdle is a tax
issue that we are currently working.

jeff


Another key point:  to avoid the mistakes of California, policy makers must
make it easy to site and interconnect new generation.  In California peak
demand rose by about 5500 MW from 1996 - 2000.  The market responded with
porposed capacity additions of about 11000 MW.  Most of these facilities are
working thier way through the tangle of state and local approvals.  The
problems we saw in California did not need to occur if policy makers simply
enabled the market to work.  Also, it's worth noting that the deregulated
market did work.  Customers who signed with Enron saw a lower bill than
prederegulation, Enron hedged its commitments and so our customers (and
Enron) did just fine during the summer.  Deregulation worked; the problems in
California can be directly traced to continued regulatory interference in the
market.

	Susan J Mara
	11/17/2000 06:09 PM

		 To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron, Christopher J Day/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Dawson/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Re: talking points on California situation

Mark,

Here's my shot.  I did it in Revision mode so you can see the changes.  Note
that Enron never got out of the retail market in CA and has gathered about
1,000 MW of retail load -- we're bigger than all but two of the municipal
utilities in the state.  Enron stopped marketing to residential consumers --
that's what all the  fuss was about in 1997.  Anyone else feel free to take
your own shot.

Sue

	Mark Schroeder@ECT
	11/17/2000 09:52 AM

		 To: Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul
Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Christopher J Day/Govt.
Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: talking points on California situation

Some of our people get asked on the phone about what is going on in
California.  I have drafted the attached paper for their use.  It is intended
to be simple and user-friendly.  Your thoughts on whether I achieved that
objectvie are welcome.  More importantly, I need you to confimr that I got
the story and facts correct, and that I have not said anything about the
situation that you (Enron USA) would not want to say, or have not said, or if
we have said something fundamentally different, I need to know that, too.
thanks for taking the time to review.  mcs


Rick and Steve:

Per Rick's request, attached is the memorandum prepared by V&E last summer
regarding possible emergency action DOE could take on open access issues.

As Rick and I discussed this morning, we are trying to assess what authority
DOE has, and what authority it would need, to enable it to take emergency
action this summer if things start to go badly.  I will be working with Linda
and John Shelk here in Washington on this issue.  We will let you know what
we come up with.

Sarah

----- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 04/30/2001 10:28 AM -----

	"Bobbish, Donna J." <dbobbish@velaw.com>
	04/30/2001 09:43 AM

		 To: "'snovose@enron.com'" <snovose@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Requested Memorandum

Sarah: Adam indicated that you wanted this memo sent again.  Please let me
know if you need anything more.  Donna

Donna J. Bobbish
Of Counsel
Vinson & Elkins
1455 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20004-1008
(202) 639-6618

          ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.  This
email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization
named above.  If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized
representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any,
or the information contained herein is prohibited.  If you have received
this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email
and delete this email from your system.  Thank You
 <<interim emergency approaches.DOC>>

 - interim emergency approaches.DOC


Thanks

	From:  Jennifer Fraser                           10/04/2000 11:10 AM

To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: RE: WEFA's Outlook for Natural Gas

---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Fraser/HOU/ECT on 10/04/2000
11:08 AM ---------------------------

"Goyburu, Alfredo" <alfredo.goyburu@wefa.com> on 10/04/2000 10:52:58 AM
To:
cc:
Subject: RE: WEFA's Outlook for Natural Gas

Thank you for your interest in Ron Denhardt's comments on Natural Gas.

If you have any difficulty opening or using the file, please write to me or
give me a call.

Al Goyburu
Electric Power
WEFA Energy
610-490-2648

 <<NAPC--Oct 2000.ppt>>

 - NAPC--Oct 2000.ppt


To all A-team members:

Check out the nice recognition note below

I also receive numerous verbal high fives from the other desk heads as well

We had a great year

Kudos to all members of the team

- - - Mike
---------------------- Forwarded by Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT on 12/21/2000
03:29 PM ---------------------------

Vince J Kaminski
12/21/2000 03:00 PM
To: Jim Schwieger/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W
Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron (bcc: Mike A
Roberts/HOU/ECT)
Subject: Re: Your Encouragement Would Be Appreciated

Jim,

Thanks a lot. It is difficult to find a better example example of commitment
to Enron and to professional excellence
than  our weather guys.

Vince

Jim Schwieger
12/21/2000 10:32 AM
To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W
Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:  (bcc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT)
Subject: Your Encouragement Would Be Appreciated

The Gas and Power Trading organizations have had a tremendous year.
Sometimes we as traders forget some of the crucial parts of the organization
that significantly contributed to that success.  I believe the Weather Group
comprised of Mike Robert's, Jose Marquez, Stephen Bennett and Dave Ryan from
Power are one of those groups.  These individuals have done a tremendous job
of predicting summer weather along with the route hurricanes would take.  The
greatest achievement has been the November and December winter forecast.
They held fast to their cold forecast even when outside services were
moderating.  On a score card with all other services they definitely deserve
an "A+".  When you are down on the 32nd floor it would be nice if you would
stop and congratulate them on a tremendous job and their contribution to our
success.

 Thanks,  Jim Schwieger


Will these instructions allow me to change the Credit people too?

	Michael Neves/ENRON@enronXgate
	02/13/2001 01:24 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Scott Cleverly/ENRON@enronXgate
		 Subject: RE: Financial Trading Agreement Database

Tana,

Regretfully, I will no longer be able to submit Application Access Requests
for you.  Until now, I have submitted e-requests on your behalf, and I feel
that removing myself from this process will help to reduce turn-around times
on your requests, as they will no longer have to come through me.  Below, I
have included detailed instructions on how to submit an e-request for the
Financial Trading Agreements Database.  Going forward, I would be glad to
assist you if you have any questions (on the system and on submitting
e-requests).

Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

Regards,
Mike 3-3363

e-request Instructions:

1. from your web browser: pull up http://itcentral.enron.com <--or click this
link
2. click on the "e-request" logo/link
3. select "Corp Logon", you'll then be prompted for your corp login (the same
one you login with in the morning)
4. then select "Add/Remove access..." under "Update Account Access"
5. chose the user/requestee from the available list of users (and choose
appropriate priority)
6. next, click the  "Applications" button (the one with gears on it)
7. then click "show all"
8. from this list, scroll down to "Lotus Notes Application - Unlisted" and
click the "+add" button
9. In the box provided, list "Financial Trading Agreements" and also include
the group name - in this case "ECT Legal - Swap - Users"

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Jones, Tana
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:21 AM
To: Neves, Michael
Subject: Re: Financial Trading Agreement Database

Can you get Peter Keohane and Greg Johnston, two attorneys in our Calgary
office, edit access to the Master Swap Agreement database.  Please let me
know when they have access.  Thanks!
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 02/13/2001 11:19 AM -----

	Peter Keohane 02/13/2001 09:54 AM 	  To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT  cc: Greg
Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT  Subject: Re: Financial Trading Agreement Database <<
OLE Object: StdOleLink >>

That would be good.  Peter.

From: Tana Jones on 02/13/2001 09:11 AM CST
To: Peter Keohane/CAL/ECT@ECT, Greg Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Financial Trading Agreement Database

If you like, I can get you database access that will allow you to review the
comments between Legal & Credit.  We do not give this level of access to
non-Legal & Credit people because we are trying to limit certain information
for client-attorney privilege (not to mention the business people give away
our negotiating positions!).  If you would like this level of access, let me
know and I will put in a request.  This level of access will also give you
edit capability, so you need to be careful not to change things by mistake.


I did, it's on powerMap and on the web on the EPA's "Airs" site.

The cool thing to do is combine that map from Powermap with the proposed plants and closures from the Newgen database. Newgen is on the RDI web site.  Gives you an idea of supply and demand for ERC's. Give me a buzz if you have any questions.

-Adam

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Taylor, Michael E
Sent:	14 August 2001 16:10
To:	Siegel, Adam
Subject:	Non-attainment areas

Adam,

I saw a map of non-attainment areas.  Trevor said you may have complied it.  Where was your source of non-attainment areas?

Thanks,

Michael Taylor
Coal and Emissions Trading
Enron Global Markets
(713) 853-1885


This request has been pending approval for  16 days and you are the alternate.  Please click http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000078935&Page=Approval to review and act upon this request.

Request ID          : 000000000078935
Approver            : sandeep.kohli@enron.com
Request Create Date : 12/11/01 10:27:11 AM
Requested For       : miguel.l.garcia@enron.com
Resource Name       : \\enehou\houston\common\Research - [Read]
Resource Type       : Directory


if people do not want to play golf i suggest we all go to breakast or have lunch
I would just like ot see and talk to everyone b/c you never know when we might not be able to

I luv you guys

dutch

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"siva66" <siva66@mail.ev1.net>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22siva66+22+20+3Csiva66+40mail+2Eev1+2Enet+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:25 AM
To:	Quigley, Dutch; martier@cpchem.com; wolphguy@aol.com; jramirez@othon.com; MarkM@cajunusa.com; ras1119@hotmail.com; klyn@pdq.net
Subject:

just in case, i do not know how everyone feels about this but i
still got 2 tee times at brock on saturday at 8:40 & 8:48.  let me
know.

ricardo

________________________________________________________________
Sent via the EV1 webmail system at mail.ev1.net


At the ALJ's direction, this subject was discussed among the parties who
were present in the hearing room yesterday at the lunch break and again
after the conclusion of hearings for the day.  The parties present reached
agreement on a process for this exhibit.

I had to leave for home immediately after the discussions in the hearing
room at the end of yesterday due to a family emergency.

I am informed the results of these discussions were put on the record today.
I understand that SoCalGas will provide to all parties by June 16 a draft of
the exhibit.  Parties can then comment to SoCalGas and we will attempt to
get a consensus by June 21.  SoCalGas will file by June 21 either a version
that has concensus, or failing concensus, its own version of what it thinks
the exhibit should show.  Parties who do not agree with what SoCalGas files
on June 21 can file on June 23 either their own version or comments on
SoCalGas' version.

I cannot absolutely guarantee the accuracy of the above details since I was
not present today and there is no transcript yet for today.

If this arrangement is not acceptable to Transwestern, you should object to
the ALJ immediately.  Hearings are scheduled to conclude after the lunch
break today.

Also, I am informed that SCGC has distributed in the hearing room and will
attempt to introduce today a written exhibit that includes an extensive
discussion of its views on the subject of "mismatches" of delivery and
take-away capacity at the California border.

-- Glen Sullivan
Attorney for SoCalGas and SDG&E
(619) 699-5162

-----Original Message-----
From: Susan.Scott@enron.com [mailto:Susan.Scott@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:39 AM
To: gsullivan@sempra.com
Cc: Jeffery.Fawcett@enron.com
Subject: Exhibit

Glen, at page 1020 of the transcript of yesterday's proceedings, the judge
asked you and Norm Pedersen to work with various other parties to develop
an exhibit reflecting capacity at the California border.  The judge
mentioned she wanted to discuss the exhibit this morning, so I am surprised
that you did not attempt to contact me to get Transwestern's input or at
least to let us review the exhibit.  I would like to review the exhibit as
soon as possible.  I am out of town but you can either e-mail it to me or
fax it to 941-466-2198 (before 3 pm PDT).  Also, I should be reachable on
my mobile phone (713-494-5002) or by voice mail at my office
(713-853-0596).


John is the only one who wants to play.

Beth Cherry
___________
Sr. Creative Consultant
EnFORM Technology
713.350.1860


As you might have noticed, there was no file actually attached to your last
e-mail. I was saving it for this one.


Folks:

I have tentatively set the date for our first round-table discussion for
Wednesday,
December 20th at 3:00pm-4:30pm.  The room, EB3268, will be available from
3:00 to 5:00pm.   If any of you have an issue with the date, please let me
know by
day's end.

Professor Don Kouri of the Physics Department of the University of Houston
will start
with an informal 30-45 minute presentation (see appended abstract below) of
his work
and will then lead a discussion as well answer questions that we may have.

Professor Kouri, please let me know if you have any requirements for
audiovisual
or other equipment.

This excerpt from a previous correspondence provides an insight to the
subject of our meeting:

[...]   topics to
be discussed at a small ``roundtable'' format meeting, are:

1. HDAFs for data analysis, including ``gap-filling'', data
extrapolation, denoising, mathematical manipulations of digital
data (e.g., taking derivatives, applying functions of differential
operators to digital data, etc.)

2. HDAFs as the basis of numerical algorithms for solving nonlinear
partial differential equations, particularly for equations for which
existing methods encounter stability problems.

There are certainly other areas of interest and applications of the
HDAFs but I think that even trying to do both of the above in a
single meeting would be difficult. Of course, in this first meeting
we would focus on general aspects of the HDAFs that make them robust
for such applications. If, however, you have other topics in which
you are interested, I am willing to focus on them.
[...]"

Yannis Tzamouranis

Yannis Tzamouranis on 12/11/2000 03:56:49 PM
To: Mark Tawney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Claudio Ribeiro/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joseph
Hrgovcic/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Todd
Kimberlain/NA/Enron@Enron, Vasant Shanbhogue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: HDAF seminar topics

Folks:

I am trying to set up a meeting with professor Don Kouri of the University of
Houston and I believe you may have an interest in the topic of discussion.
If you know of other interested parties, or want to substitute a proxy for
yourselves, please let me know.

This first meeting with Dr. Kouri will introduce the participants to his area
of research (HDAFs for data analysis) and allow us to define the contents and
attendants of a seminar (to come up soon).

We are looking to hold this discussion this week (hopefully) and to have the
seminar happen before Christmas (given that this is the in-between semester
season for schools).

A couple of other similar meetings will follow up: Dr Kevin Bassler  will be
talking about Microscopic Simulation of Economic Markets and Dr. Pinsky about
the Effect of Solar phenomena on the Earth's atmosphere.

Yannis
----- Forwarded by Yannis Tzamouranis/HOU/ECT on 12/11/2000 03:36 PM -----

	KOURI@Kitten.chem.uh.edu
	12/11/2000 02:32 PM

		 To: Yannis.Tzamouranis@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: HDAF seminar topics

Hi Yannis,
I got your email without any problem.
Regarding timing of a meeting, I am free from teaching duties now
so I am flexible. I will be in Houston all of December. I look
forward to hearing more from you. With best wishes,
Don Kouri


Fyi.  Lynn
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)

-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Britt <Britt.Davis@ENRON.com>
To: Lowry, Phil <Phil.Lowry@ENRON.com>; Miller, Mary Kay <Mary.Kay.Miller@ENRON.com>; Neubauer, Dave <Dave.Neubauer@ENRON.com>; Graham, Charlie <Charlie.Graham@ENRON.com>; Darveaux, Mary <Mary.Darveaux@ENRON.com>; Dornan, Dari <Dari.Dornan@ENRON.com>; Sturn, John <John.Sturn@ENRON.com>; Kile, Rick <Rick.Kile@ENRON.com>; Thompson, Charlie <Charlie.Thompson@ENRON.com>; Frasier, Bill <Bill.Frasier@ENRON.com>; Anderson, Gary E. <Gary.Anderson@ENRON.com>; Herber, Stephen <Stephen.Herber@ENRON.com>; Blair, Lynn <Lynn.Blair@ENRON.com>; Dietz, Rick <Rick.Dietz@ENRON.com>; Fossum, Drew <Drew.Fossum@ENRON.com>; Cappiello, Deborah <Deb.Cappiello@ENRON.com>
CC: Carrier, Lee <Lee.Carrier@ENRON.com>
Sent: Wed Oct 17 09:40:53 2001
Subject: Northern v. ONEOK/Meeting Thursday to discuss ONEOK's letter of October 16 to Dave Neubauer

	Ladies & Gentlemen:

	At Dave Neubauer's request, I am going to schedule a meeting for tomorrow to which you are all invited (and if I have left out a necessary participant, please let me know) to formulate a response to ONEOK's letter of October 16 to Dave (a copy of which I will circulate to you).  It has to do with the proposed special test.  I will have my a/a, Lee, circulate copies of (a) Dave's letter of October 5 and (b) ONEOK's reponse of October 16 to you all immediately.

	Given that so many schedules are involved, I went ahead and picked a time that both Drew and Dave have open: 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m tomorrow, Thursday, October 18.  Debbie has reserved the video conference rooms in 49C2 and in Omaha.  Lee will get a call-in conference number for anyone that can't attend in person, and e-mail it out to you.

	I appreciate your patience.

	Many thanks.

	Britt


Mary,

As Brent Price is out of the country until July & I am travelling out of the
country more frequently, I would like to temporarily designate Susan Harrison
as a signer.  Susan is the Director of our off-system Settlements & Volume
Management groups.  This temporary designation will ensure that we maintain
appropriate signing coverage while Brent & I are unavailable.

Thanks,
Sally


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W E E K E N D   S Y S T E M S   A V A I L A B I L I T Y

F O R

June 1, 2001 5:00pm through June 4, 2001 12:00am
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ECS to ECN Network Interconnection, June 9th 2001

This is a notification that the Enron Corp. I/T Networks team will be connecting the new building network infrastructure located in Enron Center South (ECS) to the existing Enron Center North (ECN) backbone network.  While this activity is not expected to produce a disruption to network services, this notice is designed to alert the organization to our activities.  No network hardware or systems are anticipated to be shutdown.  The actual physical interconnection of the networks will be performed in the EB 34th floor Data Center.

Interconnection activities are scheduled to occur the evening of June 9th 2001 starting from 7:00 p.m.(CT) and completing around 11:00 p.m. (CT). Application testing activities will begin at 11:00 p.m. (CT) once all network testing has completed.

If you have any further questions, please contact Pete Castrejana at 713-410-0642 for more information.

SCHEDULED SYSTEM OUTAGES:

ARDMORE DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

AZURIX: No Scheduled Outages.

EB34 DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

EDI SERVER: No Scheduled Outages.

ENRON CENTER SOUTH DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages

ENRON NORTH AMERICAN LANS:  SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET:     SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

MESSAGING:      SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

Impact:  Exchange
Time:  Fri 6/1/2001 at  7:00:00 PM thru Fri 6/1/2001 at  7:30:00 PM
Outage:  Initiate Failover of Nahou-msmbx01v to unlock backup api
Disruption:
Environments Impacted:  Users on with mailboxes on nahou-msmx01v
Purpose: Ensure backups run successfully
Backout: N/A
Contact(s): 	Scott Albright  713-345-9381

Impact:  CORP
Time:  Sat 6/2/2001 at  10:00:00 PM thru Sat 6/2/2001 at  10:15:00 PM
Outage:  Exchange server message change
Disruption:  Intermittent Disruption of Service
Environments Impacted:  Corp Exchange users on nahou-msmbx05v
Purpose: To enable the new mailbox over the limit message
Backout:
Contact(s): 	Tim Hudson  713-853-9289

MARKET DATA: No Scheduled Outages.

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS: No Scheduled Outages.

SITARA:  No Scheduled Outages.

SUN/OSS SYSTEM: No Scheduled Outages.

TELEPHONY: No Scheduled Outages

TERMINAL SERVER:  No Scheduled Outages.

UNIFY:  No Scheduled Outages.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
								FOR ASSISTANCE

(713) 853-1411   Enron Resolution Center

Specific Help:
Information Risk Management			(713) 853-5536
SAP/ISC                                                                               (713) 345-4727
Unify On-Call 					(713) 284-3757  [Pager]
Sitara On-Call					(713) 288-0101  [Pager]
RUS/GOPS/GeoTools/APRS			(713) 639-9726  [Pager]
OSS/UA4/TARP				(713) 285-3165  [Pager]
CPR						(713) 284-4175  [Pager]
EDI Support 					(713) 327-3893  [Pager]
EES Help Desk					(713)853-9797 OR (888)853-9797
TDS -Trader Decision Support On-Call                    (713) 327-6032 [Pager]


Attached is a memorandum prepared by Brobeck outlining the various business and legal issues that need to be considered in connection with potential licensing deals involving the EnronOnline software.  I thought each of you might be interested.


* The Megawatt Daily has not been issued this morning.

** I included Friday's Gas Daily in this email as well.  I apologize for any inconvience it's lateness may have caused.

Thank you,
Carlee


Jeff

Delainey is recruiting everybody.  It will be very hard to meet the employee criteria set out by Umbrulla if this continues.  As you see below, he is even recruiting traders.  It's hard enough with the external companies.

John
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lavorato, John
Sent:	Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:48 PM
To:	Whalley, Greg
Cc:	Kitchen, Louise
Subject:

Delainey is everywhere.

He is working on Doug Gilbert Smith - Head of Ercot Power Trading.


Attached are my updates to Steve's backgrounder and solutions documents.
I've also attached (for Rick) the summary of the CA State Treasurer's
proposal.

Best,
Jeff


Being first is overrated.   IS IT TIME YET???


--------------------------vince kaminski

-----Original Message-----
From: Exchange System Administrator [EX:.]
To: 'vkamins@enron.com' <vkamins@enron.com>
Sent: Fri Jan 04 06:50:37 2002
Subject: Undeliverable: To do

--------- Inline attachment follows ---------

From:  </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=VKAMINS>
To: 'vkamins@enron.com'
Date: Friday, January 4, 2002 12:50:34 GMT
Subject:

1 Cindy Skinner
2 Chonawee
3 Martin
4 Praveen
5 Lawyer
6
--------------------------vince kaminski


i'm just here to do my job and not worry about prestige, or something

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Fraser, Jennifer
Sent:	Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:34 AM
To:	Arnold, John
Subject:	market on JA

both inside and outside ene ( i heard from kayvan this morning)
JA- youngest MD at Christmas
odds?
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Arnold, John
Sent:	Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:21 PM
To:	Fraser, Jennifer
Subject:	RE:

me thinks below but won't really move until closer to expiry

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Fraser, Jennifer
Sent:	Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:17 AM
To:	Arnold, John
Subject:	RE:

thanks.trust life is good to you. am in tokyo this week. has weather (HDD, storms) arrived too late to save nat gas? what about sep expiry above or below 3$-

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Arnold, John
Sent:	Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:15 PM
To:	Fraser, Jennifer
Subject:

not really.  i actually don't think the market's going to move too much even though the range of expectations is huge.  there are enough people on the sidelines to mute a move either way


ENERGY COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
(Please pass on as appropriate)

Congresswoman Anna Eshoo has organized a town hall meeting to bring everyone
together to talk about what residential and commercial customers can do
during the current energy crisis, and to promote energy efficiency and
conservation.

The event will be held  9:00 - 11:00am, on Saturday, June 2, 2001, at the
Menlo Park campus of the USGS at 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park.
Directions are attached below.

Panel speakers will focus on recent Federal and State action and energy
efficiancy and conservation.  Speakers include Ambassador Dick Sklar,
Assemblyman Joe Simitian, Ralph Cavanagh of NRDC and local business owner
Larry Hassett.

Please join us on Saturday for Congresswoman Anna Eshoo's Town Hall Meeting.
If you have questions, please call the Congresswoman's Palo Alto office at
650-323-2984

DIRECTIONS:
The USGS campus is actually on Survey Lane, a short road (1 block long)
south of Middlefield Road between Marsh Rd and Willow Rd in Menlo Park.

US 101: take the Willow Road exit. Take Willow Road south / west towards
Menlo Park about one mile, and turn right onto Middlefield Road. Take the
second left onto Survey Lane.

I-280 from the South: Take I-280 N to Highway 85 N (towards Mountain View).
Take US-101 N to the Willow Road exit. Take Willow Road about a mile, and
turn right onto Middlefield Road. Take the second left onto Survey Lane.

To Use Public Transportation on the Peninsula: Take Caltrain to the Menlo
Park Station. Caltrain schedules can be obtained at www.caltrain.com or by
calling 1-800-660-4287. Thanks to SamTrans, a special shuttle will be
available at the Menlo Park station starting at 8:20am to take those
arriving by train to the USGS campus.   The special shuttle will also be
available after the townhall meeting to return to the Menlo Park station.
The shuttle is ADA accessible.  Also note, the train station is less than a
mile to the USGS campus. To bike or walk to the campus, head south from the
train station about 100 yards to Ravenswood Avenue. TURN LEFT (east) and go
down Ravenswood Avenue about a half a mile to Middlefield Road, turn right
(south) and the campus is on the right side of the street.


Andrea,

After reviewing Bryan Hull's resume, I think he would be best suited for the trading track program.  Please forward his resume to Karen Buckley.

Phillip


Laura, let me visit with Darrell to see what would be the best date to schedule the hot tap. The 20th is the week of Thanksgiving, maybe the week after would be better. Like the 26th or 27th. I'll get back to you soon and let you.

Jerry Graves
713-345-8923

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	lkunkel@trigon-sheehan.com@ENRON
Sent:	Wednesday, October 17, 2001 8:37 AM
To:	Graves, Jerry
Cc:	mike_mccracken@enron.com
Subject:	RE: Albuquerque Region Outage Report Through May 2002

WE need to do a 12" hot tap on the West Texas Loop line for the Agave
Interconnect.  This will be just north of the Atoka II junction.  I think we
can be ready for the hot tap by 11-20-01 based on when we should be
receiving materials.  The tap is to be in service by 12-1-01.  The pressure
at the time of the tap needs to be reduced to a maximum of 712 psig.  Is
there a good time to do the tap or a good time not to?  Attached is the
outage report.
Laura J. Kunkel
Project Manager
Trigon-Sheehan, LLC
505/627-9124
lkunkel@trigon-sheehan.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Graves, Jerry [mailto:Jerry.Graves@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 2:31 PM
To: Alvarado, Jesse; Armitage, Roy; Artesia, Team; Asante, Ben; Bailey,
Arnie; Bandel, Bob; Barnes, Rodney; Barry, Richard; Boothe, David;
Braswell, Keith; Brown, Sharon; Calhoun, Rory; Carlsbad, Team; Chanley,
Earl; Chow, Kenneth; Coash, Steve; Cochran, Jeffrey; Cummings, Helen;
Ellington, Michael; Flagstaff, Team; Flagstaff-Sta2, Team;
Flagstaff-Sta3, Team; Gallup, Team; Gallup-Sta4, Team; Gallup-Sta5,
Team; Goradia, Pallavi; Graves, Jerry; Hall, Margaret; Hardy, Crandal;
Hendricks, Jonny; Henley, Gaynel; Hood, Colleen; Howell, Dennis;
JalCompressors, Team; January, Steven; Jolly, Rich; Kermit, Team;
Kermit-WT2, Team; Kingman, Team; Kingman-Needles, Team; Kingman-Sta1,
Team; Kowalke, Terry; Laguna, Team; Laura Kunkel; Macpherson, Sigrid;
Maestas, Gary; Martens, Donna; Matthews, Ron; McCracken, Mike; McIlwain,
Greg; Monahans, Team; Monahans-FtStockton, Team; Monden, Bart; Moore,
Jan; Moore, Jeff; Mountainair, Team; Munson, Robert; Panhandle, Team;
Panhandle-P2, Team; Pribble, Dan; Pyle, Carl; Ratliff, Dale; Rice,
Randy; Roensch, David; Roswell, Team; Roswell-Capitan, Team; San-Juan,
Team; San-Juan-LaPlata, Team; Schoolcraft, Darrell; Sims, Peggy; Smith,
Rick; Sommer, Carol; Spain, Ron; Spraggins, Gary; Watson, Kimberly;
Welsh, Edward; Williams, Jo; Young, Kenneth
Subject: Albuquerque Region Outage Report Through May 2002

Please review the attached outage report.

Jerry Graves
713-345-8923
                                         <<011011Al.xls>>

**********************************************************************
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.
**********************************************************************

 - Outaoutgage - Agave tap.txt << File: Outaoutgage - Agave tap.txt >>


Dear Power Outage Database Customer,

Attached you will find an excel document. The outages contained within
are forced or rescheduled outages. Your
daily delivery will still contain these outages.

In addition to the two excel documents, there is a dbf file that is
formatted like your daily deliveries you receive
nightly. This will enable you to load the data into your regular
database. Any questions please let me know.
Thanks.

Greg Elliott
IIR, Inc.
713-783-5147 x 3481
outages@industrialinfo.com

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS LEGALLY PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE.  YOU
ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT
ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPY OF THIS E-MAIL TO UNAUTHORIZED
ENTITIES IS STRICTLY
PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT.

 - 012902R.xls
 - 012902.xls
 - OUTAGE.dbf


Mona,
 What is your phone #?

Bob Badeer