Dear GISB Members,

Attached please find a request for comments on ten recommendations from our
subcommittees.  If adopted, these recommendations would change existing
standards or add new standards and interpretations.  The recommendations are
in response to requests from our members and interested industry participants
to change or add standards and interpretations. The request for comments is
49 pages in length and includes a brief description of each recommendation as
well as the recommendations themselves.

The attachment is presented in .pdf (Portable Document Format from Adobe
Acrobat) and can be viewed with the Acrobat Reader, which can be downloaded
at no cost from the Adobe site www.adobe.com.  The attachment can easily be
accessed online with the bookmark feature of Adobe Acrobat, which is
available in the reader software.

If you have difficulty retrieving this document, please call the GISB office
at (713) 356-0060.

Best Regards,  GISB Office

(The GISB organization follows a privacy policy, which does not permit
distribution of contact information. If you are on a GISB distribution list
and would like to be removed, please email such request to the GISB office
and your email address will be removed. If you would like to add other
participants from your company to this distribution list, please also email
such request to the GISB office.)

 - cr000710 with attach.PDF


Do not update links when opening this file.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Laura Levy
EnronOnline
x53551


Phil,  Can you send Tyrell the schedule that is to be attached as Appendix A?


Had a typo in your e-mail address!
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 08/30/99 02:29
PM ---------------------------

Sara Shackleton
08/30/99 01:08 PM
To: pla@marvel.com.ar
cc: Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: ISDA Schedule for Argentina

Per our  conversation of date, attached is ECT's most recent version of the
ISDA Schedule and Credit Support Annex designed for use with Argentine
counterparties.  As we discussed, I would like for you to review this format
and determine whether changes are required as a result of legal developments
in Argentina.  Please call me when you have had an opportunity to review the
document.  We have had sent out several recent drafts using the attached
format.  Also, any written materials which might prove useful are always
greatly appreciated.  Thanks.  Sara

P.S.  I will try to schedule some time when I am in the B.A. office.


I think this will do for now.  I was sniffling the other evening when we went out for a little drinky and Meredith said you wanted to work out instead of seeing me.  I was so sad and heartbroken.  Baby's doing good.  Woman has not had any problems so far and she's starting to feel the baby move on a regular basis now.  I've never felt the little sucker move - maybe she's just getting fat.  What do you think?

We keep loosing people.  Christina is moving to the Estate Team power dispatch group.  Good for her.  That will make her in expendable.

how the heck are you?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Tamara Carter" <tcarter@sequentenergy.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, January 31, 2002 3:27 PM
To:	Germany, Chris
Subject:	Re: Boo

Tamie Carter      832-397-1750
Steve Gillsepie    832-397-1758
John Hodge        832-397-1759
Tammi Depolis    832-397-1728

kimberly bates answers the main number which is X1700.  You can get anyone through her.

How's it going???  How's be be doing?

>>> "Germany, Chris" <Chris.Germany@enron.com> 01/31/02 03:13PM >>>
Hey woman.  I need your phone number and Steve's phone number and John's phone number and Tammy's phone number please.

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


I'm sorry - I have no idea who Christer is - I'm assuming Chris Foster? Also,
we have two Bill Williams - I assume you mean the real time manager, Bill
Williams III. Let me know if I'm right, and I'll be happy to add them to the
mailing list.

Thanks,
Kate

Neil Bresnan@EES
02/22/2001 12:57 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject:

Kate,

Will you copy Christer and Bill Williams with the daily purchases.  Thanks

NFB


I completely forgot to call you this afternoon...it got kind of crazy around
here.  If you're going to be at the flat any time tomorrow shoot me off and
email and I'll call you in the morning, ....otherwise I'll talk to you
tomorrow when you get to H-town.


I had the pre-review meeting on my calendar for the 16th (10:00) and the
final meeting for the 30th (1:30).  Has one of them changed?

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  Sylvia T Sauseda                           07/07/99 11:07 AM

To: Alan B Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T
Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kristina Mordaunt/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Sefton, Mark - ECT
Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robin M
Jordan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Erica Braden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Meagan Brinkworth/LON/ECT@ECT,
Julia Murray/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Twanda
Sweet/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joya Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Wende
Warren/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sheila Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathy George/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Final - Legal Business Unit Review

To the OGC's:

The Final Legal Business Unit Review Mtg. is scheduled on Friday, July 23,
1999 at 9:00 - 12:00 p.m..  Scott Sefton and Michael Brown will be connected
via telephone conference.  If you are not able to attend, please let me know
at your earliest convenience.  Location TBA.

sts


I need the city's bond counsel (outside counsel).

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ward, Kim S (Houston)
Sent:	Monday, October 08, 2001 8:27 AM
To:	Shackleton, Sara
Subject:	RE: City of Glendale

Glendale's City Attorney is Steve Lins.  His phone number is 818-548-2080 and his email is slins@ci.glendale.ca.us.  Please let me know if you need anything else.  I will be in their offices on Wednesday.

Thanks,  Kim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shackleton, Sara
Sent:	Monday, October 08, 2001 8:03 AM
To:	Ward, Kim S (Houston)
Cc:	Heard, Marie
Subject:	RE: City of Glendale

Kim:  Can you obtain the name of Glendale's bond counsel (lawyer's name, phone number, email, etc.)?  Thanks.  SS

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ward, Kim S (Houston)
Sent:	Friday, October 05, 2001 1:59 PM
To:	Shackleton, Sara
Subject:	City of Glendale

Sara,

Believe it or not, we are very close getting our signed ISDA from the City of Glendale.  Steve Lins, the City attorney had a couple of questions which I will attempt to relay without having a copy of the documents.

1)  I am assuming that he obtained a for legal opinion letter or document of some sort.  This document references a confirmation and we are not sure what this references.  Typically, it references a transaction, which in this case, there are no transactions yet.  He feels this reference should be deleted.  What is your opinion regarding this? [Shackleton, Sara]    If we have no transaction on the books, then he can delete the reference.  Marie:  Have we received an opinion from Glendale?

2)  We sent him a couple of form documents to facilitate the documents required under the ISDA.  One form ws a form resolution.  They have already received City Council approval to enter into financial tranactions and to enter into an ISDA with us.  Steve is going to get a certified copy of this Resolution.  Will this suffice? [Shackleton, Sara]    I'll review their resolution again.  If it references our ISDA and all transactions, it should be fine.  (This is part of the reason why we need a legal opinion)

When you return, I may try to do one last conference call to alleviate any unanswered questions.  I think we will have an executed ISDA with the City of Glendale by the end of next week.  I am going to be out there meeting with them on Wednesday.

Thanks for your help,

Kim


Max,

Please look this purchase proposal over and forward it on to the applicable parties.  This proposal is completely open for negotiations, you can reach me at (303) 575-6474 to discuss this proposal further.

Sincerely,
Paul Lucci


The FRED file for Ontario did not include flashed liquidations detail.  It
appears the files were not prepared by risk.  I have prepared the files and
attached them.  Do you mind including this in the FRED file and reissuing?
Thanks for your help, please call with questions.
PL


---------------------- Forwarded by Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT on 04/11/2001
01:13 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Technology

	From:  Moyez Lallani @ ENRON                           01/16/2001 10:46 AM

To: Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vasant Shanbhogue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Livelink Access

Gentlemen,

I have created a folder called Research Projects Folder in the Livelink test
instance.  The URL to the test instance is

http://nahou-kmcprm01t/livelink/livelink.exe

To log in, use your NT login id as your userid and password (all lowercase).
You will find the folder on the Enterprise Workspace.  Please call me should
you require further assistance.

Moyez Lallani
X5-3683


Please find attached the signed Master Agreement (with schedules at the back), the form of Comprehensive License Agreement (to be signed at closing), and the schedules to the Comprehensive License Agreement.

These have been filed with the bankruptcy court in New York and are available to 3d parties via the court's web site.

EDD

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	White, Bonnie
Sent:	Tuesday, January 15, 2002 10:32 AM
To:	Daniels, Eddy
Subject:	UBS documents you requested

Bonnie J. White
Enron Litigation Unit
1400 Smith Street, Suite 4824
Houston, TX  77002
Ph:  713-853-7244
Fax: 713-853-6576
bonnie.white@enron.com


The above stated meeting is scheduled for Monday October 11th, 8:30am-10:00am,
    in EB27C2.

    Amy
    x37293


First things first...

Yes, I am still alive...Things with Wonder Boy suck (and for the time being I
think we should refrain from calling him Wonder Boy)...I'll be leaving for
Austin Friday night (1st football game of the season), but will be back
Sunday and definitely want to get together while you're in town.

Hope all is well with you and that you had a fantastic holiday weekend.  Mine
was incredible!!! I visited a friend of mine in San Diego and had the best
time just hanging out, shopping, hitting the beach and attending the symphony
(on the water no less).  It was definitely a good trip for my psyche as Ted
has been less than impressive going on almost two weeks now.  I'm certainly
not pleased about the situation, but at no point have I lost site of what a
catch I am (and if he's not bright enough to see or appreciate that fact then
I don't think he's bright enough for me).

Talk to you soon,
Susan

Wit makes its own welcome, and levels all distinctions. No dignity, no
learning, no force of character, can make any stand against good wit. -Ralph
Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)

From: Tobin Carlson@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 09/06/2000 12:21 PM PDT
To: Susan M Scott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:

Hey there. Are you still alive? What is up? How are things with you and
Wonder Boy?
I think I will be in Houston Friday through Tuesday (maybe more days
depending on how matters turn around). Will you be around?
Drop a note when you get a chance.

TC


Please let me know if this format is accessible and useful for you. I know
some of these deal changes aren't relevant to your calculation discrepancies,
but I included everything just in case. If you'd like it pared down or beefed
up, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks for your patience.


Rick,

Just following up on the VaR requests.  Do you have everything you need?

Jeff


I tend to think that Enron needs to re-position its message re:  RTOs.
From what I can tell, we have been a proponent of Transcos before FERC for
the most part during the RTO debate.  Only Detroit Edison's Transco
proposal comes close to our initial vision.  Given that what is most likely
is a bunch of not-for-profit ISOs being created in the East and West, why
not re-establish our position.  This meeting gives us an opportunity to
really set up this distinction and draw some "bottom lines".

Jim

To:   Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@ENRON
cc:   Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES@ENRON, Joe
      Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES
Subject:  Re: EEI Conference Series on RTOs and Markets: Mark Your
      Calendars  (Document link: James D Steffes)

From what ESCA was telling us, I don't think that they typically would go
to these as speakers.   However, it may be something they would want to do
to promote their systems (hopefully that will be consistent with the Enron
model).

Since Scott Miller and Massey of FERC are on the agenda 9/28-29 , it may
make sense for Enron to make sure that Ed Cazulet of APX and the Cal PX
people on the agenda are promoting the "Enron" model.  Cal PX is coming in
next week.

Steven J Kean@ENRON
08/21/2000 07:33 AM

Sent by:  Steven J Kean@ENRON

To:   Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT, Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT, James D
      Steffes/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject:  EEI Conference Series on RTOs and Markets: Mark Your Calendars

Should we (or ESCA) start looking for opportunities like this now to get
the word out?
---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000
07:30 AM ---------------------------

"Christina Forbes" <CFORBES@eei.org> on 08/18/2000 02:54:52 PM

To:   <Anthony.Duenner@enron.com>, <chris.gaffney@enron.com>,
      <dallegre@enron.com>, <ddorman@enron.com>, <dfossum@enron.com>,
      <eaafedt@enron.com>, <fbay@enron.com>, <fking@enron.com>,
      <jhartso@enron.com>, <JKeller@enron.com>, <jsteffe@enron.com>,
      <julia.murray@enron.com>, <Lhuber@enron.com>, <mary.hain@enron.com>,
      <meyer@enron.com>, <mpavlou@enron.com>, <rfrank@enron.com>,
      <scorman@enron.com>, <scovino@enron.com>, <skean@enron.com>,
      <snovose@enron.com>, <stweed@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  EEI Conference Series on RTOs and Markets: Mark Your Calendars

EEI is pleased to announce a three-conference series addressing RTOs and
electricity market design.

*  RTOs and Market Design:  How to Get Electricity Markets to Work.
September 28 and 29, Hilton Washington Embassy Row.
Current draft agenda attached.  This conference features a star-studded
cast of speakers addressing market design issues from all around the
country,  Keynote by Commissioner William Massey.

*  RTOs:  The October Filings
November 2 and 3, Washington D.C. (hotel information to come).
Team leaders from each of the RTOs under development that must file in
October will present their RTO plans.  EEI will have summaries of all of
the major filings available.   This conference will give everyone a chance
to be on the same page as to what the RTO filings propose and to learn what
is being developed around the country.

*  RTOs:  The January Filings
February 8 and 9, Washington, D.C. (hotel information to come).
Team leaders from each of the approved ISOs that will file in January will
present their RTO plans.  EEI will have summaries of all of the major
filings available.  This conference will complete the initial tour of the
RTO plans, nationwide.

These three conferences will give you the information you need to
understand tomorrow's electric business and a chance to network with
leaders in the  industry.

For further information and conference registration materials, email Judy
Mastin, jmastin@eei.org.

We hope to see you there,

Christina C. Forbes
Director, Federal Commercial and Regulatory Policy
Edison Electric Institute
P 202 508 5104
F 202 508 5445
cforbes@eei.org

(See attached file: RTOMktDesAgenda.doc)

 - RTOMktDesAgenda.doc


-----Original Message-----
From:  Oxley, David
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 3:12 PM
To: Brown, Suzanne
Cc: Corteselli, Gina; Olson, Cindy; Joyce, Mary
Subject: RE: 6/8/01 Version

I talked with Delainey and sent him draft per his request. Wait and see. He
will call for us to go see him Monday to discuss.

Suzanne, this is good stuff.

David

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Brown, Suzanne
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 3:08 PM
To: Oxley, David
Cc: Corteselli, Gina
Subject: 6/8/01 Version

 << File: PRC Trends_Home v3.ppt >>


Jeff,

It has come to my attention that you were concern by some of my comments
recently televised on CH. 2. Let me try to  fill in the blanks. First, the
interview lasted almost 45 minutes of actual camera time. Of course, the
news media took their usually advantage of editing "for their agenda" what
they wanted. The risk you take in any situation like this. During the course
of the interview, I made it quite clear that it would be a mistake to lay
California's current natural gas problems on the doorstep of deregulation.
No one should question I am strongly in favor of gas deregulation in the
state.

On a more direct point, Mr. Vacar was clearly trying to get me to confirm
what he had already been told before my interview that the culprit here was
Enron Online. I disagreed with that conclusion yesterday and this morning.
About 1/2 hour ago, Mr. Vacar phone me to presumably find out what natural
gas prices where doing in the spot market. He quickly brought the
conversation back to Enron Online. I told him that it would be a mistake to
blame these current day prices on Enron Online. While it is convenient for
some to look for a simple singular answer or someone to blame, the answer
isn't Enron Online. He went on to reason that Enron is such a large energy
company they could conceivably "do this". I responded that would also be a
mistake. I acknowledged Enron as a large player but in no way capable of
running up California Gas prices because of some "perceived dominance".

Yesterday, I shared my concern that Mr. Vacar was directing his inquiries
toward Enron with Mr. Fawcett. Obviously , I reserve my right to call them
like I see them independent from anyone of my clients own agendas and will
continue to do so. The source of potential allegations against Enron isn't
me. If I can clarify anything else let me know.

Mark, IGS


The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete.  Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein.  Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author.  As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates.  , 2001 Carr Futures

The charts are now available on the web by clicking on the hot link(s)
contained in this email. If for any reason you are unable to receive the
charts via the web, please contact me via email and I will email the charts
to you as attachments.

Option Candlesticks
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/candlesticks86.pdf

Carr Futures
150 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 1500
Chicago, IL 60606  USA
Tel:  312-368-6149
Fax:  312-368-2281
soblander@carrfut.com
http://www.carrfut.com


Bill - The Houston IR team had big money betting that your appointment would
result in a major NBP price decline (and probably take the value of all other
MLP's down as well)!!.  JUST KIDDING.  Congratulations!.  When you are in
Houston - give me a call - there are a few things that I would suggest to
get  you off on the right foot with the analysts.  It's a neat company , and
I believe there is quite a bit we can do to increase the value of the units.
MEK
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron on 07/19/2000
07:36 PM ---------------------------

Ellen Konsdorf
07/19/2000 07:16 PM
To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Larry DeRoin/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Bill
Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jerry Peters/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Mark
Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janet Place/NPNG/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: NBP unit reaction to DeRoin/Cordes announcement

The market received the announcement of Larry's retirement and Bill's
succession very calmly.   I talked to each of our analysts and elaborated a
bit on the news and answered their questions:
 - Why is Larry leaving?  Was there any "hidden" reason?
 -  What is Bill's background?
 - Does this signal any change in strategy or direction from Enron?
 - Do we anticipate any other change in the business as a result of this
management change?

Several said that "since this seems to not be a big change (in direction or
strategy), I'm not going to write anything on it".

The unit price did not reflect much change.   The units opened Monday (the
day of the news) at $29, blipped up some 3/16  just after the press release,
and then settled back to the opening price.   Tuesday opened strong, trended
up $.50 in heavy volume and then again settled to $29.   Wednesday's price
closed up 1/16, at $29.0625.

Daily volumes were:  Monday 27,400 units
            Tuesday 50,200 units
                 Wednesday 20,800 units

We were hoping to communicate that this would be a fairly seamless transition
and continue NBP's history of solid, fairly conservative management, and it
appears that the market interpretted it exactly that way.


Enron Methanol nominates the following natural gas requirements for the
Methanol Plant for October 2000:

38,000 mmbtu per day

EGPFC nominates the following natural gas requirements for the MTBE Plant at
Morgan's Point for October 2000:

10,000 mmbtu per day


Yahoo! News	Edit Breaking News Alerts - Yahoo!

	Breaking News Alert	 edit
ACCRA, Ghana _ Stampede at packed soccer match leaves at least 100 dead,
hospital officials say.

	 [IMAGE]
	[IMAGE]

If you no longer wish to receive this alert, click here to unsubscribe.
If you have questions, send us feedback.

Copyright , 1994-2001 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Yahoo Privacy Policy


Here is the DRAFT watermark I've used.  I put instructions in the document on
how to copy the draft into another document.

-JD


Can you forward this information along to Kimberly in the Confirms group?
Thanks so much.

Kate
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 03/01/2001 03:03 PM
---------------------------

Kimberly Hundl@ENRON
03/01/2001 02:36 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Need Contact Info...

Hi Kate,
Can you please give me a contact info for Dennis St. Jean, or whoever I'm
supposed to contact, at Tosco Refining Company (Deal #533134)?
Thanks!
Kim


Please note the attached press release from Governor Davis regarding a
new energy efficiency program in which he references a contract with
EES.

http://www.governor.ca.gov/state/govsite/gov_htmlprint.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@11
67524908.0985126123@@@@&BV_EngineID=halkhckdehmbemfcfkmchcgi.0&sFilePath=%2fgo
vsite%2fpress_release%2f2001_03%2f20010320_PR01104_energyefficientbuildings.ht
ml&sTitle=GOVERNOR+DAVIS+ANNOUNCES+STATE+AGREEMENTS+TO+SPUR+ENERGY+EFFICIENT+B
UILDINGS+03%2f20%2f2001&sCatTitle=Press+Release&iOID=14048


The deal has been booked into Tagg.  I have entered the ED - ECC leg, it is VS3986.  I believe Albert will be entering the counterparty leg.

Chad

-----Original Message-----
From: Joslyn, Kate
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 4:16 PM
To: Mckay, Jonathan
Cc: Bruce, Chad; Luc, Albert
Subject: RE: Pricing

Jon
Lindsay Park have closed.  Please book the deal.
Thanks
Kate

-----Original Message-----
From: Mckay, Jonathan
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 7:18 AM
To: Joslyn, Kate
Subject: FW: Pricing

Kate,

Greg asked me to get a price for Lindsay Park first thing in the morning.  Given their load profile we would be offered at 4.39/gj for supply one year out of August.  Please let me know if you need any thing else.

Best Regards,

Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: Frers, Greg
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:16 PM
To: Mckay, Jonathan
Subject: RE: Pricing

Jon,

I'm not going to be in tomorrow and Kate Joslyn is going to close the Lindsay Park deal for me.  Could you Email pricing to her directly instead of to me.  Thanks Jon.

Hey, if you ever need some tickets to go to a game let me know.

Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Mckay, Jonathan
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 2:45 PM
To: Frers, Greg
Subject: RE: Pricing

We would be offered at 4.43 right now, but like all things.... what goes up must come down.   We moved down .16 in the front part of the curve, but the back has not followed as quickly.  I would expect we will have a good hedging opportunity the next couple of days, and then rally after that.

Regards,

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Frers, Greg
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 1:33 PM
To: Mckay, Jonathan
Subject: Pricing

Jon,

Lindsay Park is being a pain in the butt - could you update me on price.  I know we are up today - when do you think prices may get back down to 4.25 range again?

Start Date - August 1

Thanks

Gregory Frers
Enron Direct
Sales Manager
Suite 950, Encor Place
645 - 7th. Avenue SW
Calgary, Alberta
T2P 4G8
Ph. : 403-663-2805
Fax : 403-663-2899
Greg.Frers@enron.com <mailto:Greg.Frers@enron.com>


The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete.  Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein.  Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author.  As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates.  , 2001 Carr Futures

The charts are now available on the web by clicking on the hot link(s)
contained in this email. If for any reason you are unable to receive the
charts via the web, please contact me via email and I will email the charts
to you as attachments.

Crude Spread     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/crudespread44.pdf
Heat Spread     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatspread44.pdf
Unleaded Spread
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/unleadspread44.pdf

Heat Crack     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatcrack44.pdf
Gas Crack     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/gascrack44.pdf

Carr Futures
150 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 1500
Chicago, IL 60606  USA
Tel:  312-368-6149
Fax:  312-368-2281
soblander@carrfut.com
http://www.carrfut.com


When his telephone was stolen, JVD III lost Katherine Frels' Madrid telephone number.  If you have it, he would appreciate your e-mailing it to him.  Thanks!


Please see attached.  Hard copies are being sent to the restricted service list.

Joseph H. Fagan
ATTORNEY
HellerEhrman
tel.:  202.912.2162
fax:  202.912.2020
e-mail:  jfagan@hewm.com
web:  http://www.hewm.com
Address:  1666 K Street, N.W.
               Suite 300
               Washington, D.C. 20006-1228
>
The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited.  If you think that you have received this e-mail message in error,  please e-mail the sender at JFagan@HEWM.COM.

 - Transmittal Letter to Mirant.rtf
 - First Set - Mirant - Start Up .rtf


Hi Hoon
How is your tommy feeling?
I love you


It was a deal with Pacificorp - new trader error. It's been changed.

Thanks,
kate

Rhonda L Denton
02/12/2001 11:15 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Deal # 513066

Can you check this deal.  We don't have transmission with PG&E.


Gentlemen:

Please find attached the draft agreement with Southern Company.  I have
commented on the letter agreement only at this point.

I will work on the rest later today.

Regards.
les


i thought you said you didn't know where it is.


Jeff has both sides of both deals in the system correctly. Here are the deal
numbers.

461029
Williams
115.00

461030
EES
114.95

461801
Mieco
115.00

461802
EES
114.95

And Deal #461139 was actually a Short Term Southwest deal done by Tom Alonso
with Williams for the same price on the same days, but with Prebon.
Confusion!

Hope this fixes it.


Bob, see the quote about $83 /5-yr power

GAC

Article 1   Next Article    Return to Headlines

Moody's:Won't Downgrade Calif Utils To Junk Before Jan 4

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Moody's Investors Service doesn't expect to reduce the
debt ratings of California's two largest utilities below investment grade
status before state regulators meet on a rate hike on Jan. 4.
But the ratings agency said in a press release Friday that it might still cut
the ratings of PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison
International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison next week to a level
short of speculative status, and set strict terms for what it would consider
a favorable ruling by regulators on Jan. 4.

"Moody's will continue to review for possible downgrade the ratings of
Southern California Edison Company and its parent, Edison International, and
the ratings of Pacific Gas and Electric Company and its parent, PG&E
Corporation, and may take additional rating action next week prior to the
January 4th meeting," Moody's said. "However, it is not anticipated at this
point that any rating action taken prior to the January 4th meeting would
result in the ratings of the utilities or their respective parents falling
below investment grade."

Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric have lost a combined $8
billion since May buying wholesale power at prices that far exceed the fixed
rates they're allowed to charge their customers.

Between one-third and one-half of that figure is offset by profits from power
plants the utilities still own, but the net losses are substantial and
mounting. Both utilities have said they soon will become unable to continue
buying power for their customers if the situation persists.

Ratings agency Standard & Poor's warned Wednesday that both utilities face
imminent default and a downgrading of their debt ratings to junk-bond status
unless California officials acted immediately to raise rates and restore the
utilities to liquidity.

On Thursday, the California Public Utilities Commission agreed rate hikes
were needed.

"We believe that retail rates in California must rise," the commission said
in a written statement. "It is our intent to maintain the utilities' access
to capital on reasonable terms."

But the commission deferred a final ruling on rates until Jan. 4, pending
hearings on the matter scheduled for next week.

Standard & Poor's wasn't immediately available to comment on the decision.

Moody's said Friday that the PUC's decision was a "necessary first step" in
restoring the utilities to financial viability. Comments by the PUC and other
officials indicated their desire to maintain the utilities' investment-grade
status, Moody's said.

But Moody's set strict terms for what must come out of the PUC's Jan. 4
meeting if the utilities are to avoid being downgraded to speculative status.

"Specifically, at that meeting, the utilities need to obtain the right to
immediately raise rates by a sizeable amount and must obtain the unquestioned
and unambiguous ability to recover past and future wholesale procurement
costs," Moody's said. "The failure by the CPUC to act in a prompt and
constructive way around these two issues could result in the utilities'
ratings being downgraded to below investment grade."

Such a downgrade would hurt the utilities' ability to fund power purchases
and day-to-day operations, Moody's said.

-By Andrew Dowell, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4430;
andrew.dowell@dowjones.com

Article 2   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

POWER POINTS: Calif Utils Won't Fail; Competition Will
By Mark Golden

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

A Dow Jones Newswires Column <~>
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Fans of the movie "Erin Brockovich" have been tempted
to fantasize about executives from California's two main investor-owned
utilities, PG&E Corp. (PCG) and Edison International (EIX), heading to
bankruptcy court.

Dream on.

True, this week the utilities didn't get either of the two things they need
to escape the astronomically expensive spot market for electricity in
California: a rate increase and long-term contracts with independent
generators at prices they can afford under new rates. With lending sources
virtually dry, both utilities have said they are about to run out of the cash
needed to continue buying electricity in the spot market.

But hearings on a rate increase are scheduled to resume next week followed by
the California Public Utilities Commission vote on Jan. 4, and long-term
contract negotiations are to resume Jan. 3.

Both negotiations are likely to succeed in keeping the companies afloat
because almost all parties would lose with the utilities under Chapter 11
protection and because the price to save the utilities isn't that high. The
rate increase decision was postponed Thursday because California Governor
Gray Davis and his CPUC are trying to give the corporations only what they
need to survive and not a penny more. If Davis succeeds - he is insisting on
an independent audit of the holding companies and all subsidiaries -
shareholders can expect to see their dividends cut.

Sorting out the finances of the $21 billion PG&E, which is the 73rd largest
U.S. company, and $10 billion Edison International must be daunting.

But here are the basics: First, the utilities have to get out of the spot
market. SCE charges residential and small commercial customers 12 cents a
kilowatt-hour, of which 6.6 cents - or $66 a megawatt-hour - goes for
electricity. The rest covers transmission and distribution, some other costs
and the utility's profit.

In the day-ahead and spot market, where SCE has been buying almost half the
power it needs, the utility has been paying about $350/MWh. Rates, obviously,
won't be tripled so that SCE can continue to buy power in the spot market.

But the company can purchase five-year supply contracts at about $78/MWh
currently, which it could do with a mere half-cent increase in rates. Since
the company is already making plenty of money on the coal-fired and nuclear
generators that it owns, a half-cent increase on all the electricity it sells
could be applied to all of its outside purchasing, which comes to an extra
$10 a megawatt-hour.

Edison International is in a more dire immediate cash situation because the
utility is two-thirds of the parent company, but Pacific Gas & Electric faces
a more difficult situation operationally. PG&E gets only 5.4 cents/KWh, or
$54/MWh, from customers for electricity, while wholesale prices in northern
California are more expensive than in southern California. Finally, PG&E has
to buy about two-thirds of the power it needs in the wholesale market,
compared to SCE's 50%, because it sold off more of its power plants, as
dictated by deregulation legislation, more quickly than SCE.

Still, PG&E could pick up five-year supply contracts at about $83/MWh. A
two-cent increase to its basic rate of 10 cents would give PG&E $30 more per
megawatt-hour - or $85/MWh - to spend on power purchases.

But a 20% increase may not be necessary. The governor's staff needs to find
out the details on the substantial long-term deals PG&E had the foresight to
sign back in October. Those deals were done at less than $55/MWh, and they
kick in Jan. 1.

The governor's staff may also look at the unexpectedly high profits from
SCE's and PG&E's nuclear power plants. The utilities have cut costs at the
plants, so instead of making just 6% return on capital, the utilities have
been getting a net gain of 30% on nuclear revenues, according to Bob
Finkelstein of The Utilities Reform Network. If the utilities say
deregulation decisions such as the rate freeze must be reexamined because
they are bankrupting the utilities, then, TURN says, the deregulation
decisions that have resulted in unexpected gains for the utilities should be
looked at, too.

Nevertheless, retail competition in California is dead for another five
years. The utilities get their modest rate increases with the insistence that
they lock up their needed supplies under long-term contracts. The contracts
will be approved by the CPUC, which means the utilities are guaranteed to be
paid for the costs even if wholesale power prices fall below $80/MWh in three
to four years, as expected.

The only way to ensure that the utilities get paid is to add a new
"non-bypassable" transition cost to customer bills for five years, which
means that even if a customer chooses an alternate power supplier, they will
still be sending money back to PG&E and Edison to pay for this year's
debacle.

The current non-bypassable charges, which are scheduled to end in March 2002,
are what has killed retail competition since 1997. Competitors can't offer
much in the way of savings, so almost nobody bothers to switch.

Electricity traders and regulators wonder why the utilities keep buying so
much power at the last minute through the Independent System Operator, which
will pay almost anything to keep the lights on. Right now, the ISO is paying
$700/MWh for power that readily could have been bought Thursday for $400/MWh.

This practice over the past six months has run up Edison's debt to a
projected $2.3 billion at the end of December and PG&E's to $4 billion.
(Edison overstates its real losses by 50%; PG&E, by 33%.)

So, for about $6 billion dollars, the utilities will get a rate increase and
four more years of protection from competition in their $20 billion business.

These guys are good.

Was all this intentional? Go ask Erin Brockovich.

-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com

Article 3   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Industry Watchers Confident About Rate Increase for California Utilities

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Business News

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW YORK -- Some observers now believe that troubled California utilities
Edison International and PG&E Corp. will get some relief at the start of the
new year after state regulators at least opened the door to electricity-rate
increases the two utilities said they need to stay in business.
Many expect the California Public Utility Commission to authorize a rate
increase at a scheduled Jan. 4 meeting. ABN Amro Inc. analyst Daniel Ford was
so optimistic he upgraded Edison shares to "buy" from "hold."

Shares of the two companies, which own the state's largest utilties, hit
52-week lows Thursday. In midday trading Friday on the New York Stock
Exchange, PG&E (PCG), which owns Pacific Gas & Electric, was up $1.06, or 6%,
to $19.31 while Edison International (EIX), parent of Southern California
Edison, was flat at $14.94.

On Thursday, the California PUC tried to reassure jittery credit markets that
they won't let the state's big utilities go broke. Still they stopped short
of ordering the kind of immediate relief utilities and their lenders want:
rate increases big enough to cover exploding wholesale power costs in the
state's deregulated energy market.

Instead, the California PUC ordered audits of utility records and scheduled
hearings for next week, needed to provide a legal basis for eliminating a
rate freeze that has protected most consumers from spiraling wholesale power
costs.

Soaring power costs in supply-short California have produced a political
crisis in the state, which four years ago led the nation in deregulating its
power industry. Wholesale electricity for delivery Sunday and Monday in the
West sold for $200 to $400 a megawatt-hour Thursday, about 10 times its
year-ago level.

Edison Internaitonal's Southern California Edison unit and PG&E's Pacific Gas
and Electric Co. have said they are more than $8 billion in debt due to the
price they must pay for electricity and the inability to pass on the higher
costs to consumers due to a state-mandated freeze. Between one-third and
one-half of that figure is offset by profits from power plants the utilities
still own in the state, but the net losses are substantial and mounting.

Both utilities have said they soon will become unable to continue buying
power for their customers if the situation persists. Earlier this week
ratings agency Standard & Poor's warned that both utilities face imminent
default and a downgrading of their debt ratings to junk-bond status unless
California officials acted immediately to raise rates and restore the
utilities to liquidity.

The utilities' deteriorating credit situation has left some generators
reluctant to supply power to California without guarantees they'll be paid.
The Department of Energy has issued an emergency order requiring power
suppliers in the West to sell uncommitted electricity to California on demand
until Dec. 28.

Consumer groups, which say the utilities are overstating their financial
woes, decried the PUC decision.

According to Mr. Ford, the utility's fate now rests in the hands of the
Standard & Poor's. He expects S&P to downgrade Edison's utility debt by "a
notch or two to keep politicians honest," but stop short of giving the
companies junk bond ratings.

Another ratings concern, Moody's Investors Service, said it doesn't expect to
reduce the debt ratings of the two utilities below investment grade status
before regulators meet on Jan. 4. Moody's said it might cut the ratings next
week to a level short of speculative status, and set strict terms for what it
would consider a favorable ruling by regulators.

Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

All Rights Reserved.

Article 5   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Consumer Grps Oppose Calif PUC Hint Will Raise Util Rates

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

<~> (This article was originally published Thursday) <~>
LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Two consumer advocate groups Thursday objected to a
California Public Utilities Commission order suggesting it will decide Jan. 4
to increase retail electricity rates for customers of the state's two largest
investor-owned utilities.

"We believe that retail rates in California must rise. It is our intent to
maintain the utilities' access to capital on reasonable terms," the order
says.

Spokesman Bob Finkelstein of San Francisco-based The Utility Reform Network
said such statements indicate the PUC is "kowtowing to Wall Street" rather
than protecting ratepayers.

Michael Shames, spokesman for San Diego-bas notion that rate increases are
inevitable, which isn't a position anyone in the consumer movement takes,"
Shames said.

The PUC will hold evidentiary hearings Dec. 27 and Dec. 28 on a rate
stabilization plan by Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California
Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

The utilities have said they are more than $8 billion in debt due to an
inability to pass higes the PUC has something in mind to do, but they need to
claim they had a public process before doing it," Finkelstein said.

The PUC also will look into claims by the two consumer groups that the
utilities aren't as financially strapped as they say. The utilities' debt due
to "undercollections" is counterbalanced by a separate account of proceeds
from the sale of stranded assets, the consumer groups say.

-By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;
jessica.berthold@dowjones.RES1771

Calif Ruling On Pwr Rates Leaves Util Credit In Question

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

(This article was originally published Thursday) <~> By Andrew Dowell <~> Of
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES <~>
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- California regulators opened the door Thursday to the
retail rate hikes the state's two largest utilities say they need to stay in
business.

But they failed to take decisive action needed to settle the question of
whether PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International
(EIX) unit Southern California Edison will be able to sustain the mounting
costs of buying wholesale power for their customers.

Ratings agency Standard & Poor's warned Wednesday that both utilities face
imminent default and a downgrading of their debt ratings to junk-bond status
unless California officials acted immediately to raise rates and restore the
utilities to liquidity.

On Thursday, the California Public Utilities Commission agreed rate hikes
were needed.

"We believe that retail rates in California must rise," the commission said
in a written statement. "It is our intent to maintain the utilities' access
to capital on reasonable terms."

But the commission deferred a final ruling on rates until Jan. 4, pending
hearings on the matter scheduled for next week.

The utilities welcomed the possibility of a rate hike, but expressed concerns
that the commission hadn't acted decisively enough.

"This is a significant change in the commission's approach," said PG&E Corp.
spokesman Shawn Cooper. "The real question is whether the action they are
taking today will inspire confidence in the financial community to allow us
to continue to provide power to our customers. Hopefully, the financial
community will take the commission action seriously enough to wait until Dec.
27 and 28 to make a decision on our credit rating."

Southern California Edison said in a statement that it "wished the commission
had acted more decisively."

Standard & Poor's wasn't available to comment on how the PUC's action might
affect its outlook for the utilities.

Shares in PG&E Corp. and Edison International plunged to 52-week lows
Thursday ahead of the commission's ruling, which was expected.

     Utilities' Power-Market Losses Continue To Mount

Soaring power costs in supply-short California have produced a political
crisis in the state, which four years ago led the nation in deregulating its
electric utility industry. Wholesale electricity for delivery Sunday and
Monday in the West sold for $200-$400 a megawatt-hour Thursday, about 10
times its year-ago level.

The utilities have lost a combined $8 billion since May buying wholesale
power at such prices, which far exceed the fixed rates they're allowed to
charge their customers.

Between one-third and one-half of that figure is offset by profits from power
plants the utilities still own in the state, but the net losses are
substantial and mounting. Both utilities have said they soon will become
unable to continue buying power for their customers if the situation
persists.

Southern California Edison, which said this week it won't be able to pay a
power bill that comes due Jan. 4, said in a statement Thursday that it will
soon adopt a "cash preservation" plan that could involve layoffs and cuts in
operations. Company executives were in talks with bankruptcy attorneys
Thursday to plan their next move, a Southern California Edison executive
said.

The utilities' deteriorating creditworthiness has left some generators
reluctant to supply power to California without guarantees they'll be paid.
The U.S. Department of Energy has issued an emergency order requiring power
suppliers in the West to sell uncommitted electricity to California on demand
until Dec. 28.

Consumer groups, which say the utilities are overstating their financial
woes, decried the PUC decision.

"The most disturbing part is this notion that rate increases are inevitable,"
said Michael Shames, spokesman for San Diego-based Utility Consumers Action
Network.

The utilities were seeking rate increases of up to 30%. State officials were
reluctant to accept anything beyond 10%, an amount analysts said is
insufficient.

The commission said it deferred its decision on the matter to create time for
evidentiary hearings and an independent audit to determine how much of an
increase is needed.

Consumer groups, however, were skeptical.

"It is clearly a sham procedural course that indicates the PUC has something
in mind to do, but they need to claim they had a public process before doing
it," said Bob Finkelstein, spokesman for The Utility Reform Network.

The Cambridge Energy Research Associates said Thursday that California faces
another three years of high electricity prices and possible blackouts,
because the state's piecemeal response to the power crisis has discouraged
the development of new generating capacity.

-By Andrew Dowell, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4430;
andrew.dowell@dowjones.com

(Jason Leopold, Mark Golden and Jessica Berthold contributed to this article.)

Article 7   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

SoCal Gas Inventories Low, But Interruptions Doubtful
By Pat Maio

12/22/2000
Dow Jones News Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES <~> (This story was originally published late
Thursday.) <~>
LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Unlike the almost daily threats of rolling
blackouts from the electricity industry in California, the possibility of
natural gas interruptions is unlikely even though reserves are historically
low, said a company executive of Southern California Gas Co.

SoCal Gas is the gas distribution unit of San Diego-based Sempra Energy
(SRE), and serves 5 million customers.

Reserves of natural gas stored in four underground rock formations scattered
throughout Southern California are at lower levels than what SoCal Gas
normally maintains, said Anne Smith, vice president of customer service and
marketing at SoCal Gas, in a phone interview with Dow Jones Newswires.

SoCal Gas entered its winter season on Nov. 1 with 63 billion cubic feet of
gas in storage, about 30 Bcf less than its previous heating seasons, Smith
said.

The lower reserve levels are due to power plants in California siphoning out
the gas at unprecedented levels, she said.

The plants burn strictly gas, and are trying to meet the intense electrical
demand this winter after the state's certain source of power from hydro
generators in the Pacific Northwest had evaporated.

Lack of rain in the region this year is to blame for the hydro cutbacks,
Smith said.

As well, a cold snap in November, coupled with SoCal Gas's decision to buy
less gas this past summer for reserves, didn't help matters.

Smith isn't worried about the lower levels of gas in the company's storage
areas, which can hold up to 105 Bcf.

The cold weather in November forced SoCal Gas to pull out of storage about 13
Bcf in November, leaving a total of 50 Bcf, Smith said.

The stored gas is purchased as a hedge to protect the company from
fluctuations in natural gas prices -- which this month have soared to as high
as $60 per million British thermal units on the spot market.

For the most part, SoCal Gas imports its gas from out-of-state regions in
Texas and New Mexico via pipelines owned by El Paso Natural Gas Co. (EPG) and
Enron Corp.'s (ENE) Transwestern pipeline.

El Paso and Transwestern are keeping up with demand, and report that their
pipelines are filled to the near the brim.

Over the past few weeks, Smith said it is pushing out through its system of
pipes about 3.45 Bcf to 3.5 Bcf of gas daily, to its customers.

"The way we see demand breakdown the last couple of weeks is generators using
about 1 Bcf a day, our core customers (4.8 million) about 1.5 Bcf and our
non-core" about 1 Bcf, she said. The non-core customers -- which number about
1,500 in total -- are industrial manufacturers who consume more than 250,000
therms of gas annually, Smith said.

In comparison, a home averages about 600 therms.

Smith's eyebrows have been raised by the rapid consumption of natural gas by
power plants, which use the commodity to run turbines for electrical
generation.

Historically electric power plants have consumed about 300 million to 400
million cubic feet a day of gas in SoCal Gas' service territory, she said.

"This is why we are seeing pipelines fuller than usual. There is continuing
demand by the electric generators," she said. "This is basically an increase
in demand for gas that has contributed to the national picture of why prices
(for gas) have gone up this year. Demand has outpaced production capacity,"
Smith explained.

A growing economy starved for electricity to run its Internet systems or
manufacturing businesses, have contributed to the reasons why gas prices have
soared this month, she said.

Power plant owners have passed along these higher gas costs to the utilities
where they sell their electricity.

This is partially why PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Edison
International's (EIX) Southern California Edison face financial insolvency
today.

They are having to borrow billions of dollars to pay for this higher-priced
electricity as part of the state's complex deregulation plan.

The power plants are owned by out-of-state companies like AES Corp. (AES),
Calpine Corp. (CPN) and Duke Energy Corp. (DUK).

The threat of rolling blackouts has several causes.

Some power plants run around the clock -- gobbling up the natural gas at a
rapid pace. But others have temporarily been shut down because environmental
laws prohibit them from emitting certain levels of pollutants annually.

SoCal Gas has managed to keep its gas costs relatively low by buying gas for
its core customers on long-term contracts at fixed prices.

This helps to insulate the company from price spikes on gas delivered to its
system at the California and Arizona and Nevada borders.

By buying gas this way, SoCal Gas was able to set a fixed charge of $6.53 per
MMBTU for its 4.8 million core customers in the month of December. A new
price is set to be established next week for January.

"We hope it holds steady in January," said Smith. "We are doing everything we
can."

-By Pat Maio, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3776;

patrick.maio@dowjones.com

Article 8   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

S&P:Diverse Holdings Insulate Generators From Calif Risk

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

(This article was originally published Thursday) <~>
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Independent generators selling power into California
face "extremely serious counterparty credit concerns," but the threat to
their financial positions from a default by one of the state's utilities is
mitigated by their positions in other power markets, Standard & Poor's said
Thursday.

The ratings agency affirmed its double-B-plus corporate credit and senior
unsecured debt ratings for one of those generators, Calpine Corp. (CPN), and
indicated that the positions of a number of other generators were similarly
stable.

Standard & Poor's, without commenting on ratings, said those generators
include Dynegy Inc. (DYN), The Williams Cos. (WMB), Reliant Energy Inc.
(REI), Southern Energy Inc. (SOE) and NRG Energy Inc. (NRG).

"Each company has a diverse asset portfolio that mitigates exposure to any
single market, such as California," S&P said. "Standard & Poor's has
concluded that the developers with merchant exposure to the California market
have sufficient financial liquidity to sustain long-term disruptions to their
markets."

S&P also said the generators have generally incorporated conservative pricing
assumptions well below California's current market prices.

The generators' main counterparties in California - PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit
Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International (EIX) unit Southern
California Edison - have lost a combined $8 billion buying wholesale power at
prices far higher than they are allowed to charge their customers.

Between one-third and one-half of those losses are offset by the utilities'
own profits from generating power in the state, but they are still
substantial and mounting. Both utilities have said they face a serious
liquidity crisis.

S&P said Thursday that both companies face imminent default unless California
officials immediately come up with a way to correct the imbalance between
their buying and selling price for power, and said it would likely downgrade
the utilities' debt ratings to junk-bond status even if they avoid
bankruptcy.

The California Public Utilities Commission met Thursday and opened the door
to rate hikes, but deferred a final decision to its Jan. 4 meeting.

S&P wasn't available to comment on its outlook for PG&E and SCE or the
generators following the PUC's decision.

About 1,284 net megawatts of Calpine's total 4,900 net megawatts of
generation is exposed to California counterparty risk, S&P said. Nonetheless,
only about $400 million of Calpine's approximate $2 billion revenues for 2000
have seen exposure to California's energy markets, the ratings agency said.
Calpine's receivables total only about $75 million, S&P said.

"The affirmation comes during a period of extremely serious counterparty
credit concerns for generators selling into the California power markets,"
S&P said of its decision regarding Calpine.

-By Andrew Dowell, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4430;
andrew.dowell@dowjones.com

Article 9   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Chapter 11 Filing May Give Calif Utils Breathing Room

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

12/22/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service

(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

(This article was originally published Thursday) <~>
By Jason Leopold

LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--If two of California's largest utilities file for
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, a move they said this week was possible, it
may give the companies some breathing room to allow for a much needed
internal reorganization, according to one California bankruptcy attorney.

"What Chapter 11 ultimately does is it allows a company to reorganize," said
Larry Peitzman, an attorney with the Southern California-based law firm of
Peitzman, Glassman and Whegg. "The whole purpose is to come up with a plan to
allow the company to service and pay back creditors and shareholders as much
as possible."

While in bankruptcy, a judge can order the state to raise the utilities
retail electricity rates if that would help the company generate revenue to
pay its creditors, Peitzman said.

Peitzman, who has worked on many large company bankruptcy cases in
California, said if PG&E Corp. unit (PCG) Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and
Edison International unit (EIX) Southern California Edison file for
bankruptcy, the companies will be given an injunction by a court that will
prevent creditors from seizing the utilities assets, collecting money or
filing a lawsuit against the companies.

"Another reason to file for bankruptcy protection is the companies wouldn't
be forced to pay pre-bankruptcy debts if they have run up enormous bills,"
Peitzman said.

Executives at both PG&E and SoCal Edison said they may be forced to file for
bankruptcy protection because of a combined $8 billion debt in excess
wholesale power costs and the inability under state law to pass those costs
on to rate payers. However, between one-half and one-third of that money has
been paid into accounts held by the utilities to collect profits from the
generators they still own.

The utilities were hoping for an immediate rate hike Thursday by the state's
Public Utilities Commission, but commissioners said it would first hold
evidentiary hearings and conduct an internal audit of the companies. A rate
increase is still at least two weeks off, the commission said at its meeting.

   Utilities Can Conduct Business While In Bankruptcy

Peitzman said that while in bankruptcy, the companies could operate as a
"debtor in possession," which means the companies have the authority to
conduct business as usual without the consent of bankruptcy court. But if the
companies were to try and secure a loan, the loan would have to be approved
by a judge.

Although most Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases "can't survive," Peitzman said, the
state's two largest utilities - with millions of customers - may be an
exception.

"Inevitably they are going to continue to owe money because of the constant
shortfall they pay in (electricity costs) and what they charge their
customers," the attorney said. "But the bigger the company, the more likely
the company will survive. It will be devastating to lose such large
corporations."

If the companies fail to survive a Chapter 11 filing, the utilities' assets
would be liquidated to pay off their creditors, Peitzman said.

In a Chapter 11 filing, PG&E and SoCal Edison would put their creditors in
different classes and determine how much under the dollar each one would get
paid, Peitzman said.

"It can be as much as possible or less than 100 cents on the dollar," he
said.

In addition, any contracts that either companies held before a potential
bankruptcy filing would have to be honored regardless if the company can
fulfill its financial obligations to its counterpart, Peitzman said.

"That's one of the other benefits," he said. "It's called executory
contracts, which generally means both parties have material operations that
have yet to be performed. It may be long-term contracts and the company would
be able to enforce the other part to continue doing business. The other party
can't refuse to do business because of a stay."

Bankruptcy can last as long as a judge allows it, Peitzman said, pointing to
the Eastern Airlines bankruptcy case in the early 1980s which lasted for
years.

Neither company has indicated whether it will actually file for bankruptcy,
but SoCal Edison said in a filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission Tuesday that it may not be able to pay its January power bill if
its retail rates are not immediately raised.

-By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;
jason.leopold@dowjones.com

Article 10   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

National Desk; Section A
Trying to Shore Up Utilities, California Plans Rate Increase
By LAURA M. HOLSON

12/22/2000
The New York Times

Page Page 16, Column 1
c. 2000 New York Times Company

LOS ANGELES, Dec. 21 -- The California Public Utilities Commission said today
that a rate increase for consumers was likely and that over the next weeks it
would inspect the books of the two major utilities to decide how much was
reasonable.
The move is an effort in part to show Wall Street that California is
committed to ensuring the health of the state's utilities.

On Wednesday, the agency that rates the credit-worthiness of both the Pacific
Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison said that if
meaningful action was not taken by Friday, the two utilities were headed for
bankruptcy. The agency is expected to comment on the commission's action
soon.

Gov. Gray Davis has been meeting this week with utility executives and
consumer advocates to come to an agreement on the size of a rate increase.
Mr. Davis, a Democrat, is also seeking the advice of financial experts,
including Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, whom he is
expected to meet with next week.

Some people close to those discussions suggested that 10 percent would be a
palatable rate increase, but the utilities are asking for more. The
commission will hold hearings next week, and just how much consumers will
have to pay should be decided by Jan. 4.

Four years ago, California agreed to deregulate its utilities with the hope
that competition would lower rates for households and businesses. But this
year, prices for wholesale electricity and natural gas have skyrocketed,
forcing utilities to incur costs of more than $8 billion that they cannot
pass to consumers because rates are frozen until 2002.

In recent weeks, the utilities have tried to make a case that, without rate
increases, service to consumers is threatened. John Bryson, chief executive
of Edison International, the parent company of Southern California Edison,
has taken the unusual step of warning consumers in television and newspaper
advertisements in Southern California and in Sacramento that blackouts are
inevitable unless order is imposed.

In response to the announcement by the commission today, Southern California
Edison said it expected additional cost cutting and measures to preserve cash
soon.

But not all the commissioners believed that today's announcement would be
enough to placate financial analysts and investors, many of whom buy utility
stocks because they are perceived to be less risky than, for example,
Internet stocks. Analysts have recently downgraded the stocks of both Pacific
Gas and Electric and California Edison, which are trading near 52-week lows,
over fears about California's energy woes.

''When I look at the newspapers and peruse the Internet I get the decided
impression that Wall Street has spoken,'' said Richard Bilas, a commissioner.
''I don't know if this decision goes far enough.''

Article 11   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Fitch Comments On California Electric Utilities

12/22/2000
Business Wire

(Copyright (c) 2000, Business Wire)

CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 22, 2000--Fitch views the California Public
Utilities Commission's (CPUC) interim decision to initiate proceedings to
consider raising retail rates as just one of the steps necessary to salvage
credit quality for the state's two largest utilities, Southern California
Edison (SCE) and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Pac Gas). The CPUC is
expected to reach a decision on rate increases and recovery mechanisms during
the first week of January, at which time Fitch will assess the appropriate
ratings for these companies. The outstanding issue is whether rate increases
will sufficiently offset high wholesale power prices being paid by the
companies.
The companies' securities ratings are likely to weaken, unless 1) full
recovery is provided for the large monies paid by the utilities above
existing retail rates and 2) price stability is ensured for the regional
market. The utilities are unable to tap new credit until the rate decision is
executed. They do have, however, sufficient cash and existing credit to
support them through the decision period of the first week in January. If a
suitable rate structure is passed by the CPUC at that time, the utilities'
banks would be more likely to consider additional funding.

Liquidity will remain strained, however, to the extent that regional power
prices remain high. While Energy Secretary Richardson has ordered certain
power producers to sell into the California market, wholesale prices remain
high and are above retail rates. No additional federal action has been taken.

The CPUC's decision in early January is not expected to completely resolve
the utilities' future. Given the large costs incurred and numerous
constituent groups affected, Fitch envisions a longer-term scenario of
consecutive rate increases associated with a fundamental overhaul of
California's power market. In conjunction with the governor's active
involvement, the California legislature is evaluating potential actions to
restructure the state's power situation. Legislative action remains possible
over the next three months, and could impact debt ratings.

The Rating Watch Negative designation remains in place for Pac Gas, SCE and
its parent, Edison International. The current ratings are:

Southern California Edison:

-- First Mortgage Bonds,`A';

-- Senior Unsecured Debt,`A-`;

-- Preferred Stock,`BBB+';

-- Commercial Paper,`F2'.

Edison International:

-- Senior Unsecured Debt,`A-`;

-- Preferred Stock,`BBB+';

-- Commercial Paper,`F2'.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company:

-- First Mortgage Bonds,`A-`;

-- Preferred Stock,`BBB+'.

EIX's ratings are also on Rating Watch Negative as approximately half of its
consolidated cash flow is provided by SCE. Fitch does not rate the securities
of Pac Gas' parent holding company, PG&E.

The ratings of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) are not pressured to
the extent of the utilities described above. Unlike the other utilities,
SDG&E is operating under a legislatively-imposed rate ceiling for residential
and small commercial loads. Its legislation also permits a balancing account
to accumulate uncollected power procurement costs. Less liquidity pressure
also exists at SDG&E due to its strong financial fundamentals (senior
unsecured debt rated 'AA-'). Fitch has a Rating Outlook Negative designation
on SDG&E's ratings due to potential increases in leverage while power
procurement costs are high. Sempra's ratings (senior unsecured debt rated
'A') have a stable outlook due to the strong and consistent cash flow derived
from its regulated natural gas distribution subsidiary, Southern California
Gas.

Based in Rosemead, California, SCE is a wholly owned subsidiary of Edison
International. Pacific Gas and Electric Company is headquartered in San
Francisco, California. SDG&E and its parent, Sempra Energy (SRE), are based
in San Diego, California.

CONTACT: Fitch Lori R. Woodland, 312/606-2309 (Chicago) Robert Hornick,
212/908-0523 (New York)
14:31 EST DECEMBER 22, 2000

Article 12   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

SCE Reacts to CPUC Interim Decision

12/21/2000
PR Newswire

(Copyright (c) 2000, PR Newswire)

ROSEMEAD, Calif., Dec. 21 /PRNewswire/ -- Southern California Edison reacted
to today's California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) interim decision
by stating that it wished the commission had acted more decisively but would
work with the commission to take definitive action to address the current
crisis by Jan. 4, 2001.
The company said it was encouraged by the language in the CPUC's interim
decision that committed the commission to: <~> " ... take expedited actions
to fulfill our statutory obligations to <~> ensure that the utilities can
provide service at just and reasonable <~> rates. In our view, that mandate
means that we must avoid continuing <~> conditions that may jeopardize the
utilities' creditworthiness and their <~> ability to continue to procure
energy on behalf of customers. Therefore, <~> we believe that retail rates in
California must begin to rise. It is our <~> intent to maintain the
utilities' access to capital on reasonable terms. <~> We recognize that this
will require that we act expeditiously to address <~> the new FERC-imposed
reality of unlimited wholesale prices."

Nevertheless, SCE underscored that any solution to the current crisis
requires prompt, meaningful and final action by the commission ending the
rate freeze, providing for the recovery of procurement costs, and increasing
rates to a level that will restore the creditworthiness of California's
investor- owned utilities.

SCE added that it anticipated announcing additional cost-reduction and
cash-preservation measures in the near term that would be necessary to
protect the company's financial integrity while maintaining customer service.

An Edison International company, Southern California Edison is one of the
nation's largest electric utilities, serving a population of more than 11
million via 4.3 million customer accounts in a 50,000-square-mile service
area within central, coastal and Southern California.

/CONTACT: Southern California Edison, Corporate Communications, 626-302-2255/
19:24 EST

Article 13   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Ambac Financial Group has Insured Exposure to Southern California Edison and
Pacific Gas & Electric

12/21/2000
Business Wire

(Copyright (c) 2000, Business Wire)

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 21, 2000--Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (Ambac)
announced today that it has $75.1 million in insured net par exposure
outstanding to Southern California Edison.
The bonds are secured by a first mortgage or lien on substantially all of the
property and franchises now owned by Southern California Edison. Ambac has
$72.6 million in insured net par exposure outstanding to Pacific Gas &
Electric. These bonds are also secured by a first mortgage lien. Both
Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric have been warned by
Standard & Poor's that their ratings might drop below investment grade.

"The secured nature of our exposure, coupled with the essentiality of the
services the companies provide, cause us to be confident that the likelihood
of any permanent material loss is remote," said Robert J. Genader, Vice
Chairman. "On the other side of the coin, this difficult situation serves as
a strong reminder as to the value of bond insurance," he continued.

Ambac Financial Group, Inc., headquartered in New York City, is a holding
company whose affiliates provide financial guarantees and financial services
to clients in both the public and private sectors around the world. Ambac
Assurance Corporation is the principal operating subsidiary of Ambac
Financial Group, Inc. Ambac Assurance, a leading guarantor of municipal and
structured finance obligations, has earned triple-A ratings, the highest
ratings available from Moody's Investors Service, Inc., Standard & Poor's
Ratings Group, Fitch and Rating and Investment Information, Inc. Ambac
Financial Group, Inc. common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange
(ticker symbol ABK).

CONTACT: Ambac Financial Group, Inc., New York Brian S. Moore, 212/208-3333
bmoore@ambac.com Website:www.ambac.com
16:37 EST DECEMBER 21, 2000

Article 14   Next Article  Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Ambac Financial Group, Inc. Corrects and Replaces Previous Announcement,
BW2354, NY-AMBAC-FINANCIAL

12/21/2000
Business Wire

(Copyright (c) 2000, Business Wire)

Business Editors
NOTE: The following news release replaces and corrects the

previous Ambac Financial Group, Inc. news release, which

ran earlier Thursday on Business Wire, BW2354

(NY-AMBAC-FINANCIAL)

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 21, 2000--

Ambac Financial Group has Insured Exposure to Southern

California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric

Ambac Financial Group, Inc. (Ambac) announced today that it has $75.1 million
in insured net par exposure outstanding to Southern California Edison.

The bonds are secured by a first mortgage or lien on substantially all of the
property and franchises now owned by Southern California Edison. Ambac has
$72.6 million in insured net par exposure outstanding to Pacific Gas &
Electric. These bonds are also secured by a first mortgage lien. Both
Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric have been warned by
Standard & Poor's that their ratings might drop below investment grade.

"The secured nature of our exposure, coupled with the essentiality of the
services the companies provide, cause us to be confident that the likelihood
of any permanent material loss is remote," said Robert J. Genader, Vice
Chairman. "On the other side of the coin, this difficult situation serves as
a strong reminder as to the value of bond insurance," he continued.

Ambac Financial Group, Inc., headquartered in New York City, is a holding
company whose affiliates provide financial guarantees and financial services
to clients in both the public and private sectors around the world. Ambac
Assurance Corporation is the principal operating subsidiary of Ambac
Financial Group, Inc. Ambac Assurance, a leading guarantor of municipal and
structured finance obligations, has earned triple-A ratings, the highest
ratings available from Moody's Investors Service, Inc., Standard & Poor's
Ratings Group, Fitch and Rating and Investment Information, Inc. Ambac
Financial Group, Inc. common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange
(ticker symbol ABK).

CONTACT: Ambac Financial Group, Inc., New York Brian S. Moore, 212/208-3333
bmoore@ambac.com Website:www.ambac.com
16:36 EST DECEMBER 21, 2000

Article 18   Previous Article   Return to Headlines

Calif. puts IOUs' request for rate hikes on hold

12/11/2000
Megawatt Daily

(c) Copyright 2000 Pasha Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and Southern California Edison (SoCalEd) were
disappointed Thursday in their bid to gain permission for a rate increase to
go into effect Jan. 1.
State regulators denied the utilities' request that they take immediate
action to approve the rate increases, saying that the requests are
"premature."

While regulators did not outright reject the utilities petitions, they
declined to implement the remedies requested until the cases can be reviewed
further at a later date.

The president of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), Loretta Lynch, issued
two rulings at the commission's meeting Thursday "suspend[ing] the schedule
in the Rate Stabilization Plan applications recently filed by [PG&E and
SoCalEd]."

Both utilities filed papers separately with the PUC stating that they had
fulfilled the criteria set for ending a rate freeze imposed on them under
California's electric industry restructuring statute. The law allowed for a
transition period, during which the utilities were to pay off any "stranded
costs" related to investments in generation assets.

By keeping prices frozen at 1993 levels, legislators and utility
representatives who expected wholesale power prices would fall, thought the
measure would give the companies a chance to pay off those costs by a March
31, 2002, deadline. Instead, prices shot up and the utilities were left with
the responsibility to supply power to their customers while paying the
difference between high wholesale prices and lower retail rates.

Claiming "undercollections" totaling over $5 billion between them, the
utilities say they want the price freeze lifted and retail rates increased.
Last month, SoCalEd asked for permission for a 10% increase and PG&E for a
22% increase in its rates. ADP

 Display as:  Full Article Keywords in Context Full Article Plus Indexing
Return to Headlines

Copyright , 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved.


Do you have further information about your pending trip to Canada?  I am
reviewing the final letter prepared by Kevin Zemp and he is trying to
coordinate with Calgary authorities.  I may be out of town during the week of
Aug. 16 and I want your trip to run smoothly.  Give me a call sometime.
Thanks.  Sara


Hi Pete,

We want the GE form to be on an individual turbine basis.  As for work
priorities, I would put it in front of the City of Austin agreement.

Thanks,

Kay


I think now we should all just log off email and turn off our phones, and let
Fed Ex, the fax machine and Citibank do the rest.

ckm

"Lang, Gregory F." <gregorylang@paulhastings.com> on 05/01/2001 12:57:04 PM
To: "'PARKER, Isabel'" <isabel.parker@freshfields.com>,
"'Kay.Mann@enron.com'" <Kay.Mann@enron.com>, "Lang, Gregory F."
<gregorylang@paulhastings.com>
cc: ccampbell@kslaw.com

Subject: RE: GE Legal Opinion

I agree with Isabel on this point.

-----Original Message-----
From: PARKER, Isabel [mailto:isabel.parker@freshfields.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 1:40 PM
To: 'Kay.Mann@enron.com'; gregorylang@paulhastings.com
Cc: ccampbell@kslaw.com
Subject: RE: GE 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.

I am indifferent so long as whoever signs is authorized and we have an
incumbency certificate covering them.
Thanks
Isabel

-----Original Message-----
From: Kay.Mann@enron.com [mailto:Kay.Mann@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 12:27 PM
To: PARKER, Isabel; gregorylang@paulhastings.com
Cc: ccampbell@kslaw.com
Subject: RE: GE Legal Opinion

Isabel and Greg,

I'm having a logistical problem.  The only managing director of Salmon is
not in the office today.  I can have the membership certificates signed by
(1) a vice president or (1)  the managing member or (3) elect a new
managing director.  What's your preference?

Kay

"paulhastings.com" made the following annotations on 05/01/01 13:57:11
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW E-MAIL ADDRESSES AT PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP

We have changed our e-mail address.  Our new domain name is
paulhastings.com.  In most cases, our address is composed of conventional
first name and last name plus @paulhastings.com.  Here are two examples:
janesmith@paulhastings.com and danjones@paulhastings.com.  If you have any
questions, please contact us at noc@paulhastings.com.

==============================================================================
"The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all
computers."

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


According to Dan Wilson at Cornbelt there is a peak alert at Hubbard today and tomorow.


Joe,

Sally is out of the office, but wanted me to forward the message that she had
reviewed the draft that you put together regarding power trading and she
doesn't have any comments.

Patti
x-39106


either day ok with me.

	Esmeralda Gonzalez/ENRON@enronXgate
	05/21/2001 11:04 AM

		 To: Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marie
Heard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Lunch @ Dong Ting

Good morning ladies:

Mary asked that I coordinate a lunch with you next week and after looking at
her calendar, she is available either Thursday, May 31, 2001 or Friday, June
1, 2001.  Please let me know your availability so that I can make
reservations at Dong Ting for 12:00 p.m.

Thanks.

Esmeralda Gonzalez
Enron North America Corp.
Legal Department
1400 Smith Street, EB3815
Houston, Texas 77002
e-mail: esmeralda.gonzalez@enron.com
Phone: 713-345-7621
Fax: 713-646-3393


Daren,

The intercompany/interdesk reflects an error for the above referenced day.  A transport usage ticket was put into the system for 3,000 Dth (Duke Carthage to Texoma), however, we do not have any supply on EPGT from Duke for this deal.  The package was confirmed, according to POPS, so, we are probably missing the supply deal.  Please check on the day/price (it is the 3,000 on k# ta99027 on EPGT).  I am trying to take care of some of these current month issues on the "clean reports".

Mike,

Would you please make sure that this contract was nominated on EPGT for 5/10/01.

Thank you both for your assistance (everyone else is FYI),

Mary


---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Hernandez/HOU/ECT on 01/28/2000
03:34 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Community Relations @ ENRON                           01/27/2000 05:54
PM

To: All Enron Houston
cc:
Subject: Enron Field/Houston Astros Tickets Announcement

As many of you know, the opening of Enron Field is quickly approaching.
Enron Field, the new 42,000 seat retractable roof ballpark, will make its
debut when the Astros play host to the World Champion New York Yankees on
March 30th and 31st.  The defending American League West Champion Texas
Rangers travel to Houston on April 1st.  The Astros open the 2000
Championship Season on the road before playing host to the Philadelphia
Phillies in the season opener on April 7th.

There have been numerous inquiries about how to secure tickets for Astros
games at Enron Field.  A limited number of tickets have been allocated for
Enron for these inaugural games.  However, we anticipate that the demand for
tickets by employees will exceed this allocation.  In an effort to keep all
of you informed, Astros tickets will be going on sale for the entire season
to the general public for single-game tickets beginning this Saturday,
January 29th at 9:00 a.m.

 We recommend you secure personal tickets for the games of your choice
through the traditional Astros ticket outlets listed below.  Enron will sell
a significant portion of its allotted tickets to employees in late February;
however, please remember that our supply of tickets is limited and will sell
out quickly.

 March 30 vs. New York Yankees (Inaugural exhibition game)
 March 31 vs. New York Yankees
 April 1 vs. Texas Rangers
 April 7 vs. Philadelphia Phillies (Opening Day)

ADVANCED TICKET PURCHASES:
Tickets for all 84 home games, including three exhibition games, will be
available at the Astrodome Box Office and the usual Ticketmaster outlets,
including Houston-area Foley's, Fiesta and Kroger stores.  Those who wish to
order by phone may do so by calling (713) 6-ASTROS.  Tickets are also
accessible on-line at  www.astros.com and www.ticketmaster.com.

A detailed follow up e-mail will be sent to provide more information on when
and where the Enron tickets will be sold.  In addition, Astros tickets will
be available to Enron employees throughout the season, and we will notify you
of these opportunities.


Molly,

We have a reasonably big room. 2-5 people is OK. It's EB1938.
Vince

Molly Carnes@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
09/28/2000 03:10 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Mathworks

I've got in on the calendar for the 18th at 2:00.  What's the location?  How
many can we bring?  2 or 3?

Thanks.

Molly Carnes
for
Louis Casari
Vice President, Mid Office Operations
Enron Broadband Services
713-853-4302, Room EB4492
lou_casari@enron.net

	Vince J Kaminski@ECT
	09/28/00 10:39 AM

		 To: Lou Casari/Enron Communications@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS@ENRON
		 cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lou
Casari/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
		 Subject: Re: Mathworks

Molly,

I met Lou in the building lobby last Wednesday and he suggested that he
(or his representatives) join the Mathworks presentation to my group).

It's a good software package for mathematical modeling,
 but there is a limit to the number of different installations any group
can productively use.

I shall take a look at some new features they offer
and decide whether it's worth the effort.

Vince Kaminski

Lou Casari@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
09/20/2000 02:10 PM
Sent by: Molly Carnes@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Mathworks

Do you know this person or this company?  They are want to set an appointment
with EBS and I believe, are wanting to meet with you, also.  Any feedback?
Thanks.

Molly Carnes for Lou Casari
Enron Broadband Services
713-853-1467, Room EB4486A
molly_carnes@enron.net
----- Forwarded by Molly Carnes/Enron Communications on 09/20/00 02:09 PM
-----

	scottw@mathworks.com
	09/20/00 08:46 AM

		 To: Lou Casari/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc:
		 Subject: We'll be in Houston

Hello Mr. Casari:

Myself and our Energy Trading Financial Team will be visiting with the R&D
group at Enron the week of 10/16/00.  They have several applications can be
dramatically improved with our tools.

We are very interested to understand the Bandwidth Trading Market, to see
if any additional challanges can be overcome with our tools.

I would like to understand your challanges of modeling, simulating and
deploying applications to control risk.

Are you available to discuss these items prior to our visit?

I look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks
Scott Wakefield


The attachment provides details for a total wellhead nomination for June 2001 of 734,436 Mmbtu/d.  George


Dear phillip,

This e-mail is automated notification of the availability of your
current Natural Gas Intelligence Newsletter(s). Please use your
username of "pallen" and your password to access

       NGI's Daily Gas Price Index

  http://intelligencepress.com/subscribers/index.html

If you have forgotten your password please visit
  http://intelligencepress.com/password.html
and we will send it to you.

If you would like to stop receiving e-mail notifications when your
publications are available, please reply to this message with
REMOVE E-MAIL in the subject line.

Thank you for your subscription.

For information about Intelligence Press products and services,
visit our web site at http://intelligencepress.com or
call toll-free (800) 427-5747.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. (c) 2000, Intelligence Press, Inc.
---


Ashley,

I agree with you. Two trips are the best solution, unless of course Shmuel
rearranges
the speaker list and the 16th will work for the presentation as well.

Coordinating so many different events is never easy. Thanks for your
patience.

Vince

	Enron Technology

	From:  Ashley Baxter @ ENRON                           08/30/2000 08:24 AM

To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron

Vince,

Actually, the General Presentation that I have scheduled for the Faculty Club
(a dining/meeting room) on campus is set for 7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. on Monday
the 16th.    I can attempt to change the presentation date again, however I
feel that it would be very unlikely that we are able to get another facility
that is near campus.  At this point it may be better to plan on making two
seperate trips so that we are able to handle both events.  Maybe we could
combine another presentation in during the same visit.  What do you think?

Ashley

Vince J Kaminski@ECT
08/30/2000 08:03 AM
To: "Shmuel Oren" <OREN@IEOR.Berkeley.edu> @ ENRON
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley
Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron

Shmuel,

Let's see if we can either rearrange the seminar speakers
or change the date of our visit to the campus. Ashley Baxter, our coordinator
is very efficient and
got a faculty room for a presentation on Monday morning on the 16th.

Vince

"Shmuel Oren" <OREN@IEOR.Berkeley.edu> on 08/29/2000 05:37:33 PM
To: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron

Dear Vince. I spoke too soon. Apparently the seminar slot on the 16 was
already filled. I will see if I can switch the speaker for that week to the
following week. In any case we are on for dinner on the 16.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Shmuel S. Oren, Professor
Dept. of Industrial Engineering
        and Operations Research
4117 Etcheverry Hall
University of California
Berkeley, CA 94720-1777
e-mail: oren@ieor.berkeley.edu
phone: (510) 642-1836 or 5484
Fax:      (510) 642-1403
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

----- Original Message -----
From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
To: <OREN@queue.IEOR.Berkeley.EDU>
Cc: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>; <Ashley.Baxter@enron.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron

>
> Shmuel,
>
> The date of our trip to Berkeley has been set. It will be October 16th and
> 17th
> (Monday and Tuesday).
>
> I shall be glad to make a presentation on energy derivatives markets
> (development of the markets in the US and Europe, valuation difficulties,
> Enron's role
> in developing the forward markets for natural gas and electricity).
>
> Please, let me know if this topic would be of interest to you. If this is
> the
> case, I shall follow with a title and an abstract.
>
> By the way, are you free for dinner on Monday?
>
> Vince
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Shmuel Oren" <OREN@IEOR.Berkeley.edu> on 08/24/2000 08:59:38 AM
>
> To:   "Vince J Kaminski" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
> cc:
> Subject:  Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron
>
>
> Great. Our seminars are 3:30 to 5PM. If it works for you please send me a
> title and abstract.
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> Shmuel S. Oren, Professor
> Dept. of Industrial Engineering
>         and Operations Research
> 4117 Etcheverry Hall
> University of California
> Berkeley, CA 94720-1777
> e-mail: oren@ieor.berkeley.edu
> phone: (510) 642-1836 or 5484
> Fax:      (510) 642-1403
> ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vince J Kaminski" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
> To: "Shmuel Oren" <OREN@queue.IEOR.Berkeley.EDU>
> Cc: "Vince J Kaminski" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>; "Ashley Baxter"
> <Ashley.Baxter@enron.com>
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 9:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron
>
>
> >
> >
> > Shmuel,
> >
> > Thanks for the message. I am working with our recruiter, Ashley Baxter,
> > to finalize the date of the trip. I shall shoot for October the 23rd
> > if this date works for the rest of our team.
> >
> > Vince
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Shmuel Oren" <OREN@IEOR.Berkeley.edu> on 08/23/2000 11:46:19 AM
> >
> > To:   Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
> > cc:
> > Subject:  Re: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Vince.
> > I sent you a reply earlier this month but I haven't heard from you about
> the
> > date of your visit. Our department has a Seminar every Monday. If you
can
> > schedule your visit on a Monday I would like to invite you to give a
> seminar
> > which will be attended by many of our graduate students and faculty and
> will
> > give you an opportunity to tell them about your program. With sufficient
> > lead-time I can advertise the seminar in the Hass school to their
> financial
> > engineering students.
> > Shmuel.
> > /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > Shmuel S. Oren, Professor
> > Dept. of Industrial Engineering
> >         and Operations Research
> > 4117 Etcheverry Hall
> > University of California
> > Berkeley, CA 94720-1777
> > e-mail: oren@ieor.berkeley.edu
> > phone: (510) 642-1836 or 5484
> > Fax:      (510) 642-1403
> > ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <vkamins@ect.enron.com>
> > To: <OREN@queue.IEOR.Berkeley.EDU>; <vkamins@enron.com>;
> > <ashley.baxter@enron.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 10:59 AM
> > Subject: Hello from Vince Kaminski at Enron
> >
> >
> > > Shmuel,
> > >
> > > I hope you remember me. I visited you together with Aram Sogomonian, a
> > > good friend of mine, a few years ago. I am currently responsible,
among
> > > other things, for recruiting graduates with finance and/or technical
> > > backgrounds at the University of Berkeley. I would be glad to give you
> a
> > > call and talk more about the details of our program. My colleague,
> > > AshleyBaxter, from the Analyst/Associate Program at Enron would join
me
> > > as well.
> > >
> > > I am sending you a copy of the brochure about the Analyst / Associate
> > > Program.
> > >
> > > Vince Kaminski
> > >
> > >
> > > Vincent Kaminski
> > > Managing Director - Research
> > > Enron Corp.
> > > 1400 Smith Street
> > > Room EB1962
> > > Houston, TX 77002-7361
> > >
> > > Phone: (713) 853 3848
> > > Fax  :  (713) 646 2503
> > > E-mail: vkamins@enron.com
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>


fyi
----- Forwarded by Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT on 06/06/2001 01:45 PM -----

	"Andy Katz" <AKatz@eei.org>
	06/06/2001 01:35 PM

		 To: <elizabeth.sager@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Fwd: FW: EEI Collateral Documentation

One of two comments received on Collateral Annex documents

Andrew S. Katz, Director Industry Legal Affairs
Edison Electric Institute
701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20004
Voice:  202-508-5616
Fax:     202-508-5673
e-mail:  akatz@eei.org
 - TEXT.htm
Received: from pitbull.ep.hess.com (ns.ameradahess.com [207.51.255.129]) by
mail.eei.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2001 17:12:38 -0400
Received: from hacnte03.ep.hess.com by pitbull.ep.hess.com          via smtpd
(for mail.eei.org [204.254.108.2]) with SMTP; 5 Jun 2001 21:19:50 UT
Received: from wdb-ex-001.rm.hess.com (wdbex001.rm.hess.com [10.103.10.17])
by hacnte03.ep.hess.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
Version 5.5.2650.21) id LQBNCY6M; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 16:19:49 -0500
Received: by wdbex001.rm.hess.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id
<MJ9CSD7J>; Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:19:41 -0400
Message-ID: <7911DD490C96D311B6AA00508B63B97A03A4326A@wdbex003.rm.hess.com>
From: "Crespo, John" <jcrespo@hess.com>
To: "'akatz@eei.org'" <akatz@eei.org>
Subject: FW: EEI Collateral Documentation
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:19:29 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Andy, we didn't have too many comments, but here they are:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cerria, Chuck (Commodities - NY)
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 4:16 PM
> To: Crespo, John
> Cc: Butala, John (Commodities - NY); Trivino, Grimuald (Commodities -
> NY)
> Subject: EEI Collateral Documentation
>
> We concur with Enron's and AEP's comments, except as follows:
>
> 1.Interest should be payable on cash collateral held each month and upon
> return of the collateral.
> 2. 15 days to expiry should be the trigger on LC's so that if the LC does
> not auto renew, the pledgee can draw down on the LC when the expiry is
> within 15 days.
>

 - Andy Katz.vcf


Kristin,

Enclosed is our overall schedule for the 3 week documentation effort.  You are welcome to attend any meeting in the schedule you have time for.  We should finish our documentation of your processes during this meeting however.

Thanks for your help on this effort.

Debra


Lew, it looks like I have some appointments I can't get out of on the 24th;
however, we could be out there by noon on the 25th.  How does that fit?  I
did get a call from Mike letting me know that he would be sending over the CA.

Regards
Delainey