---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2001
09:24 AM ---------------------------
From: Veronica Espinoza/ENRON@enronXgate on 03/21/2001 09:12 AM
To: Janie Aguayo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diane Anderson/NA/Enron@Enron, Derek
Bailey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jean Bell/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Patricia Boulanger/CAL/ECT@ECT, Bob Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie
Brewer/NA/Enron@Enron, Lesli Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Celeste
Cisneros/NA/Enron@Enron, Sharon Crawford/CAL/ECT@ECT, Richard
Deming/NA/Enron@Enron, Russell Diamond/ENRON@enronXgate, Cindy
Feldman/CAL/ECT@ECT, Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT, Veronica
Gonzalez/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Walter
Guidroz/ENRON@enronXgate, Larry Joe Hunter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kam
Keiser/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT, Errol
McLaughlin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Nidia Mendoza/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Bianca Ornelas/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie
Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Dianne Seib/CAL/ECT@ECT,
Linda Sietzema/CAL/ECT@ECT, Kim S Theriot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ellen
Wallumrod/NA/Enron@ENRON, Melinda Whalen/CAL/ECT@ECT, Tiffany
Williams/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Credit Report--3/21/01


Thanks Kim,  here are the revised agreements.

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Marvin Briggs [mailto:dayahead@snowcrest.net]
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:43 AM
To: Richter, Jeff
Subject: City of Redding

Jeff-

Here is a link to our website with he job posting on it.

<http://ci.redding.ca.us/personel/pwrprsch.htm>

You can also download an application from this site as well.  Sorry to hear what's going on up that ways...especially this time of year.

Anyhow, you also asked for my home phone number- its 530-226-8046
Give me a holler there or at work 530-245-7018 if you have any additional questions.

~Marv Briggs


Kay, we are working on the Bogey Exhibit and the Profit/Savings Calc.  Will
get back with you re: items 1d. and 2.

See assignments and comments in red.  Reagan/Kayne/Dave/Jeff responses due to
Kay by noon today.

1) General comments -
a) We have not seen a draft of the MPPSA or the MGPSA for review and comment.
Kay
b) All section references in the draft should be reviewed and checked.  The
majority of the references checked were incorrect. Kay
c) Since financial security is still an outstanding issue, all comments
regarding the provisions in the draft pertaining to that subject have been
excluded.  Kay
d) The draft contains references throughout to exhibits that will be attached
to the agreement that were not included in the draft.  See bleow.

2) Article 1, pages 6 and 7 - Profit and Savings: These definitions reference
exhibits that were not included in the draft.   One of the most significant
issues we had with the prior drafts were with the definition for "savings" so
it is important to review a draft of these exhibits as soon as possible.
Reagan/Kayne/Dave/Jeff to chech with Marvin.  He should have forwarded
exhibits with everything else.  time is running out on them to do anything
here.  Will report more on this issue.

3) Section 3.1(b): This section obligates EPMI to &Propose8 a load projection
and stack model.  Should this say &Prepare8 as opposed to &Propose8.
"Prepare" is fine.

4) Section 3.1(c): First line refers to a &request by Customer8.  Customer is
not defined, is this intended to refer to MDEA?  If not, include a definition
of Customer.  "...upon request by Customer" is not necessary.  This has
already been done.

5) Section 3.2(a): Provides that EPMI will use &commercially reasonable
efforts8.  The draft does not include a definition for this term.  Suggest
including a definition since this standard is used throughout the draft.  Kay

6) Section 3.2(a): Suggest adding the following phrase in the second line
after &schedule Products8, &in a manner intended to minimize the cost of
serving MDEA,s native load8.  Adding this seems fine; however, are there any
legal implications, Kay?  If not, add it in.

7) Section 3.2(c): Line 3 refers to Cajun and EPI, which are not defined in
the draft.  Suggest including definitions or inserting the phrase &Existing
Contract Resources8 in place of &SEPA, Cajun, EPI8.  The substitution is fine.

8) Section 3.2(h): Line 1 provides &EPMI will optimize scheduling and usage
or resale (when appropriate)8.  Would suggest deleting &when appropriate8 and
inserting &(in accordance with the terms and conditions of each Existing
Contracted Resources contract)8.  The suggested change is OK.

9) Section 4.1(a): Line 1 requires MDEA to operate and maintain its native
load distribution system in accordance with Prudent Operating practices(.8.
Would suggest deleting the phrase &and the Native Load distribution system8.
This agreement does not bear on how the cities would operate and maintain
their distribution systems.  Reagan/Kayne/Dave/Jeff
[Rorschach, Reagan]  (a) Operate and maintain the Facilities and Entergy
interconnection obligations in accordance with Prudent Operating Practices
and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(b) Responsibilities for operating reliably with respect to Native Load lies
solely with MDEA and the Cities.

10) Section 6.4: The fourth sentence states & due to the use of imprecise
data such as weather reports, heat rate estimates and the like, it is
understood between the Parties that the resulting projections,
recommendations and daily plan are consistent with commercially reasonable
industry practices8.   According to this provision, the parties agree in
advance that the resulting projections, recommendations and daily plans are
consistent with commercially reasonable industry practices.  We believe that
the &use of that type of data8 is consistent with commercially reasonable
industry practices, but do not believe that that this automatically
translates into the projections themselves being consistent with commercially
reasonable industry practices.  Text should be changed as appropriate to
reflect this change.  Reagan/Kayne/Dave/Jeff
[Rorschach, Reagan]  Section 6.4 Each day, EPMI shall provide a projection of
the next day,s Native Load, and project the need for gas, fuel oil and power.
Each day, EPMI and MDEA shall jointly run the Load Projection Model and the
Facility Stack Model.  EPMI and MDEA will then (1) compare and verify
assumptions and results from the models, (2) develop recommendations and (3)
decide upon the operating plan for the day.  This analysis will take into
account such considerations as weather conditions, business day/weekend and
holiday load conditions, historical loads, gas/power pricing, unit
availabilities, unit operating data, and prior commitments to buy and sell
power. The Parties understand and agree that the development of the
projections, recommendations and daily operating plan is complex and requires
an element of judgment.  Further, it is understood that the use of imprecise
data such as weather reports, and heat rate estimates to make such
projections, recommendations and daily plan are consistent with commercially
reasonable industry practices.

11) Section 7.1: Second sentence provides &Risk of loss and all price and
unit contingency and transmission risk shall be borne by Customer8.  Suggest
adding the phrase & For Back to Back Transactions8 at the beginning of this
sentence.  MDEA should not be responsible for unit contingency, transmission
risk etc. for an EPMI Transaction.    Reagan/Kayne/Dave/Jeff
[Rorschach, Reagan]  Delete the sentence "Risk of loss...shall be borne by
the Customer."

12) Section 10.2(a): Line 3, change & MDA8 to &MDEA8.  Kay

13) Section 14.6: Line 3, change &and the MPPSA8 to &the MPPSA and the
MGPSA8.  Kay

14) Section 15.1(d): provides three business days written notice to the
defaulting party to cure a Financial Event of Default, otherwise the
agreement can be terminated.  Three days is too short of a time period for
MDEA.  Kay/David Hunt

15) Section 17.1: Second sentence, provides that an independent auditor
reasonably acceptable to EPMI is entitled to audit all books and records of
EPMI.  However this provision goes on to state that EPMI shall be entitled to
audit MDEA,s books, not an independent auditor subject to MDEA,s approval.
Suggest deleting &EPMI shall be entitled to audit8 and adding &An independent
auditor reasonably acceptable to MDEA8.  Kay

16) Article 28: As we have previously noted, this section contains language
related to conflict of interest issues and the lack of notification related
to conflicts of interest that should be read carefully reviewed by MDEA and
the Cities.  Kay/David Hunt


I haven't seen any of the press reports (even though I am in London and I
hear that's where they were) but I thought this was a well drafted response.
The only additional rumours I have heard indicate that the police may have
been rough in their handling of demonstrators outside the fence at the plant
construction site.  I remember hearing that there were times that the
construction workers feared for their lives because of the vehemence of the
protesters.  I guess that didn't make it into the Human Rights Watch (ever
heard of them?) report.

Mark
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT on
01/27/99 04:08 PM ---------------------------
From: Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling AT Master_po@CCMAIL on 01/25/99 02:20 PM
To:
cc:
Subject: Human Rights Watch

To:      All Employees
From:    Ken Lay & Jeff Skilling
Subject: Human Rights Watch

Over the next few days, you may see some press coverage of a report that was
issued by the Human Rights Watch which alleges human rights abuses in
relation to the Dabhol Power Company (DPC) project in India. As you know,
Enron is a 50 percent owner of the Dabhol project, which should be
operational next month.

We want each of you to know that this report is entirely without basis.  We
are very disappointed that Human Rights Watch has chosen to listen to the
perspectives of the people who have opposed the project since the beginning.
As you are probably aware, project opponents filed more than 20 lawsuits
against the project in the Indian courts over the past four years.  Every
lawsuit was dismissed, withdrawn or ruled in DPC's favor.  The project is
clearly above reproach.

Enron was advised of the Human Rights report just a few days before it was
issued.  The Dabhol Power Company, the Government of Maharashtra and our many
supporters were never even contacted.

DPC has worked hard to promote positive relations within the community.  A
handful of people who oppose the project were interviewed for this report in
great detail.  Unfortunately, the good relationships we have built with a
large percentage of the community were not reflected.  Our community efforts
have included building a school and a hospital, planting thousands of trees
at the site, building wells for drinking water and conducting numerous job
training programs for area residents. Last year, Enron made a $500,000 grant
to CARE to be used for programs in the state of Maharashtra.

Our media statement on the issue is as follows:

Dabhol Power Company does not tolerate human rights abuses by its employees
or contractors.  And, while we respect the work of Human Rights Watch and its
mission, this report is out of context at best and dredges up allegations
that have been put to rest over the past four years.  Much of the report
deals with concerns over state police actions, over which we have no control,
and it is misleading by Human Rights Watch to allege so.

Please refer any media inquiries to the Enron International public relations
office at 713-646-6416.


For preparation of my travel folder for the trip.  Mark
----- Forwarded by Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT on 05/23/2000 05:08 PM -----

	Corrinne Greasley <CGREASLEY@isda.org>
	05/23/2000 04:22 PM

		 To: ISDA BOARD <BOARD@isda.org>
		 cc: David Lafleur <DLAFLEUR@isda.org>, Mary Cunningham
<MCUNNINGHAM@isda.org>, Nick Collier <ncollier@isda-eur.org>, Richard Grove
<RGROVE@isda.org>, Robert Pickel <RPICKEL@isda.org>, Ruth Ainslie
<RAinslie@isda.org>
		 Subject: Board Book Materials

Members of the Board:

A complete set of materials was sent to ISDA Directors today in preparation
for the Strategic Planning Session scheduled for June 7-9, 2000 in
Sonoma,California.  Attached please find electronic copies of a few of the
presentations included in the Board book.

 Executive Briefing, Agenda, European & US Technology and Regulation
 <<Strategic Planning 2000 Executive Briefing.doc>>    <<Strategic Planning
2000 Agenda.doc>>    <<board book sonoma - eu regulation.doc>>      <<SONOMA
- E-trading - US.doc>>

Technology and Documentation Delivery
Below please find a memo to the Board (included in the Board materials)
describing the issues involved in the ISDA e-Documentation Project.
 <<Strategic planning e-delivery memo.doc>>

A sample of the electronic documents will be sent to Board Members
separately.

I can be reached by return e-mail or by telephone on 212 332 1200 should you
encounter any problems accessing these documents.

Corrinne Greasley

 - Strategic Planning 2000 Executive Briefing.doc
 - Strategic Planning 2000 Agenda.doc
 - board book sonoma - eu regulation.doc
 - SONOMA - E-trading - US.doc
 - Strategic planning e-delivery memo.doc


Thanks for getting in touch.  Yes, we can schedule.  Do you know who all would participate?

Best,
Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lokay, Michelle
Sent:	Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:19 PM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff
Subject:	RE: Conference Call with PG&E to Discuss the Gas Portion of Its Proposed Plan of Reorganization that It Will File w/FERC Toward End of November

Jeff,

Was this ever scheduled?  When?  Thanks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Harris, Steven
Sent:	Saturday, November 24, 2001 9:50 AM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff
Cc:	Kilmer III, Robert; Lokey, Teb; Lokay, Michelle; Rapp, Bill
Subject:	RE: Conference Call with PG&E to Discuss the Gas Portion of Its Proposed Plan of Reorganization that It Will File w/FERC Toward End of November

Thanks. I think we would definitely be interested.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dasovich, Jeff
Sent:	Wednesday, November 21, 2001 4:55 PM
To:	Tycholiz, Barry; Tribolet, Michael; Mellencamp, Lisa; Hass, Glen; Miller, Stephanie; Tholt, Jane M.; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Steffes, James D.; Novosel, Sarah; Harris, Steven; Fossum, Drew
Subject:	Conference Call with PG&E to Discuss the Gas Portion of Its Proposed Plan of Reorganization that It Will File w/FERC Toward End of November

PG&E called.  They want to set up a conference call to brief us on the gas piece of their POR that they'll be filing with FERC around November 30th.  They want to try to do it in the next couple of weeks. Please let me know if you're interested and please pass this along to anyone else who might be interested.  Thanks.

Best,
Jeff


fyi
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 01/25/2000
12:03 PM ---------------------------

Christian Yoder

01/25/2000 11:38 AM
To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Bruce Stevenson - Resume

Richard,
I do not know this person personally, but I know very well the corporate
culture  and the law firm culture from which he comes.  He has worked for
TransCanada and the law firm of Walsh Young.    You probably need to discount
the probative value of my comment as being too vague and subjective,  but all
things considered, I would give a thumbs down to this guy, and suggest that
we try to get someone from one of the firms up there.    Please call if you
are interested in general background comments. ----cgy


Steve,

Just follow the instructions at the bottom of this e-mail.

Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Lindberg, Lorraine
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 8:55 AM
To: 'hugh.r.lindberg@conoco.com'; Y'Barbo, Paul; 'jfawcett@sempra.com';
Lindberg, Susan
Subject: FW: Osama Movie

-----Original Message-----
From: Lohman, TK
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:59 PM
To: Lindberg, Lorraine; Armstrong, Julie; McConnell, Mark
Subject: FW: Osama Movie

-----Original Message-----
From: Lohman, TK
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 10:13 AM
To: 'swalker@sidrichgas.com'
Subject: FW: Osama Movie

Buehler's sick humor!  I've missed you.  Linda Ward called me and I had to let her know that Brad is my new "Main Man"!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TK
-----Original Message-----
From: Buehler, Craig
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 2:15 PM
To: Dietz, Rick; Bodnar, Michael; Jones, Dana; Lohman, TK
Subject: Osama Movie

This is funny! Don't have your sound up too loud.

Click on the link below, then click "Watch this movie", then click "PLAY" after it loads.

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view.php?id=33641


Do we have an English version of the expert opinion concerning the Eletrabras
guarantee that I can be reviewing?  I would like to present this along with
the other things to the lenders next week.


Ryan is waffling.  I talked to him this weekend and he said his wife wants to move back north.   These weather guys need physcology treatement.   Dave now thinks this UBS deal is full of risk.   I think the Friday event has everyone freaked out.

Sorry to ruin your Sunday evening.   With respect to fundies, I already have my guys working on this.

-----Original Message-----
From: Lavorato, John
Sent: Sun 1/27/2002 8:31 PM
To: Calger, Christopher F.; Milnthorp, Rob; Milnthorp, Rob; Whalley, Greg; Whalley, Greg; Shively, Hunter S.; Presto, Kevin M.; Lavorato, John; Belden, Tim; Oxley, David; Kitchen, Louise
Cc: Oxley, David; Slone, Jeanie
Subject:

Ok So I'm having trouble letting go.......

9:00 am  Greg and I and Louise will meet with the back office to discuss staff.
10:00 am  We will meet discuss staff.  We need to have further meeting later with our staff to determine if we should offer other people jobs.  We have a lot of front office spots.  Slone, you need to get us a front office count by region.

I suggest that Hunter and Dave Ryan coordinate interviews for outside weather guys for next Monday.  We should bring in 10 if we can and hire 2 or 3.   I suggest Presto works with Gaskill and Will and the H guy I can't spell in Portland to put together gas and power fundies presentations for a week Tuesday.  I would like to have a clue before I start trading.

Hunter on the gas trading side I say we put all front office into 4 groups and give them a task to come up with the best Organization structure.   It will get everyone working.  We need that.  I would suggest that we start projecting our groups to death so they're focused on business.

I also suggest we put all the screens on the floor to commodity prices to keep people from watching Enron shit all day.

Lavo


FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 01/23/2001 11:40
AM ---------------------------
From: Catherine Clark/ENRON@enronXgate on 01/23/2001 11:24 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: FW: Meeting between EE&CC and ENA

Sorry about that.

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Clark, Catherine
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 11:15 AM
To: Mann, Kay
Cc: Bills, Lisa
Subject: Meeting between EE&CC and ENA

Kay,
Lisa asked me to see if you would represent ENA Legal at the meeting between
EE&CC and ENA on Monday, Jan 29th.  Having worked at both companies, you
would add a lot of insight to the crafting of a "new project development
process".  The agenda is for Ozzie, Mike Coleman, Lisa and you to give brief
presentations (5-10 minutes each) on the project development process, with
recommendations on changes to be made.  You've already seen the notes, but
I'm attaching an updated version.

Please let me know if you will be available and if you want to change any
discussion bullets and/or recommendations.  The most recent message had the
meeting taking place on Monday, January 29th from 11:30 am to 1:30 pm (with
lunch provided).  Megan will let everyone know which room will be reserved.
There is also a pre-meeting tomorrow (Wed) at 10:30 am in EB 2868 (it should
only last 30 minutes).  Thank you in advance for your help.
-Catherine
x3-9943


Phil:

Why don't you execute (duplicate originals) and overnight to me? I'll return
an original to you tomorrow (overnight), as well.  I'm located, specifically,
at:

1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, TX  77002

Please call if you need anything.  Thanks.

Sara

	<Philip.Levy@chase.com>
	12/18/2000 12:18 PM

		 To: Sara.Shackleton@enron.com
		 cc: Jeffrey.W.Dellapina@chase.com, Soma.Ghosh@enron.com,
Teresa.G.Bushman@enron.com
		 Subject: Re: Amendment of Chase/ERMS ISDA dated April 5, 1994

I have been speaking with Soma regarding the markup of the collateral
schedule to the Margin Agreement between Enron and Mahonia as well as the
Enron/Chase ISDA limiting the collateral to direct obligations of the US.
We needed to determine whether we could accept your proposal.  I have been
advised that the changes you requested are acceptable.  Accordingly, all
the amendments can be executed.  Please contact me regarding how you would
like to accomplish this.

<Sara.Shackleton@enron.com> on 12/18/2000 10:16:53 AM

To:   philip.levy@chase.com
cc:   Soma.Ghosh@enron.com, Teresa.G.Bushman@enron.com
Subject:  Amendment of Chase/ERMS ISDA dated April 5, 1994

Phil:

I was just checking to see when we would execute the amendment to the
Security Agreement (to permit the rehypothecation of securities).  Please
let me hear from you.

Regards,

Sara


Would you please generate a fresh ENE guaranty and email to the lawyer (see
Lotus Notes - Emma Nakakuki is the new attorney).  Also, please verify with
credit (Rod Nelson in London) that the guaranty cap has not changed.  I have
the file in my office.  Thanks.  SS


----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/02/2001 06:01 PM -----

	Expense Server@Enron_Development
	01/31/2001 03:03 PM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS012201

The following expense report is ready for approval:

Employee Name: Richard Shapiro
Status last changed by:  Automated Administrator
Expense Report Name: RS012201
Report Total: $8,299.73
Amount Due Employee: $8,299.73

To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur
Expense.
http://nahou-wwxms01p


Yep, its there.

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:49 AM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Subject: RE: important stuff

Maybe it is on the development phone list.  I don't have it at hand.

From: Kathleen Carnahan/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/31/2001 09:45 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: RE: important stuff

Remember not to throw away baby stuff!  My oldest daughter, Sara has already
bought a complete wardrobe for the baby including girl and boy outfits.  I
guess I had better get on the ball and at least buy a "I Love Granny" bib or
something!  Ha.

Do you know Carlos' cell phone number?  His normal secretary is out.

K-

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:37 AM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Subject: RE: important stuff

Thanks, but I'm throwing away junk all weekend.  Neil will be gone....

From: Kathleen Carnahan/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/31/2001 09:28 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: RE: important stuff

Lake Woodlands, do you want to come?

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:23 AM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Subject: important stuff

So where are you kayaking this weekend?

ckm


I have thrown together the following list of issues that people have raised
so far:

Opportunity Costs under the soft cap
$150 too low
Benchmarks for Forward contracts
Regulation of long term sales
Preemption of PUC "buy" requirement
Commission's findings concerning exercise of market power
PUC's request for protective order


Since Alfredo received them from the customer, I thought each of you would be
interested in the progress of Enron Directo in Spain.   mcs
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 25/01/2001
19:36 ---------------------------

	From:  Alfredo Huertas                           22/01/2001 11:10

To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Enron Directo weekly performance

FYI,

a.
---------------------- Forwarded by Alfredo Huertas/LON/ECT on 22/01/2001
11:13 ---------------------------

Jose Luis Gomez-Banovio
19/01/2001 17:38
To: Naomi Connell/LON/ECT@ECT, Anthony Key/LON/ECT@ECT, Charlie Crossley
Cooke/LON/ECT@ECT, Alfredo Huertas/LON/ECT@ECT, David Gonzalez/LON/ECT@ECT,
Ignacio Soneira/MAD/ECT@ECT, Gonzalo Gomez-Navarro/MAD/ECT@ECT, Eric
Gonzales/LON/ECT@ECT, Mariano Gentilini/LON/ECT@ECT, Jude
Atkinson/LON/ECT@ECT, Daniel Maitland/LON/ECT@ECT, Diana Higgins/LON/ECT@ECT,
Alex Perkins/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Mead/LON/ECT@ECT, Pedro Del Rio
Alcalde/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oliver/LON/ECT@ECT, Sarah Gregory/LON/ECT@ECT,
Kyran Hanks/LON/ECT@ECT, Julie Green/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert Saltiel/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Enron Directo weekly performance

FYI, see below some basic performance indicators of Enron Directo:

For further details, please let me know/ Jose L


Frank worked every Saturday when I was at HMRP.

"Neil Mann" <nmann@erac.com> on 12/04/2000 01:57:50 PM
Please respond to <nmann@erac.com>
To: "C. Kay Mann (E-mail)" <Kay.Mann@Enron.com>
cc:

Subject: meeting with Frank

We have a 10am appointment with Frank on Saturday 12/16. He said he did not
think we could or should try to do it over the phone. He knows you travel a
lot and thought Saturday might work best for all of us.  NM


Either the location, or the number of locations has changed on revision number 17. The hedge associated with this deal needs to be re-evaluated.


----- Forwarded by Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT on 07/13/2000 11:59 AM -----

	Brenda Whitehead
	06/28/2000 10:58 AM

		 To: Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: EOL Definitions

per the request of Elizabeth Sager, please see this attachment:

Elizabeth will get with you later to set up a meeting to discuss the
attachment and finalize.


i'm in, is this on saturday?

Phillip M Love
07/25/2000 09:01 AM
To: David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve Venturatos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael
Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT, O'Neal D Winfree/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bryan Hull/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: CLEAR LAKE

Just wanted to remind you guys of the get together this weekend for the Texas
guys at my house.  Please let me know by Friday if you will be able to come
and I will draw up some maps.  I was thinking about 5 p.m. to get started.
Beer and burgers will be on the menu with a little bit of billards action.
Please bring your significant others(Mick, please only bring one).
PL


John,

Thanks. I have reserved March the 2nd for the meeting.

Vince

"John D. Martin" <J_Martin@baylor.edu> on 08/18/2000 02:02:31 PM
To: vkamins@enron.com, sgibner@ect.enron.com
cc:
Subject: Hello guys

Vince and Stinson,

Just got a copy of the attached paper and thought it may have some interest
for you guys.

On another note, I am putting together a workshop in the spring on the New
Economy and Business Education and will be seeking out some Enron network
people to join in the discussion (2-hours on Friday March 2nd).  I'll let
you know more as we work through the details.  The idea is to "brainstorm"
about the new world you guys work in every day and its implications for
what we should be doing.  Hope this is interesting to you and that you'll
want to spend the day with us.

Take care and enjoy the weekend.

John

 - risk.pdf

John D. Martin
Carr P. Collins Chair in Finance
Finance Department
Baylor University
PO Box 98004
Waco, TX 76798
254-710-4473 (Office)
254-710-1092 (Fax)
J_Martin@Baylor.edu
web:    http://hsb.baylor.edu/html/martinj/home.html


The following counterparties are not authorized to trade US power products --
restricted by credit.

Koch Olefins Group
Towne Exploration Company

Please contact me with any questions you may have.

	Tana Jones
	12/27/2000 05:30 PM

		 To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie
Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shari Stack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Alison Keogh/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Marie Heard/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Robbi Rossi/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, John Viverito/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jane McBride/AP/Enron@Enron,
Andrea Calo/SA/Enron@Enron, Peter Keohane/CAL/ECT@ECT, David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 12/27/00

----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 12/27/2000 05:30 PM -----

	Bradley Diebner
	12/27/2000 05:25 PM

		 To: Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel
Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie
R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Cynthia Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe
Global Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie
Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey
Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa
Lees/HOU/ECT@ECT, Juana Fayett/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Trang Le/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Maley/LON/ECT@ECT, Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT, Lee
Munden/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Karen O'Day/NA/Enron@Enron, Tanya
Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Walter Guidroz/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 12/27/00


I think we need some clear indication that with Hogan on the Board this is
not going to turn into a diatribe about the benefits of LMP.  He's the most
informed of the bunch and I doubt he would find a general work of interest
(unless he can create a platform for his more detailed ideas).  If it stays
general, I think the study is a good idea.  One topic area might be to
explore how politicians mess up the basic idea of deregualtion and suggest
that the process needs to be handled in a more objective (and pure) fashion.

	Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	03/16/2001 10:54 AM

		 To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, skean@enron.com
		 Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy
choice

Great points.  Teece---and the lion's share of the folks on the participants
list---are advocates of a minimalist role for government, particularly where
markets are a clear and preferably option, as in the case of electricity.

That said, I think we're going to have to make a fundamental decision about
what the goal of this "study" would be, which will determine, to a large
degree, whether we choose to pursue it.

I'll throw out for comment the notion that the study should be designed to
serve one purpose:  to influence the policy decision currently under debate
"To de-regulate or not."  As such, I wouldn't see issues like "PJM or APX" or
"competitive default supplier or not," or "divest generation with vesting
contracts or retain the assets" being the focus.

That debate over critically important implementation details, would seem to
come in "Round 2," once the initial debate over "deregulate or not" is won.
To try to do both, i.e., resolve in the broad policy issue AND make the case
for the specific, "right" implementation plan, would arguably bog the study
down, perhaps interminably.  And it seems that time is of the essence in the
current environment.  In addition, unless the fundamental policy issue is
won--and won rather quickly--debating  implementation may be moot.  Of
course, it will be impossible to avoid some level of dicussion on "how to do
it," but that would not be the emphasis.

In sum, I'd suggest for comment that it only makes sense to
proceed---particularly since time is of the essence---if we focus on the high
level policy level question of "to deregulate or not," and address
implementation in a second, or follow up, study.  I think we should try to
make a call on this swiftly, since the "go/no go" decision would seem to flow
from resolution of this issue.

Best,
Jeff

	James D Steffes
	03/16/2001 08:22 AM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com
		 Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy
choice

Jeff --

It would be helpful to get some feedback prior to starting to deal with the
fundamental question related to direct access for smaller customers.  I would
like to know Teece's perspective on the role of government in this
marketplace.  In addition, I think that the paper must deal with the
drawbacks of having mixed roles - utility default supply and competitive
markets.

Jim

	Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	03/15/2001 03:11 PM

		 To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy
choice

Greetings:

As I've mentioned, I've been discussing with a group of academics
(principally from UC Berkeley) the possibility of producing an analysis of
why it makes sense to move forward toward de-regulation, and makes no sense
to turn back to command-and-control regulation.  Clearly, we're at a fork in
the policy road---move forward, or go back.

I've (finally) gotten a proposal from the group.  It's attached.  Please take
a look.  I'd like to distribute more widely internally for comment, but
wanted to run it through a preliminary screen to guage whether folks think it
would be useful before cluttering up folks' in-boxes with more emails to
read.  Few points worth mentioning:

The majority of the academics that would do the report are affiliated with
LECG, Inc., the consulting group that I worked with prior to joing Enron.
List also includes Dan McFadden, UC Berkeley nobel prize winner who wrote the
recent op-ed piece in the WSJ.
The list also includes Hogan and Joskow  and Borenstein.  We could certainly
exclude these folks should we choose to go forward with the analysis.
However, the goal is to produce a high level analysis, i.e., "de-regulation
is good and can work; command and control regulation is bad and we know that
it does not work."  Once the study is released (if it is pursued), the
"authors" could tour the country, testifying before federal and state bodies
to advocate the virtues of de-regulation and the pitfalls of reversing
course.  The analysis would not be a debate over "To Poolco, or not to
Poolco, PJM, etc."  In this way, including folks like Joskow and Hogan could
offer the added benefit of creating a "Nixon goes to China" scenario.  Please
take a look at the list of participants.  Again, we can add to and subtract
from the list.
Laura Tyson would be one of the two project leaders. (The other would be
David Teece, Chairman of LECG.)
None of the folks on the list occupies either extreme of the political
spectrum.  It's a mix of D's and R's who are arguably centrist economist and
strong believers in markets (I won't vouch for Joskow and Hogan).
The idea would be to get a wide array of industry participants from across
the country to support the project.  This is for two reasons:  1) the more
diverse the group supporting the effort, the greater the credibility, and 2)
they are asking for about $1 million to do the study.
If you think it would be useful to pursue the study as part of our national
campaign to minimize the damage created by California, I would like to start
immediately to approach trade associations, companies, customers, etc.
nationwide to garner support for the project.

Let me know if you think the effort would be worthwhile.  Appreciate your
comments.

Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 02:43 PM -----

 - REAFFIRMING THE CASE FOR ELECTRICITY DEREGULATION.doc


For your review
---------------------- Forwarded by Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron on 12/05/2000
11:55 AM ---------------------------

Anila Hoxha
11/28/2000 07:38 PM
To: Randy Petersen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: eSpeed Dash

Attached  please find the latest DASH.

Thanks,
AH


Grzegorz,

Ludmila doniosla mi, ze pracujesz w Kalifornii.

Bede w Berkeley w srode i w Palo Alto w czwartek i piatek.

Czy masz czas, by spotakc sie na obiad/lunch/kawe?

Pozdrowienia

Wicek


Start Date: 2/23/01; HourAhead hour: 11;  No ancillary schedules awarded.
Variances detected.
Variances detected in Load schedule.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001022311.txt

---- Load Schedule ----
$$$ Variance found in table tblLoads.
     Details: (Hour: 11 / Preferred:   5.49 / Final:   4.92)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  LOAD_ID: PGE2
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 2/23/01
  SC_ID: EPMI
$$$ Variance found in table tblLoads.
     Details: (Hour: 11 / Preferred:  50.16 / Final:  45.76)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  LOAD_ID: PGE3
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 2/23/01
  SC_ID: EPMI
$$$ Variance found in table tblLoads.
     Details: (Hour: 11 / Preferred: 205.08 / Final: 210.08)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  LOAD_ID: SCE1
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 2/23/01
  SC_ID: EPMI


Your message

  To:      whitfield@blackstone.com
  Cc:      Koehler, Anne C.
  Subject: Due Diligence Documents
  Sent:    Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:02:57 -0500

was delivered to the following recipient(s):

Whitfield, Benjamin on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:00:27 -0500
    MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:TBG_DOMAIN:TBG-NYMSX2

 - C.DTF


Please give me a call when you get this.  Thanks
Ben
3-7998


65534 is 149349 in Sitara
 65403 was 149346 as ENA agent for CES.  I created deal 214854 for April 1
forward, since Joann has pathed it for March.
 The demand was not correct on the first so I fixed it also.
I will update the sheet when you exit the original.
Scott

Chris Germany@ECT
03/08/2000 06:52 PM
To: Scott Goodell/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Brenda H Fletcher/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: k#65403

Same thing on k#65403
And k#65534 - I left this one in red.

---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 03/08/2000 06:22
PM ---------------------------

Chris Germany
03/08/2000 06:08 PM
To: Scott Goodell/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Brenda H Fletcher/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: k#62164

Is contract 62164 a valid contract on CGAS?  It was highlighted in red in the
2000ces02.xls sheet.  I updated the info based on what I see in Navigator and
highlighted it in yellow.  And, if this is a valid deal, we need to add it to
Sitara.


Greetings;

The PMI 10-minute Expost price information for 7/19/00 hours 4-24 has been
republished. The information can also be found at the following URL:

http://www.caiso.com/docs/2000/08/28/2000082808281323598.csv

If you have any questions, please contact Ginger Y. Seitles  Phone: (916)
351-4420.

Client Relations Communication
CRCommunications@caiso.com


Attached please find the proposed credit terms for the ISDA Agmt.  Comments
or questions, please call.

Ed Sacks


Michael.

Thanks a lot for a very quick response. It looks fine.

Please, forward it to Margaret Carson. Please, explain the data source. She
may expect NYMEX as the data source for natgas and WTI.

Vince

Michael Sergeev
04/11/2000 09:41 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: WTI CRUDE PRICE and NY Harbor Resid prices VS HENRY HUB and New
York city gate gas BY MONTH

Vince, here's the numbers and two charts. the charts represent the same
information but have different styles. one has all of the prices on the same
scale, and the other has crude and resid on one scale and natural gas on
another.
ms


Please send a copy of the Energy Gateway docs to Luis Derrota - EB838.


Wanda, Thanks for your story and support.  We will have great event again
this year.  Let me know if there is anything I can do with your business unit
to help you.
Mike

Wanda Chalk@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
09/11/2000 09:04 AM
To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Fundraising

Mike: You can certainly count on my support.  My son Brandon Johnson was
diagnosis with JD when he was 11 years old.  Needless to say my family was
traumatised by the event, however my son handled it like a trooper.  He is
now 16 years old and has very good days with his blood sugar, but then he has
his bad ones as well.  I have walked since he was first diagnosed with JD and
will continue to provide my support.

Thx

Wanda

---------------------- Forwarded by Wanda Chalk/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on
09/11/2000 09:00 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Mike McConnell @ ENRON                           09/08/2000 09:59 PM

Sent by: Enron Announcements@ENRON
To: All Enron Houston
cc:

Subject: Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Fundraising

It is my sincere honor to once again lead the Enron team in this year's
Juvenile Diabetes Foundation (JDF) walk scheduled to take place on Sunday,
November 5, 2000, at the Sam Houston Race Park.  I continue to serve on the
board of JDF representing Enron and will be Enron's corporate executive for
this year's fundraising efforts.

As many of you may already know, I am an insulin dependent diabetic myself.
Even though I know how difficult this disease can be to manage with the
multiple finger pricks for blood samples and several shots each day, I cannot
imagine how difficult it is for a small child with this disease.  Taking
insulin does not cure the disease nor prevent the development of
complications; insulin is simply their life support system and without it
they would die.

Enron continues to be a major corporate sponsor for JDF again this year.  JDF
is a very efficient organization in which approximately 84% of all money
raised goes directly to research.  Enron's goal this year is to raise
$225,000 and we need your help.  Enron has been the number 1 walk team for 5
years in a row and we are not ready to give up first place!  We need team
leaders, walkers and volunteers to help us reach our goal.  The theme for the
walk this year is "Knock Out Diabetes" and we would like to have you join us
for this great event.  The Walk is truly a blast and we had about 500 Enron
people participate last year and everyone enjoyed it.

If you are interested in volunteering to be a walker or a team leader, or if
you would like to make a pledge, you may call any of the steering committee
members listed below.  If you are interested in being a team leader, please
contact one of the following people immediately so that you may be included
in the first important and informative training session taking place this
week.

Thank you very much for your support.

Mike McConnell

Steering Committee Members:

Blanca Bollom X66091
Rachel Feldt  X57629
Deb Gebhardt X39606
Cathy Phillips X36898
John Walt  X35379
Debbie Yates X35305


Here is the original response but the letter pretty much supercedes this
document.  Let me know what else I can do.

Thanks,

Kim

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Nemec, Gerald
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 5:10 PM
To: Ward, Kim S.
Subject: Re:

Kim,  Can you send me the original response.  The attached letter only
contains the revisions to that letter.

	Kim Ward/ENRON@enronXgate 05/11/2001 04:49 PM 	   To: Gerald
Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT  cc:   Subject:

Attached is my letter and here are the some additional terms -

Seller shall provide informal pricing information to Buyer on a regular
basis.  Buyer and Seller can agree to a mechanism to facilitate this
process.  Pricing for various risk management products can be provided at the
request of the customer.

 Customer will not be exposed to daily prices, even during OFO periods

 Seller can provide accounting services to handle all payables for
transportation capacity and therefore provide a consolidated statement for
gas supply and transportation.

Seller is prepared to work with the Buyer to manage any new acquisitions that
take place during the course of any agreement.  However, Seller maintains the
right to reprice the products and services provided under such agreement if
such acquisition materially affects the scope of the original offer.

 << File: rfp revision letter.doc >>
They selected a three year deal, however, termination language will need to
be negotiated. We will wait for Mike Grigsby to get back to determine some of
that language.  If they terminate with in one or two years, they will be
required to pay the difference in the demand charge for the period we
provided this service and the $.08.

Please let me know what else I can do to help facilitate this process.

Thanks,

Kim


I will be out of the office next week on Spring Break. Can you participate on
this call? Please report what is said to Christian Yoder 503-464-7845 or
Steve Hall 503-4647795

	"A William Urquhart" <awu@quinnemanuel.com>
	03/09/2001 05:48 PM

		 To: <GFergus@brobeck.com>, <dmbutz@butzdunn.com>,
<Richard.b.sanders@enron.com>, <jmorrissey@mdbe.com>, <ncregan@mdbe.com>,
<dpritchard@mofo.com>, <hmersel@mofo.com>, <JRoth@mofo.com>,
<lebiner@mofo.com>, <bcurrey@omm.com>, <mawilliams@omm.com>,
<jenniferbaldocchi@paulhastings.com>, <thord@perkinscoie.com>, "Harry Olivar"
<hao@quinnemanuel.com>, <paramfjord@stoel.com>, <ayudkowsky@stroock.com>
		 cc: <GErspamer@mofo.com>
		 Subject: Re: ISO Withholding Payment

I don't know, but I will check with our client.
>>> "Pritchard, Diane E." <dpritchard@mofo.com> 03/09/01 03:35PM >>>
Our client Avista Energy has received the communication, below, from the ISO
regarding withholding of payments to creditors of monies the ISO has
received from PG&E.  We are interested in whether any of your clients have
received this communication, are interested in this issue and, if so,
whether you have any thoughts about how to proceed.

You are invited to participate in a conference call to discuss this issue on
Monday, March 12, at 10:00 a.m.

Call-in number: (888) 320-6636
Host: Pritchard
Confirmation number: 1827-1922

Diane Pritchard
Morrison & Foerster LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 268-7188
dpritchard@mofo.com

ISO Market Participants:

On March 7, 2001, the ISO distributed funds from the March 5 market
settlement of the December 2000 preliminary invoice.  The ISO distributed a
total of $45,779,567.97, of which $352,693.64 was applied to outstanding
November balances, and $45,426,874.33 was applied to December balances, as
shown below.   Total amounts payable to Market Participants related to the
December preliminary invoice were $1,490,781,469.67.  Accordingly, the
preliminary pay-out ratio for December was 3.05%, and the cumulative
November pay-out was 24.22%.

Additionally, the ISO received $171,116,114.43 ($177 million less GMC
obligation) directly from PG&E.  PG&E indicated the funds were to be applied
in payment of California Power Exchange ("Cal PX") obligations.  The ISO has
been contacted by the Cal PX, and they have indicated they believe they are
entitled to such funds and that such funds are subject to a pending action
in federal court entitled "Enron Power Marketing, Inc. and Enron Corp. v.
California Power Exchange Corporation", Case No. 01-00901CM (Central
District of  California.  The Cal PX has indicated they plan to seek an
order within the next 7-10 days with the Court to have the funds transferred
to the Cal PX for deposit into an escrow account pursuant to Judge Moreno's
Preliminary Injunction.   These funds are being held by the ISO in a
segregated interest bearing account pending resolution of this issue by that
court.

Payments were made in accordance with ISO Tariff Section 11 and Settlements
and Billing Protocol ("SABP") Section 6.

The following table provides an overview of the cash settlement:

----See Footnotes Which Follow---- Amount Owed Amount Paid to ISO
Default
Market Obligations:
  California Power Exchange $1,442,285,801.01  $0.00
$1,442,285,801.01
  Pacific Gas & Electric (also see note above) $13,103,456.51
$2,031,035.76 ($1,678,342.12 applied to December)  $11,425,114.39
  American Electric Power * $1,698,457.47  $602,777.42
$1,095,680.05
  City of Santa Clara  $31.56  $0.00  $31.56
  Edison Mission Marketing  $21.34  $0.00  $21.34
  Illinova ** $2,360,888.94  $0.00  $2,360,888.94
  Non Defaulting Parties: All Others $43,737,553.38  $43,737,553.38
$0.00
Subtotal $1,503,186,210.21  $46,371,366.56  $1,457,167,537.29

Total Payable from ISO for December $1,490,781,469.67

Total Distributions by ISO Applied to December  $45,426,874.33  <--See Note
1
Pay-out Ratio 3.05%

Outstanding Balance (net of GMC & other      adjustments)
$1,444,652,782.25

Grid Management Charge Obligations ("GMC"):
  Bonneville Power Administration * $83.01  $0.00  $83.01
  British Columbia Power Exchange * $278,212.68  $0.00  $278,212.68

  Dynegy  * $35,963.06  $0.00  $35,963.06
  Illinova ** $4,011.80  $0.00  $4,011.80
  New Energy * $50,605.46  $0.00  $50,605.46
  Puget Sound * $101,783.73  $0.00  $101,783.73
  Seattle City Power & Light * $7,116.22  $0.00  $7,116.22
  Southern California Edison ** $114,022.63  $0.00  $114,022.63
Non Defaulting Parties: All Others $14,873,312.81  $14,873,312.81
$0.00
Subtotal $15,465,111.40  $14,873,312.81  $591,798.59

Total, Market and GMC Receivable $1,518,651,321.61
$61,244,679.37  $1,457,759,335.88

Note 1:
  Collections (see above)  $46,371,366.56
  Less: GMC Shortfall collected from Market Funds
($591,798.59)
  Less: December collections applied to November Payables
($352,693.64)

  Total  $45,426,874.33

Note *, **, *, ** *  AEP is a creditor for November for an amount in excess
of December default amount. ** Illinova is a creditor for November for an
amount less than the December default amount. *    Party has no remaining
GMC obligation after offset against amounts distributed. **   SCE and
Illinova remain in default for GMC obligation.

The distributions were made in accordance with the following tariff
provision:

 11.16.1 Pro Rata Reduction of Payments.
 If it is not possible to clear the ISO Clearing Account on a Payment
Date because of an insufficiency of funds available in the ISO Reserve
Account or by enforcing any guarantee, letter of credit or other credit
support provided by a defaulting Scheduling Coordinator, the ISO shall
reduce payments to all ISO Creditors proportionately to the net amounts
payable to them on the relevant Payment Data to the extent necessary to
clear the ISO Clearing Account.  The ISO shall account for such reduction in
the ISO ledger accounts as amounts due and owing by the non-paying ISO
Debtor to each ISO Creditor whose payment was so reduced.

As noted above, certain parties have defaulted on their GMC obligations to
the ISO.  The ISO has a priority claim to the collection of its GMC.  As a
result of non-payment of the GMC by the parties listed above, the ISO
reduced the amounts payable to market participants by a total of $591,798.59
to satisfy the ISO's GMC obligation.  This action was consistent with
Settlements and Billing Protocol section 6.3.1.3.  Additionally, for those
parties who defaulted on their GMC obligation to the ISO, but who were to
receive funds from the market, the ISO has reduced their payout to reflect
their GMC default.

 SABP 6.3.1.3
 The ISO is authorized to instruct the ISO Bank to debit the ISO
Clearing Account and transfer to the relevant ISO account sufficient funds
to pay in full the Grid Management Charge falling due on any Payment Day in
priority to any other payments to be made on that or on subsequent days out
of the ISO Clearing Account.

Amounts collected from any party are first used to settle that party's
oldest outstanding amount payable, in accordance with SABP 6.10.4:

 SABP 6.10.4
 The ISO shall apply payments received in respect of amounts owing to
ISO Creditors to repay the relevant debts in the order of the creation of
such debts.

Accordingly, amounts received on 3/5/2001, were distributed to November 2000
and December 2000 creditors.  Payments received from parties who defaulted
in November were first applied to their November balances.  The $352,693.64
was distributed to creditors for the trade month of November 2000.

In accordance with Section 11.12 (and SABP 6.10.5) of the tariff, the ISO
will assess the defaulting parties interest at the ISO Default Interest Rate
(currently 10.5%:  prime plus 2%).

Certifications are required by Section 11.20.2 of the tariff.  Accordingly,
the ISO will provide such certification to ISO creditors.

 11.20.2 Evidence of Unpaid Amount.
 The ISO shall, on request, certify in writing the amounts owed by an
ISO Debtor that remain unpaid and the ISO Creditors to whom such amounts are
owed and shall provide certified copies of the relevant Preliminary and
Final Settlement Statements, invoices, and other documentation on which the
ISO's certificate was based to the ISO Debtor and the relevant ISO
Creditors.  An ISO certificate given under this Section 11.20.2 may be used
as prima facie evidence of the amount due by an ISO Debtor to ISO Creditors
in any legal proceeding.

The ISO will report further details on this situation when available.

Philip Leiber
ISO Treasurer and Director of Financial Planning
(916) 351-2168

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

This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged.
Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee),
you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information
contained in the message.  If you have received the message in error, please
advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message.
Thank you very much.

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


bumpy times.  gonna take alot of work to come back.  i'll fill you in some time.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Sellers [mailto:Nancy.Sellers@RobertMondavi.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:13 AM
To: 'Jeff Dasovich'; 'Eldon Sellers'; Prentice @ Berkeley; Prentice
Sellers
Subject: FW: Enron Dumps CFO Amid Conflict Questions

You guys sure are in the news a lot!!  I think you should take over - it's
the only way out

-----Original Message-----
From: CFO.com_Newsletters@cfo.com [mailto:CFO.com_Newsletters@cfo.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:09 AM
To: nancy.sellers@robertmondavi.com
Subject: Enron Dumps CFO Amid Conflict Questions

http://www.cfo.com

CFO.com's
Today in Finance

________________________________Sponsor ________________________________
Infrastructure: it starts with you.  See the difference when your
infrastructure works around YOUR needs rather than the other way around.
Servers are flexible enough to handle multiple operating systems.  Software
puts your entire infrastructure in reach of your keyboard.  Storage squeezes
more efficiency out of resources you've already invested in.  It's the HP
difference at:
http://ad.2clk.net/eclk;3252766;1729382256984211925;6543288;47648;;10041.

_________________________________________________________________________

Thursday, October 25, 2001
Circuit Breaker: Enron Dumps CFO Amid Conflict Questions

By Stephen Taub

Enron Corp. is set to replace CFO Andrew Fastow. As CFO.com reported in a
story earlier this week, Fastow's role in a limited partnership has raised
concerns about a conflict of interest.

Fastow is succeeded by Jeff McMahon, who had been serving as chairman and
CEO of Enron's Industrial Markets group. From 1998 to 2000, McMahon was
Enron's treasurer. He resigned that post in part because he disapproved of
Fastow's role in running two partnerships, according to The Wall Street
Journal.

"In my continued discussions with the financial community, it became clear
to me that restoring investor confidence would require us to replace Andy as
CFO," said Kenneth L. Lay, Enron chairman and CEO, in a statement.

McMahon, 40, joined Enron in 1994 and spent three years in the London office
as CFO for the company's European operations. Upon returning to the United
States, McMahon assumed the post of EVP of finance and treasurer for Enron
Corp. In 2000, he was named president and COO of Enron Net Works, where he
focused on E-commerce activities.

As reported on Friday, The Wall Street Journal said a limited partnership
organized by Fastow, who has been Enron's CFO since 1997, racked up millions
of dollars in profits from transactions conducted with the energy company.

On Monday, Enron said the Securities and Exchange Commission requested
information regarding certain related party transactions.

On October 16, Enron stunned Wall Street when it announced that it would
take a $1.01 billion after-tax charge for the September 30 quarter.

Since the announcement, Enron's share price has more than halved.

Fastow's dismissal seems to be an about-face for Enron. In a conference call
Tuesday, Lay said the partnerships were fully disclosed and took steps to
assure that there was no conflict as Fastow played both roles. Enron has
since dissolved the partnerships.

"Obviously, the board and even the lawyers and auditors realized that there
would be an apparent conflict of interest there and the board prescribed
certain methods for it to be dealt with ... so Enron would never be
compromised," Lay said in published accounts. "We are very concerned [at]
the way Andy's character has been loosely thrown about in certain articles,
as well as the company's reputation."

Predictably, on Wednesday at least two law firms - Stull, Stull & Brody and
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, L.L.P - filed class-action suits against
Enron, Lay, Fastow, and Jeffrey K. Skilling, the former Enron chief
executive who resigned in August.

The suits allege that the defendants issued false and misleading information
that materially misstated the company's condition and prospects to the
investing public. Moreover, the suits argue that the company failed to
disclose material information necessary to make its prior statements not
misleading.

The complaints charge that Enron issued a series of statements concerning
its business, financial results, and operations which failed to disclose,
among other things:

* The company's Broadband Services Division was experiencing declining
demand for bandwidth, and the company's efforts to create a trading market
for bandwidth were not meeting with success, as many of the market
participants were not creditworthy.

* The company's operating results were materially overstated, since Enron
failed to write down in a timely fashion the value of its investments with
certain limited partnerships - the partnerships that were managed by Fastow.

* Enron was failing to write down impaired assets on a timely basis in
accordance with GAAP.

Read On! For More of Today in Finance
http://m.s.maildart.net/link_30322_6543288_1_120086373_73941461_0_7a

**********************FROM OUR FEATURED ADVERTISER **********************

Save on e-billing.  With $25,000 off the top.
From now until Nov. 2, 2001, you can sign up for the industry-leading
OpenBill
 Express e-billing system and receive implementation free - a
$25,000 savings. The secure e-billing system can be implemented in 48 hours
and you can customize branding, marketing messages and bill design yourself.
Call (972) 797-4800, or visit
http://ad.2clk.net/eclk;3484927;1729382256984211925;6543288;125818;;53311.

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

Take CFO's Budgeting and Planning Software survey!

The results of CFO's  survey will be used in a December Technology Report
that will examine the change management issues that surround implementations
of this type of software in organizations. All responses will only be used
in the aggregate. Your input is important, please take a moment and
participate. Thank you!
http://charts.cfo.com/cfomag/bpsurvey1.html
__________________________________________________________________________

Also on CFO.com:

BANKING: Banking Without Borders.
http://m.s.maildart.net/link_30323_6543288_1_120086373_73941461_0_7b

CFOs ON THE MOVE: Parts is Parts? CFO at Lear Corp. Steps Down.
http://m.s.maildart.net/link_30326_6543288_1_120086373_73941461_0_7e

CFO EXCELLENCE: Lessons from the Top Cop of Risk.
http://m.s.maildart.net/link_30325_6543288_1_120086373_73941461_0_7d

SOFTWARE: Financial Portals -- Behind the Green Door.
http://m.s.maildart.net/link_30324_6543288_1_120086373_73941461_0_7c

________________________________________________________________________
For information about advertising in this newsletter, contact Mimi
Capalaces, VP of Sales. Call (212) 698-9738 or write to
mimicapalaces@cfo.com
________________________________________________________________________

Get the Magazine - FREE Subscription - CFO Magazine is free to qualified
readers. To subscribe go to:
http://as400.halldata.com/cgi-bin/subscribe/cf?SS=SHRTFRM&pk=HP7

Become a registered user and receive FREE, unlimited access to CFO.com. Go
to: http://www.cfo.com/User_Registration
________________________________________________________________________

Copyright (c) 2001 CFO Publishing Corporation

To access the Unsubscribe page, click this link:
http://www.cfo.com/unsubscribe_nl/1,5013,807612|34978|7,00.html

This email was sent to:nancy.sellers@robertmondavi.com


Please rebook the following:

Andres
QN7130.1 to Western Gas Resources, Inc.
QN9044.1 to Midcoast Marketing, Inc.

Jason Wolfe
QN7219.1 to Coastal Merchant Enegy, L.P.

Laura
QN8105.1 to Louis Drefus Corporation
QN8106.1 to CLECO Marketing and Trading, LLC
QN7963.1
QN7965.1 both to  Nexen Marketing

Thank you - Janie


It isn't clear to me whether you are on for this banquet tomorrow so I can
RSVP to Holly!

	"Patti Young" <pyoung@pdq.net>
	09/21/2000 03:34 PM

		 To: <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: An Update

The one I have is the blue (deep purple) flower.  I think it is a new color.

It has a little light orange fruit on it, hence the name 'Golden Dewdrop'.

It is not really a big deal if you don't want it.  I was just offering it to
you first because it is a neat plant.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
To: <pyoung@pdq.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: An Update

>
> I would love to have the plants as long as they can take direct sun...can
> they?
>
> Did you see on the news last night that they arrested 44 people for
> participating in that pyramid scheme you were telling me about?  There's
an
> article about it in the KHOU TV website.
>
>
>
>
>                     "Patti Young"
>                     <pyoung@pdq.n        To:     <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
>                     et>                  cc:
>                                          Subject:     Re: An Update
>                     09/21/2000
>                     02:27 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for the info.  I sent in my resume with a letter that they
requested
> explaining how my experience would fit the job, plus salary requirements.
> Once again, I will keep my fingers crossed.
>
> Do you want plant/plants??
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
> To: <pyoung@pdq.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 4:01 PM
> Subject: Re: An Update
>
>
> >
> > That job is with Bob Williams, the litigation attorney for our
> > international company.  Bob is a great guy, probably one of the funniest
> > people I have ever known.  It also might be a good job for you because
he
> > promoted his last administrative assistant to paralegal.
> >
> >
> >
> >                     "Patti Young"
> >                     <pyoung@pdq.n        To:     <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
> >                     et>                  cc:
> >                                          Subject:     Re: An Update
> >                     09/20/2000
> >                     11:51 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for writing back.  I could probably do the Saturday evening
thing.
> > I
> > will let you know soon.
> >
> > If you get a chance, check out Job No. 105738.  Know anything about it??
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
> > To: <pyoung@pdq.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:47 PM
> > Subject: Re: An Update
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I was just about to call you when I got your email.  Holly called and
> she
> > > has a table to fill at an awards banquet (some women's professional
> group
> > > or something) and wants to know if you want to join us.  A bunch of
her
> > > girlfriends are going, me, Lucinda, I think Carol....anyway, it's
> > Saturday
> > > night at 7:00 pm.  She said it should be really boring (so I put it on
> my
> > > calendar as "boring awards banquet"), but with all the girls at one
> table
> > > we'll misbehave and have fun.  I hope you can join us.  Let me know
and
> > > I'll reserve you a spot w/Holly.
> > >
> > > The thing on your house and townhome sounds exciting.  When can I see
> > it?!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >                     "Patti Young"
> > >                     <pyoung@pdq.n        To:     "Tana Jones"
> > <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
> > >                     et>                  cc:
> > >                                          Subject:     Re: An Update
> > >                     09/18/2000
> > >                     05:44 PM
> > >
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The name of the plant I told you about last week is DURANTA.
> > >
> > > Think you will want it??
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Tana Jones <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
> > > To: <pyoung@pdq.net>
> > > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 8:28 AM
> > > Subject: An Update
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That job I passed on your resume to in our group, I checked, and
they
> > > still
> > > > haven't started interviewing people yet, since Barbara is on
vacation
> > > dropping
> > > > her daughter off at college.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>


Mark,
I'd like to expand on Kevin's explanation:

- Time-stamping:  If the owner wants Standard time all year and have a 1 hour
offset for half the year, that is his decision.
At the last Daylight-Savings time transition, at all sites we changed the
clock at the Park PC and the Time Synch routine updated all WTGs.   The time
change would have to be accounted for in the Central Database (STAR).  We
wrote a SUB to perform this activity.

- Two versions of VisuPro running on a Plant concurrently:  Kevin covered
this.  I'll cc Joe Thorpe on this correspondence.

- Writing data to errdev file:  If errdev, or any VisuPro file is open, the
new data will not be updated on the display monitor.  However, the data will
still be written to the file, and the next time the file is opened for a
person to review, the latest data will be shown.

Please contact me if additional information required.

Thank you.
Ron

Kevin Cousineau
06/18/2002 07:38 AM
To: Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron
cc: Ronald Brzezinski/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Joe Chapman/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Alaadin
Suliman/EWC/Enron@Enron, Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Re: Questions/Observations about VisuPro

Mark:

First, the new version of VisuPro (Version IV) will use standard local time,
not daylight time. This means that during the year it will be off by one hour
for 1/2 of the year.

Second, the plant pc cannot have more then one version and copy of VisuPro
running at one time. If it does then strange things happen. I will ask our
SCADA people to make sure that Joe does not run more then one copy of VisuPro
on any plant pc.

Regards

KLC

Mark Fisher
06/17/2002 09:18 AM
To: Ronald Brzezinski/EWC/Enron@ENRON
cc: Kevin Cousineau/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Joe Chapman/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Alaadin
Suliman/EWC/Enron@Enron, Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Questions/Observations about VisuPro

Ron,

While I was at Mill Run/Somerset last week a few things came up about
visupro.

First a question about the new version. As I understand it, the new version
is going to use "local time". Is this local STANDARD time or local time
(taking Daylight Savings time into account)? The owner's representative
indicated a preference for local standard time.

Now for a couple of things Joe Thorpe at the site mentioned. He has observed
that if two copies of visupro are running at the plant, then 10-minute data
does not get written. Second if visupro (at the plant) has the errdev file
open, then new data does not get written to the file. Are you aware of these
observations? If not you might want to contact Joe Thorpe and see if he has
additional examples, and do some kind of testing. These are probably issues
with the way that Paradox locks files.

Mark Fisher


---------------------- Forwarded by Dana Davis/HOU/ECT on 02/16/2001 09:03 AM
---------------------------

ClickAtHome@ENRON
02/15/2001 08:40 PM
Sent by: Clickathome@ENRON
To: clickathome@enron.com
cc:  (bcc: Dana Davis/HOU/ECT)
Subject: ClickAtHome is Coming Soon!

Want a NEW high speed computer?

866 MHz Pentium III Processor FAST enough?

Want High Speed internet?
Broadband,
Cable Modem,
DSL,
Satellite.

Then Get READY...
All Eligible U.S. Employees get innovative at HOME beginning March, 2001.

Go to http://clickathome.enron.com to LEARN more about the offerings.

Non-U.S. Eligible Employees get innovative at home beginning late 2001 and
2002.


Looks good.  I'm checking to see who will sign. Have you received the
delivery yet?


Please send me the names of the 10 counterparties that we are evaluating.  Thanks!


Jim,

Take a look at this spreadsheet.  I tried to calculate the IRR on the port Aransas and Roma post offices.  Is this how your clients usually evaluate these properties?  The Roma deal looks much better.

Phillip


The following are?summaries of today's appearance by  Sen. John Burton to the
Sacramento Press Club and of his news conference this  afternoon announcing a
lawsuit against FERC.
?
John Burton held what amounted mostly to a Q&A session at  a?lunch with the
Sacramento Press Club today. He started by talking about  the Edison MOU,
which he said will be assigned to the Senate Utility Committee  for review,
the Judiciary Committee will look at the legal elements, and the  Natural
Resources Committee will look at issues surrounding easements.?  (One
columnist commented that Burton would "love it to death," meaning it would
get so much attention it will be hard for it to advance.)
?
The MOU, he said, includes language that eliminates oversight  by the PUC.?
He said that will not be the case when it leaves the  Senate.
?
Burton is obviously troubled by?the MOU; he said "some  people" say it
doesn't just make Edison creditworthy, it makes them whole.?  He said the
following would have to take place for the MOU to be  acceptable:
?

Back debt must be verified;
All creditors must take a 30% "haircut";
The transmission lines would need to be purchased for an  amount close to
what the governor has mentioned;
$400 million (or more) must come from Edison's parent to pay  back debt.

?
When asked whether $400 million was enough, he said "no" and  that he feels
the parent should pay "a ton."? That led to a discussion of  the dedicated
rate component, which he doesn't like.?He used  the example that if
electricity costs $20 and the dedicated rate component is  $5, if prices drop
to $10 people will unnecessarily pay higher rates.? A  larger infusion of
cash from Edison's parent could eliminate the need for the  dedicated rate
component.
?
Burton called?the dedicated rate component a "big  problem" and said it could
be the strongest argument for use in an initiative  campaign.
?
He said he planned to tell the governor this afternoon that  the state should
set an acceptable purchase price for power and not pay anything  more (note:?
this is a populist approach that is getting a lot of support  from radio talk
shows and other media).? He later threw out the number  $200.? The state is
going to have blackouts whether or not it pays top  dollar, he said, so this
is one way he sees to fight back.? It's tough  medicine, but as he put it,
"You've got to take castor oil and it tastes crappy,  but two days later
you're over it and your stomach's OK."
?
Burton also used a quote from his late brother, Phil, on how  he believe the
situation should be handled:? "The only way to deal with  exploiters is to
terrorize the bastards."
?
Asked how long the committee process would take re: the MOU,  Burton said the
MOU sets August 15 as a deadline but that if there is ongoing  progress there
are allowances that would let the process go as long as into  December.
?
?
LAWSUIT PRESS CONFERENCE
?
Shortly after the lunch, Burton held a press conference to  announce a
lawsuit against FERC was filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for  the
Ninth Circuit.? A copy of the brief and press release was faxed earlier  this
afternoon to Jim Steffes and should be available in his office.? If
additional copies are needed, please contact me or Scott Govenar.
?
The plaintiffs are Burton, individually and on behalf of the  Senate; Bob
Hertzberg, individually and on behalf of the Assembly; and the City  of
Oakland.? At the event were Burton, Hertzberg, Oakland Mayor Jerry  Brown,
atty. Joe Cotchett of Cotchett, Pitre & Simon (in Burlingame); atty.  Clark
Kelso, a constitutional scholar from McGeorge School of Law; Sen. Liz
Figueroa; and Joan Breuner, vice mayor of Oakland.?
?
The suit asks for FERC to respond within 7 days and a ruling  within 21 days.
?
Burton opened by explaining that they were suing FERC for not  fulfilling its
statutory authority to maintain fair and justifiable rates.?  Hertzberg added
that FERC had ignored the law and that they  were compelled to file suit for
Californians' relief.
?
Joe Cotchett said the suit is "very basic" and is based on the  Federal Power
Act, which he says limits power costs to "fair and justifiable"  rates.??A
primary?strategy in this suit is to present it as a  "health and welfare" and
public safety suit; he noted that there are 3 million  disabled children and
12,000 convalescent homes in CA who can be adversely  affected by blackouts.?
He said it is "not an economic lawsuit -- it's  about senior citizens,
disabled kids and convalescent facilities."? Today  also happened to be the
legislative day for the California Association of Health  Facilities (the
nursing home trade assn.), and several nursing home workers were  apparently
asked to sit at the back of the room for effect.
?
Cotchett said FERC has been told for 3 years that there were  opportunities
to exert market power.? He also claimed that a Redondo Beach  facility
(obviously AES) was fined $8 million by FERC for taking its plant  off-line
and substituting higher rates.? He said, however, that this order  had been
sealed.
?
He cited an industry report that predicts 260 hours of  blackouts this
summer, which could mean four hours a day.? That could be,  he said,
"potentially the ruination of a lot of medicine in  refrigeration."? Cotchett
noted that only hospitals with more than 100 beds  are exempt from blackouts,
which does not protect surgical centers or many  health facilities.
?
Jerry Brown added that "prices are unjust and people are  suffering."?
Continued high prices could mean "potential civic disruption,"  and that
there will be "more actions to mobilize" Western mayors.
?
Liz Figueroa spoke briefly to reiterate the health aspects of  the lawsuit.
?
Burton had mentioned Clark Kelso, who regularly appears on TV  here as a
legal expert and I believe was a colleague of Justice Anthony Kennedy,  in
his Press Club appearance.? He said Kelso had appeared regularly in the
media early on to say that the state had no standing to file the
suit.?Burton's lawyer's sent him the brief, and Kelso thought enough of it
to?join the legal team.
?
Kelso reiterated that FERC has been aware of potential market  power for
three years, and that the commission has delayed  action?unreasonably.? It
has failed to define "fair and justifiable";  that failure, he said, violates
the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of  the Constitution.
?
Kelso said this is not a partisan issue, and called upon  "fellow
Republicans" to support the effort.
?
Joan Breuner (sp?), Oakland's vice mayor, said only that she  believed that
if the energy situation were happening in Texas rather than  California, the
president and FERC would have acted long ago.
?
During the Q&A session, Cotchett said the urgency filing  is necessary
because "5 generators supply 90%" of the electricity in CA and all  five have
rate renewals before FERC.? He also said one of the cases that is  relevant
is Bush v. Gore, in which the Supreme Court found that failure to set
standards (regarding elections, obviously, in that case) violates the Equal
Protection clause.? He also said six states have expressed interest in the
case and have requested briefs:? Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, Washington,
Minnesota and one other he didn't name.? None of these states has yet
committed to joining the suit.


The following are a few summaries of recent New England orders.  Please let
us know if you have any questions.

Sarah

FERC Approves NEPOOL's Three-Part Bids

On April 25, FERC approved NEPOOL,s proposal to implement a system where
generators can submit three-part supply offers consisting of a start-up
price, an hourly no-load price, and an incremental energy price.  NEPOOL also
proposed that when a supplier,s total revenues over a day from the energy and
operating reserves markets were less than its total bid costs, the shortfall
would be paid to the supplier as net commitment period compensation (NCPC)
uplift.  There was disagreement within NEPOOL as to who will pay these uplift
costs.

In approving NEPOOL,s three-part bid system, FERC finds that the system is
consistent with the policies in place in New York and PJM.  With regard to
NCPC uplift cost allocation, FERC finds that NEPOOL,s exiting method of
allocating NCPC uplift costs broadly, based on electrical load, is
appropriate since it is difficult to determine who causes what amount of
uplift costs.  The new three-part bid system will take effect July 1, 2001.

FERC Rejects Proposal to Disclose Bidding Information

In an April 13 FERC order of no overall interest to us, FERC includes a
discussion about the rules for disclosure of bidding and other data gathered
by the ISO.  Braintree had argued that FERC should require public disclosure
of bidding and other data in order to allow NEPOOL participants to monitor
the actions of others.  FERC rejected Braintree,s arguments, finding that
FERC,s rules strike an appropriate balance between the need to disclose as
much information as possible and the desire to avoid disclosure requirements
that will make it more difficult for the ISO to obtain information from
market participants in the first place.  FERC states that because data
collection is critical to the ISO,s ability to monitor the NEPOOL markets, it
does not want to take action that would impede the ISO,s ability to collect
this information.

Information Policy

NEPOOL submitted a March 5, 2001 request for revisions to NEPOOL,s
Information Policy, to be effective May 5, 2001, which permits FERC to obtain
NEPOOL Participant confidential information directly from ISO-NE.  On April
25, 2001, FERC issued an order approving the filing.  FERC stated that ISO-NE
should be able to turn over confidential information to FERC without first
being required to notify the affected member of receipt of a request for
information.  However, the Commission notes that the information given to
FERC will be treated confidentially by FERC until FERC rules otherwise, and
those Participants' whose information is given to FERC will retain the
opportunity to oppose release of that information to the general public
before FERC makes the information public.

Market Monitor Information Collection

ISO filed revised procedures intended to give ISO the authority to monitor
for generator physical and economic withholding as a way to raise prices.
Under the revised procedures, a reference price is calculated for each 10MW
block for each generating unit.  The specific reference price is an average
of in-merit bids over the last 30 days.  ISO will investigate all bids that
deviate significantly from the reference price.

Under the ISO's proposed procedures, prospective mitigation will occur if ISO
determines that the bid will have a significant effect on the relevant market
clearing price or uplift payment and the generator cannot adequately justify
why its bid is not anti-competitive.  If a bid is mitigated, ISO will
substitute the generator,s reference price as its default bid.  ISO will
implement these new mitigation measures on July 1.  ISO also proposed to
release bid data after a 3 months delay (FERC previously ordered ISO to
release bid data after a 6 month delay).

Many generators opposed the procedures; Braintree argued they do not go far
enough.  On April 26, FERC accepted ISO,s changes, finding that they do not
give ISO too much discretion and are consistent with NYISO mitigation
procedures.  FERC rejected ISO,s proposal to release data 3 months
after-the-fact and directed ISO to wait 6 months before release.


Lou,

Thanks a lot.

Vince

To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:

Congratulations on your promotion.  Lou


SAVE THE DATE

At the request of Rick Causey, please save the following dates for a meeting
to be held in San Antonio.

You will be sent more detailed information soon.

         SEPTEMBER 13-15, 2000


Here are the P&L file and positions.

I will be on vacation next week, Kam will be covering for me.  Thanks.
PL


Do you remember anything about this agreement?  It was something people were
looking for while I was in Fort Worth, and now I'm trying to find the signed
original.

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 07/18/2000 03:17
PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Kay Mann                           07/18/2000 03:15 PM

To: Steve Irvin/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Vitro/Termination agreement

FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 07/18/2000 03:14
PM ---------------------------

Brian D Barto@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
07/17/2000 09:27 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Martin W Penkwitz/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Re: Vitro/Termination agreement

What I was told by your secretary and Marty was that ENA was keeping one of
the signed originals, and I picked up the other to give to Schroeder.  I do
not exactly know where ENA's original went.  Lets ask Marty.

To: Brian D Barto/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:

Subject: Re: Vitro/Termination agreement

I thought that someone retrieved the originals (which has been signed by GE
but not Enron) while I was in Ft. Worth for my dad's surgery. Marty mentioned
that you were looking for them, so I thought  he had given them to you (he's
out this week).  I have not seen the termination agreement since I returned.
Did you and John leave fully executed termination agreements in my office?
Maybe someone else picked them up.

I can't tell you what's going on with the assignment.  Perhaps Peggy Banczak
can help out with that.

Kay

Brian D Barto@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
07/17/2000 08:00 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Vitro/Termination agreement

Schroeder and I left two signed originals with you, so what does "processed"
mean.  Yes, thankyou for asking, GE has received their fully executed
original, and therefore should be prepared to issue the invoice to
Purchaser.  But I have not seen the invoice yet.

What is the status of the assignment of the GE contract to Mitsui?  Did the
invoice go to them?

To: Brian D Barto/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Peggy
Banczak/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Vitro/Termination agreement

I haven't seen a signed copy of the termination agreement cross my desk.  I
just want to make sure that the fully executed document has been processed.

Thanks,

Kay


Please send out 2 books to TECO.  Thanks
Ben


Attached please find the daily log for 08/09/01, 08/10/01 and weekly summary for week of 08/06.  If you have any comments please advise at ext 54751 or send email.

Regards,

Nancy


i guess this is the answer to my inquiry on cypress issue-rick
---------------------- Forwarded by Rick Buy/HOU/ECT on 11/29/2000 08:22 AM
---------------------------
From: Travis McCullough on 11/28/2000 09:59 AM
To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Cypress Exploration Program--Operator/Cash Call Issue

Mark and Rick:

Attached is an e-mail from Teresa Bushman passing on what she has learned
about the circumstances surrounding the operator/cash call issue.  Let me
know if there is anything I can do to follow up on this matter.

Travis McCullough
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street EB 3817
Houston Texas 77002
Phone:  (713) 853-1575
Fax: (713) 646-3490
----- Forwarded by Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT on 11/28/2000 09:57 AM -----

	Teresa G Bushman
	11/27/2000 02:30 PM

		 To: Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Cypress Exploration Program--Operator/Cash Call Issue

Travis:

This is the response I sent to Mark a couple of weeks ago after I first heard
of this matter.  I have since learned that they expect the cost overrun to be
between $500-600,000 or $320-350,000 net to our interest.  Kelley has
promised orally to pay their joint interest billings promptly, and the
billings are being generated every two weeks.  Two have gone out; one of
which for $403,000 has already been paid by Kelley.

Please let me know if there is anything further you'd like for me to do.

Teresa

Teresa G. Bushman
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3835A
Houston, TX  77002
(713) 853-7895
fax (713) 646-3393
teresa.g.bushman@enron.com

----- Forwarded by Teresa G Bushman/HOU/ECT on 11/27/2000 01:58 PM -----

	Teresa G Bushman
	11/12/2000 05:00 PM

		 To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Lance Schuler-Legal/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Cypress Exploration Program--Operator/Cash Call Issue

Mark:

I spoke briefly to Steve Pruett this past week regarding the Cypress JOA cash
call issue that you had inquired about.   As I mentioned in my voicemail to
you, I was not aware of the farmout arrangement or JOA with Kelley and had
not been asked to review the farmout agreement or the JOA.  I obtained copies
of the documents and asked Steve to fill me in on how the situation
developed.  Steve was out of the office much of last week; he followed up
Friday with the attached email message.

As Steve mentions in his email, there were extenuating circumstances and
timing issues, but certainly it was a mistake for a rig to be moved and a
well spudded without agreements in place and for documents to be signed
without appropriate review and approval.  I understand that John Thompson and
Steve made the decision to move the rig and spud the well when they had a
term sheet and draft agreement that they anticipated being able to sign in
short order.   Allen Wilhite and I frequently work together to get
documentation finalized and in form for Steve's execution.  From Steve's
reaction when I told him I had not reviewed or initialled the farmout (which
had been initialled by Allen), I believe he had assumed that had been the
case in this situation as well, although he did not try to place
responsibility on Allen.

Steve is one of the best and the brightest I've worked with at Enron.  He is
extremely busy, working very hard to manage the portfolio of existing E & P
assets, as well as working on new deals.  I have worked with Steve enough to
know that he would never have intentionally failed to follow our procedures.
I think this incident was a mistake that will not be repeated.  I will remind
the ECR group at Monday's staff meeting that review by the legal department
is required before any agreements are signed.

Where do we go from here?  Would you like for me to arrange a meeting with
Steve?  Please let me know if there is anything further you would like for me
to do.

Steve raises the issue of staffing in his email.  In light of the level of
activity for new ECR deals, time that is required in assisting Global Finance
with Condor and a funding vehicle for the VPPs, and the increased legal time
required as Bonne Terre, Cypress, and Vastar are no longer managed by third
parties, being able to provide quality and timely legal advice is
increasingly difficult, and staffing is an issue that I hope can be addressed
soon.

Teresa

Teresa G. Bushman
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3835A
Houston, TX  77002
(713) 853-7895
fax (713) 646-3393
teresa.g.bushman@enron.com

----- Forwarded by Teresa G Bushman/HOU/ECT on 11/10/2000 06:04 PM -----

	Steve Pruett@ENRON
	11/09/2000 07:18 PM

		 To: teresa.g.bushman@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Kelly Farmout Agreement - Cypress Venture

Teresa:

Thank you for approaching me directly about the issue of my failure to obtain
legal review of the subject farmout agreement in Enron Energy Capital
Resources' (ECR) Cypress Venture.  The circumstances of the event follow to
the best of my knowledge, without confirming with Allen Wilhite who is
presently inaccessible:

Rozel Energy, led by Bill Rogers, identified a high potential / relatively
low risk prospect in late August on acreage held by Kelley Oil & Gas (sub of
Contour Energy).  He commissioned a lease check and found that Kelley
controlled 90%+ of the acreage, but it was set to expire on Sept. 28, 2000.

Rozel, after reviewing the prospect with ECR technical personnel and
receiving approval to do so, sought to acquire top leases over the prospect
only to find that others had already top-leased a significant portion of the
prospect.  Had the Kelley lease expired, these parties would have controlled
and drilled the prospect.

Rozel, with the help of Allen Wilhite, approached Kelley for a farmout.
Kelley asked to be presented with a prospect review under the concept that
Kelley would be willing to farmout approximately 50% of its interest, or
farmout all of its interest retaining an ORRI convertible to a WI APO or
higher ORRI at its option.

Kelley elected to participate for 50% of its interest in the well before the
farmout agreement was drafted.  Kelley agreed to general terms in a brief
letter agreement.  Kelley sought to operate the well, which ECR rejected due
to Kelley's poor track record in drilling deep S. Louisiana wells.  Rozel
Energy is the operator in absence of Enron having an operating vehicle.
Rozel employed a seasoned contract operator in S. Louisiana, Stokes and
Speiler, who are being managed daily by Arvel Martin and Bob Devine, who each
have over 25 years experience in mangement of drilling operations.

Inasmuch as the operation of the well was in dispute, the negotiation of the
JOA and the farmout agreement was strained and Kelley was non-responsive to
Allen's efforts to finalize the agreement.  Allen, Craig Fox, Arvel Martin
and I met with Kelley's Land Manager and VP of Operations and established a
dialogue and rapport (we thought).  The initial draft of the farmout
agreement was put together on Sept. 15th by Kelley and Allen.  Allen did not
share the draft with you then as we were still apart on certain deal
provisions, particularly who would operate.  ECR members were in dispute over
the importance of operations.

With Kelley's consent and our high level of confidence that we would reach
terms with Kelley, we moved our rig in and spudded the well a few days prior
to the Sept. 28th lease expiration.  Allen and I continued to be frustrated
with not reaching final contract terms with Kelley after the well was
spudded.  I pressed Allen to finalize an agreement and he presented an
agreement signed by Kelley on October 16, 2000 (effective Sept. 15, 2000).
Following my signature and upon his departure to Kelley's offices to deliver
the document, I asked him if you had reviewed JOA and he said no.  I asked
him if it was required or customary for Legal to review JOAs, and he said it
was sometimes done but there are rarely revisions.  I did not ask
specifically about farmout agreements.  The Kelley farmout was the first
farmout in a directly-owned asset that I had encountered.  I failed to
recognize the distinction between numerous farmouts that I had seen executed
by our GP's in our Juniper, Bonne Terre (historically) and Texland ventures,
and a farmout with Enron's name on the line.

It is my job as a Vice President to know what requires Legal review.  I have
been made aware that farmout agreements and JOA's in directly owned assets
(as opposed to LP's with a GP such as Juniper) require Legal review and
signoff.  The compliance meeting last week underscored that point.  We had
outside counsel (Lisa Jaubert) under your direction review the Tri-C and
Manti farmout agreements and your initials are evidence of your approval.

I respect you as an attorney and business partner and commit that I will be
diligent about obtaining your review of agreements and ask you when in doubt
as to whether legal review and approval is required on a particular item or
issue.

The demands that our large oil & gas exploration portfolio places on you is
another issue that we should discuss.  The Bonne Terre, Cypress and Vastar
ventures have significant drilling activity that has commenced and will
continue.  Dissolution of Bonne Terre and distribution of the assets to ENA
(to be held in BT Exploration LLC) will increase the legal and commercial
activity level.  We have another prospect in Cypress that is being promoted
and will be spudded in the next 10 days, so expect to see a farmout agreement
on the S. Riceville prospect late next week.

I would be pleased to discuss these matters with you and Mark Haedicke in
person if you desire.  I regret my failure to obtain your review and approval
of the Kelley farmout agreement and commit to preventing a repeat of the
mistake.  I am concerned about the pace of agreements that we face in the
immediate future on our direct-owned ventures.   I look forward to working
with you on ways to better manage our business process in Cypress-Acadian,
Bonne Terre & Vastar ventures.


I have responded back to Barbara and am sending her some written material.

Thank you.

Vince J Kaminski
10/12/2000 10:50 AM
To: Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joseph Hrgovcic/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Tawney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Report Research

Joe, Mike,

Please check with PR first if we want too talk to her
and run  it by Mark. I think it is in our interest to be
quotes extensively in the press.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 10/12/2000
10:53 AM ---------------------------

EnergyWriter@aol.com on 10/11/2000 10:54:39 AM
Please respond to EnergyWriter@aol.com
To: energywriter@aol.com
cc:
Subject: Report Research

I am writing a management report on weather risk management. The story
will discuss different weather risk management tools used by power
marketers in the energy industry. It also looks at weather prediction
and analysis services available to energy traders.

I am looking for a list and description of the weather risk management
products, and how each can benefit an energy trader. I would also like
to know what  traders' reactions to significant weather are. And where
can I find a list of popular weather instruments with descriptions?

I appreciate any help you can give me. I would like to set up a chat
with you this week if you have the time, or simply email me your input.
Thanks in advance!

Barbara Drazga
Independent Journalist
PO Box 472401
Aurora, CO 80047
303-369-3533 tel.
303-369-3510 fax


Baldwin's secretary called.  He's going to check with DWR and get back to me tomorrow morning regarding whether Monday or Tuesday will work.

Best,
Jeff


Nothing we need right now.  Things he may need to know:
1.  Pleased with our relationship so far.  Looking forward to market opening.
2.  We are discussing a number of other possible transactions with them including:
Possible options (either our call or their put) for power from the Bruce A units 3&4.  They are attempting to bring these back on line.  This deal would help them ensure the economic viability of doing the refurbishment.  I believe these would not come back until fall 2003 at the earliest.
Short term deals for early next year after market opening
Possible purchase of green power from their wind units at the Bruce

We are also trying to work more closely with them on the lobbying front for market opening.  This may be something he should try to sniff out to see whether they really care if the market opens early next year or not.  The people over here seem to be talking the talk that they do.

Cheers, Paul D

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Wednesday, October 10, 2001 9:40 AM
To:	Devries, Paul
Subject:	John Sherriff

has a lunch tomorrow with the Chairman of British Energy.  Is there anything you want to get from that or should he just bluff his way through.

Let me know

Thanks

Louise


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Belden, Tim
Sent:	Thursday, November 01, 2001 10:12 AM
To:	DL-Portland World Trade Center
Subject:	FW: FBI information regarding possible terrorist threat on West Coast

This just came to me today.  This information is widely available to corporations and law enforcement around the country.  It will likely hit the media in the next day or so.  This is all the information that is available.

Enron Corp. Business Controls/Corporate Security received the following information via the National Threat Warning system.  While we do not wish to unduly alarm employees, the specificity of the information dictated immediate dissemination to our West Coast offices.

THE FBI IS IN POSSESSION OF UNCORROBORATED INFORMATION INDICATING THE
POSSIBILITY OF ADDITIONAL TERRORIST ATTACKS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES,
SPECIFICALLY THE WEST COAST.  REPORTEDLY, UNSPECIFIED GROUPS ARE
TARGETING SUSPENSION BRIDGES ON THE WEST COAST.  SIX INCIDENTS ARE TO
TAKE PLACE DURING RUSH HOUR BEGINNING FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 2 AND CONTINUING
THROUGH NOVEMBER 7, 2001.

NO FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ALLEGED ATTACK IS KNOWN AT THIS TIME.
THE FBI IS ATTEMPTING TO VERIFY THE VALIDITY OF THIS REPORT.  RECIPIENTS
WILL BE UPDATED AS EVENTS WARRANT.

RECIPIENTS WHO RECEIVE OR DEVELOP INFORMATION RELATED TO THIS MATTER
SHOULD IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THEIR LOCAL FBI OFFICE.

We will keep you apprised if we receive any further information.

Thank you.


Jeff and Greg,

Operationally, we are doing great, with tremendous press coverage (USA
Today, CNN, Newsweek, Boston Globe, etc...), growing traffic, and lots of
praise for our site and concept.  On the business development front, we are
now talking seriously with eBay about a distribution arrangement and with
Northwest about expanding to their full route system.

Meanwhile, we are running out of cash.  The money we've got in the bank will
last through early August (assuming an orderly shut-down).  In order to keep
our business development efforts alive, we're trying to raise $500k at a low
valuation in the next 30 days.  Would you be willing to consider a portion
of this amount as a personal investment?

Attached is an up-to-date overview of where we stand.

Best,
Frank Levy

 - Update 5_30_01 v2.ppt