Sunday evening, October 21, 2001

COMMENT: God bless America! Let's hope American consumers are also blessed
with the resolve to keep shopping during these unsettled times! We are the
spenders of last resort. If we give in to terrorism, then the US economic
recession will worsen, and so will the global recession. That is why
President George Bush has been encouraging us to try to go back to business
as usual as best we can. Mayor Rudy Guilliani wants New Yorkers to spend
money at the stores, restaurants, and the shows. The President was right on
the money in his speech delivered Saturday in Shanghai when he observed that
the terrorists tried to disrupt the global economy. They are attacking
globalization. Mr. Bush intends to push for more globalization: "First, our
governments must keep the path of economic progress. That progress begins
with freer trade. Trade is the engine of economic advancement. On every
continent, in every culture, trade generates opportunity, enhances
entrepreneur growth. And trade applies the power of markets to the needs of
the poor."

It is hard to be bullish on the outlook for the economy and the stock
market, especially in New York City since the attack hit us so close to
home. Throughout the country, people are jittery about bio-terrorism. Yet,
we should remain optimistic that the disaster has created some opportunities
that may lead to better times again. Relations among the United States,
Russia, and China are improving as they confront the common threat of
terrorism. We are all taking this problem more seriously now as it is very
apparent that the random acts of terror around the world are not random
shocks, but rather coordinated attempts to destroy centuries of human
progress with the intent of restoring a medieval (and evil) new order. The
triumph of capitalism over communism more than a decade ago was not "the end
of history," as suggested by some. The War on Terrorism may be an even
greater challenge to capitalism, but capitalism will triumph.

The end of the Cold War was very bullish for stocks. This was one of my
major themes in numerous Topical Studies that I wrote during the 1990s.
(See www.yardeni.com/topical.asp.) The end of the War on Terrorism is likely
to be equally as bullish if it leads to increased globalization, world
trade, and prosperity. But, this war has just started, it could last years,
and it isn't likely that any particular event will mark its end, as did the
demolition of the Berlin Wall mark the end of the Cold War. Some observers
see similarities between the two wars because they see a need to contain
terror now just as the United States struggled to contain communism in the
past. The difference is that the Soviets at least valued their own lives,
while the terrorists are suicidal and readily kill civilians.

SUBSCRIBERS: In this week's GLOBAL PORTFOLIO STRATEGY, I reassess the
outlook for consumer spending. I conclude that the key is jobs, as has
always been the case. The prospects are not good because many companies
over-hired during the 1990s. I also examine two other dueling excesses:
capacity versus liquidity. I am betting that liquidity will win, but not
until the second half of next year. In Monday's WEEKLY AUDIO FORUM, I'll
discuss this subject and explain why the widely embraced "V" scenario may
not be so bullish after all. In brief: A "V" can't happen unless housing and
auto sales plunge over the next several months. DBAB analyst Rod Lache will
join me to discuss the auto industry and to explain why Ford isn't giving
workers free PCs anymore.

PUBLIC: I concluded in my recent "Global Strategist's Handbook: Stock Market
Cycles--Bottom Fishing," the panic selling during the week ended September
21 probably made a major cyclical low. Of course, another terror attack at
home could trigger a retest of that low. Heck, lousy earnings reports could
do the same. So could weaker-than-expected consumer spending caused by a
soaring unemployment rate, which could jump to 6% by the end of the year and
7% by next spring, in my opinion.

If September 21 was "the" bottom, then here are a few industries that have
had the best relative performance immediately after S&P 500 troughs since
1960: 1) Paper & Forest Products, 2) Department Stores, 3) Auto Parts, 4)
Thrifts, and 5) Truckers. If you think that we are still in store for a
1973/74 mega-recession, then the best relative performance prior to the 1974
stock market bottom was in: 1) Paper & Forest Products, 2) Chemicals, 3)
Aluminum, 4) Iron & Steel, 5) Metals Mining, 6) Containers & Packaging, 7)
Entertainment, 8) Domestic Integrated Oil, 9) Oil & Gas Drilling &
Equipment, 10) Money Center Banks, 11) Pharmaceuticals, 12) Truckers, 13)
Railroads, and 14) Gold & Precious Metals Mining.

The worst relative performers before the 1974 stock market trough were: 1)
Computer Hardware, 2) Retail Department Stores, 3) Consumer Finance, 4)
Autos, 5) Auto Parts, 6) Alcoholic and Non-alcoholic Beverages, 7) Personal
Care, 8) Property Casualty Insurance, and 10) Electric Companies. Of course,
as we all know, past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

THANKS BARRON'S: This week, in their annual ratings of web sites, Barron's
gave www.yardeni.com second place in the economics category. Other reviewers
have recommended our site. See the awards page at
http://www.yardeni.com/awards.asp.

Dr Ed

********************
Home: www.yardeni.com
Global Portfolio Strategy: www.yardeni.com/weain.asp
Earnings Week & Month: www.yardeni.com/stocklab.asp#earnings
Weekly Audio Forum: www.yardeni.com/waf.asp
Global Economic Indicators: www.yardeni.com/ecindin.asp
Stock Lab: www.yardeni.com/stocklab.asp
Stock Market Indicators: www.yardeni.com/stockindicators.asp
Greenspan Center: www.yardeni.com/greenspan.asp
People Polls: www.yardeni.com/polls/
Multi-Lingual: www.yardeni.com/#languages
Mega Trades: www.yardeni.com/megatrades.asp
**********************************************
VIRUS ALERT: No attachments sent with this message.
**********************************************
The information and opinions in this report were prepared by Deutsche Bank
or one of its affiliates (collectively "Deutsche Bank"). This report is
based upon information available to the public. The information herein is
believed by Deutsche Bank to be reliable and has been obtained from sources
believed to be reliable, but Deutsche Bank makes no representation as to the
accuracy of completeness of such information. Deutsche Bank and/or its
affiliates worldwide may be market makers or specialists in, act as advisers
or lenders to, have positions in and effect transactions in securities of
companies mentioned herein and also may provide, may have provided, or may
seek to provide investment banking services for those companies. In
addition, Deutsche Bank and/or its affiliates or their respective officers,
directors and employees hold or may hold long or short positions in the
securities, options thereon or other related financial products of companies
discussed herein. Opinions, estimates and projections in this report
constitute Deutsche Bank's judgment and are subject to change without
notice. Prices and availability of financial instruments also are subject to
change without notice. This report is provided for informational purposes
only. It is not to be construed as an offer to buy or sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy or sell any financial instruments or to participate in
any particular trading strategy in any jurisdiction in which such an offer
or solicitation would violate applicable laws or regulations. The financial
instruments discussed in this report may not be suitable for all investors
and investors must make their own investment decisions using their own
independent advisors as they believe necessary and based upon their specific
financial situations and investment objectives. If a financial instrument is
denominated in a currency other than an investor's currency, a change in
exchange rates may adversely affect the price or value of, or the income
derived from, the financial instrument, and such investor effectively
assumes currency risk. In addition, income from an investment may fluctuate
and the price or value of financial instruments described in this report,
either directly or indirectly, may rise or fall. Furthermore, past
performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Unless
governing law permits otherwise, all transactions should be executed through
the Deutsche Bank entity in the investor's home jurisdiction. In the U.S.
this report is approved and/or distributed by Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown
Inc., a member of the NYSE, the NASD and SIPC. In the United Kingdom this
report is approved and/or distributed by Deutsche Bank AG, which is
regulated by The Securities and Futures Authority (the "SFA"), is not for
distribution to private customers (as that term is defined under the rules
of the SFA) and no financial instruments referred to herein will be made
available to any such private customer. In jurisdictions other than the U.S.
and the U.K. this report is distributed by the Deutsche Bank affiliate in
the investor's jurisdiction, and interested parties are advised to contact
the Deutsche Bank office with which they currently deal. Additional
information relative to securities, other financial products or issuers
discussed in this report is available upon request. No part of this material
may be copied or duplicated in any form or by any means, or redistributed,
without Deutsche Bank's prior written consent. Copyright 2001 Deutsche Banc
Alex. Brown Inc., all rights reserved.


Steve,

Please forgive the delay.  I was having trouble with my PC again (we have a
replacement in the works).  We are discretely investigating this group a bit
more, but the general conclusion is that they may be a front for one of the
opposition groups.  We are preparing counter arguments for the general
public, but do not see much value in opening a dialogue with this "group."
We always have had opposition and we can expect that socialists etc. (some
groups have boasted that they will storm the DPC fences on March 1) will
begin to rally using us as a scapegoat for Maharashtra's financial
difficulties.  At present, we are getting balanced press and I fear that any
explanation/outreach to the most vitriolic opposition will be used against
us.  I am available to discuss this at your convenience.

John
---------------------- Forwarded by John Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on
02/19/2001 11:55 PM ---------------------------

Maureen McVicker@ENRON
02/16/2001 03:30 PM
To: John Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:

Subject: Dabhol

Steve's out of the office right now - but will be back shortly.

Please let Steve know what you think.

Thanks.

----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 02/16/2001 03:29 PM -----

	Jeff Skilling
	Sent by: Sherri Sera
	02/16/2001 02:21 PM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Dabhol

Steve, please look at the link below.  Jeff wants to know if we should get in
touch with this group to explain our side.  Thanks, SRS

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=14354856


John/Dave,

Frank and I would like to recommend assigning Phil Demoes outside of our new
group as part of the upcoming reorganization.
Please let us know if you would like to discuss further and how we should
proceed.
---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 11/12/2000 08:14 PM
---------------------------

Frank W Vickers
10/23/2000 09:56 AM
To: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Org Chart

Scott, hope all is well.  I will get to the point.  What are your suggestions
on the individuals that we have been assigned ?  I need to rely on you for
any input that might suggest that we not take someone on.  I understand that
Dave wants any personel changes as soon as possible.  What do you think ?  We
do not want to begin with HR problems if we can avoid it upfront.

Please e-mail or call at 503-464-3940.

Frank


Will you please contact them again.  SS

	Tana Jones
	06/14/2000 10:04 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: pg&e

We have not yet received the executed documents.


Kevin,

For Trans Pecos, we have a couple of slides with a fact sheet prepared that we used in the presentation with Stan a couple of weeks ago.  Would you like those or are you looking for a 2-3 page narrative?  I'd be happy to provide either.   What is the time frame - how quick?

Kim.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Howard, Kevin A.
Sent:	Wednesday, January 23, 2002 1:34 PM
To:	Watson, Kimberly; Gadd, Eric
Subject:	TransPecos and Sun Devil

Eric and Kim:
I was hoping to send some information to a potential equity investor (ArcLight) regarding both the TransPecos and Sun Devil transactions.  I have a  very brief presentation or detailed model - nothing in between.  I'm looking for commercial overview, strategic rationale and summary economics.  Do you have anything like this already prepared? If not, is there anyone who could quickly pull this together?
Kevin


Mark,

Thanks for the good news on Friday.

Can you please outline the pocedures we should follow for our Online LME
business.

regards
bruce


Joannie,

I'm back in town and have everything set for Friday AM at 9.  I am also
going to Hobby Performing Arts immediately afterwards with Paul Hobby and
we'd love to have Jeff join us for a short tour of that job as well.

Thanks,

-Stan


FYI.

----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 11/01/2000 01:08 PM -----

	Scott Bolton@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
	11/01/2000 10:01 AM

		 To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Communication within Gov/Reg

I'm all for Greece.

	Sue Nord@ENRON
	11/01/00 06:46 AM

		 To: Donald_Lassere@enron.net, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Xi_Xi@enron.net
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Communication within Gov/Reg

FYI

----- Forwarded by Sue Nord/NA/Enron on 11/01/2000 08:45 AM -----

	Jan Haizmann@ECT
	10/31/2000 09:14 AM

		 To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Jane
Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Michael Grimes/AP/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject: Re: Communication within Gov/Reg

Hi Sue:

I am pleased with this approach. I will ask my assistant Beverley Ashcroft to
put together  a list of participants with phone numbers and time difference
indication. I suggest following people:

Jane Wilson
Michael Grimes
yourself
Donald &/or Scott
Mark Schroeder (provided that he is interested in this)
Wayne Gardner

We will have to find a time scheme which will allow us to talk to each other
at a convenient time.

Following the list of topics as presented by Donald in Vancouver, I suggest
to start with dividing up the issues and nominate 'rapporteurs'.
The rapporteurs can then report on work progressed at our next off site
meeting (in Greece?)

international tax issues
what regulatory issues does the blockbuster deal bring about ?
what are the regulatory risks involved with bandwidth trading ?
how can the global approval process be harmonized ?
CLEC issues
development of a coherent licensing strategy in target markets

I copied some more people into this mail, in order to get the discussion
started.

Best regards

Jan

Sue Nord@ENRON
31/10/2000 14:13
To: Jan Haizmann/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Communication within Gov/Reg

Hi Jan,

I think your suggestion of establishing regular communication between our
groups is a very good one.  Maybe we should start with a monthly conference
call.  The quality of video conferencing between London and Houston doesn't
seem to be very good, and I think it is quite expensive.  Should we try just
doing a phone conference to see if that is adequate?

What do you suggest for the date and agenda for our first call?  Perhaps we
could further refine the scope, participation and timeframe for the working
groups.

I look forward to working with you.  Kindest regards,

Sue

	Jan Haizmann@ECT
	10/25/2000 10:20 AM

		 To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Communication within Gov/Reg

Hi Sue,

I hope that you are doing well. I would like get some communication between
the different areas of business started. Maybe we could meet up once in a
month or bi-monthly. Donald had suggested to set up some working groups and
suggested some areas of interest for us. I would like to come back to this
suggestion.

I  wonder whether we do not have a telephone/video conference on the possible
issues for the working group and present progress  reports on issues on our
next meeting in 3 months time. The aim is to improve communication in general
and to help us structure future meetings.

Let me know what you think. We could then push things forward together.

Best regards

Jan D. Haizmann
Director Governmental & Regulatory Affairs
Enron Broadband Services Europe
Telephone: +44 (0) 207 783 4474
Fax: +44 (0) 207 783 1045
Jan.Haizmann@enron.com
http://www.enron.net


Peggy, and all,

I did a first cut on a draft of regulatory/legislative risks associated with
San Diego.  Because of the need for quick turn-around I am circulating the
draft for comment.

If anyone has comments on the draft, please send to my attention asap and I
will compile a final document.  Thanks.

Peggy Mahoney
09/05/2000 01:53 PM
To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Peters/HOU/EES@EES, James M
Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Nikkel/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Regulatory Risks

Mona:
As we discusssed, I've attached the PR risks associated with going
back into San Diego.  Please email back your take on the regulatory
risks in the morning.
Thanks
Peggy


Attached is the latest draft of the Asset Management Agreement between Enron and NCPH.  Please forward any comments you may have to me.

Thanks,

Heather
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Jay Sonnenberg" <jsonnenberg@bracepatt.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Jay+20Sonnenberg+22+20+3Cjsonnenberg+40bracepatt+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Thursday, May 10, 2001 7:58 PM
To:	Bob.Percopo@AIG.com; christopher.lee@AIG.com; Michael.Walsh@AIG.com; Jgrushkin@milbank.com; wbice@milbank.com
Cc:	Clark Thompson; Kroll, Heather; ozzie.pagan@enron.com; steve.van.hooser@enron.com; Zisman, Stuart
Subject:	Asset Management Agreement

Attached please find clean and black-lined versions of the Asset Management Agreement (marked to show changes against MTH&M's draft of 5/4/01).

Please note that these attachments have not been reviewed by ENA and, accordingly, remain subject to such final approval.

Best regards,

Jay

Jay Sonnenberg
Bracewell & Patterson, L.L.P.
711 Louisiana St., Suite 2900
Houston, TX  77002-2781
(713) 221-1417 (Ph)
(713) 221-2158 (Fax)

 - #1142119 v10 - ASSET MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT.doc
 - #1142119 vRED - ASSET MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT.doc


it is so good to finally get one of these state of the unions again.  i don't
know if i can speak for everyone, but i sure have missed it.    it is just
good to read all the smart, witty humor again.  i especially thought the part
about screaming "who let the dogs out" was quite funny.  it makes it
especially funny b/c the employees play along instead of yelling out "shut up
nerd".   as most of you know chad and i no longer live together.  it was real
tough to see him go b/c we are pretty close, but not as close as maziarz and
i evidently are.  but every now and then i still get reminders that i used to
live with chad  like the other day when i was vacuming.  i decided to vacum
behind the couch b/c i had never cleand back there.  when i looked behind the
couch the floor was littered with about 50 toenails.    at first i was pretty
freaked out and i was thinking how could these toenails possibly get here?
but then i remembered i use to live with chad and he had a nasty habit of
pulling off his toenails.  i should have figured that he didn't dispose of
them properly.  it is good to see that chad has figured out how to use the
email system again.  last week enron sent out a company wide email and our
boy chad replied back to the whole company.  i felt pretty embarrassed for
him after he sent the first reply, but went he replied to the whole company a
second time i just thought that he was an idiot.  now he will be known as the
guy who replied not once but twice to a company wide email.  well, i sure am
looking foward to the next state of the union.  i know i will since i am
going to vegas to spend all my money at the strip clubs.

MFL


Mr. Lay,

I hope you don't mind the unsolicited email. I am interested in founding an
internal organization, or club within Enron.  The club would require
executive support in order to be successful.  I,ve therefore sent you a high
level summary outlining the club,s objectives so that you could pass it along
to the correct executive(s) for further consideration if you think the idea
has merit. I anticipate operating this program on my own time, so the
incremental costs to the company would be minimal. Thank you in advance for
your consideration.

Fred Philipson

Name
Club Intrapreneur

Mission of Potential Organization
To nurture entrepreneurial concepts consistent with Enron strategies and
abilities, bringing them to the point of a written business plan through the
collective, informal participation of Enron employees.

Value Proposition
The club will stimulate, nurture and capitalize on the innovation of
collective individuals within the organization, serving as a catalyst for
developing businesses within Enron.

Problem Statement
Many innovative ideas abound among Enron employees, yet they largely go
unshared or if shared, go undeveloped due to the present lack of a forum.

Solution
This internal club could foster these ideas, reducing these lost
opportunities.  The club could serve as a repository of information,
referring concept development to receptive mentors that could add insight
into an idea,s development.

Overview of club services
? Quarterly speakers from the business community giving brown bag seminars at
Enron.  These speakers could be entrepreneurship professors from  Rice,
venture capitalists or even entrepreneurs from outside Houston.  According to
the Rice University Executive Education Office, Rice   professors charge
$2,000/day, although many could be encouraged to speak pro bono, given their
relationship with high-level Enron executives.   These speakers can also come
from within Enron,s executive ranks, thereby further sharing knowledge and
showing support for the club.
? Monthly seminar-format meetings between Enron executive sponsors and club
members to review concepts and choose those that should be   nurtured further.
? Weekly, informal lunch meetings with club members discussing strategies and
ideas, assigning action items, creating goals and targets for an idea,s
development.
? Intranet site containing club meeting information, white papers, topics
under discussion, links to relevant sites and an overview of Enron,s
strategic  direction, which would serve as a template showing intrapreneurs
the types of ideas Enron would be most interested in developing.


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/01/2001
10:56 AM ---------------------------
From: Paula Corey@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 03/01/2001 09:56 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Doreen

V -

I spoke with Doreen this morning re: our San Francisco project. Please
forward info to her at

  doreen@magdalinweiss.com

Are you up fro brunch at my house on Sunday with Bill and Mary? Kathryn will
be home on midterm break

P -


---------------------- Forwarded by Marcus Nettelton/NA/Enron on 11/07/2000
03:08 PM ---------------------------
From: Alfred Pennisi@MGUSA on 11/07/2000 08:08 AM EST
To: Marcus Nettelton/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: ETS Risk Assessment Reporting Memorandum

Please review and come back to me with comments.

tks for your prompt attention.

regards,

Alfred Pennisi
Enron Trading Services Inc
520 Madison Avenue
28th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Tel: 212.715.5845
E-mail: alfred.pennisi@enron.com

----- Forwarded by Alfred Pennisi/NYC/MGUSA on 11/07/2000 08:20 AM -----

	klarsen@mwe.com
	11/03/2000 04:25 PM

		 To: alfred.pennisi@enron.com
		 cc: Alan.Aronowitz@enron.com, ppantano@mwe.com, daron@mwe.com,
darezina@mwe.com
		 Subject: ETS Risk Assessment Reporting Memorandum

Dear Al:
As discussed, attached please find our Memorandum concerning ETS's CFTC risk
assessment reporting requirements.  Included in the Memo is a discussion of
the
information we will need from Enron to file such report.  Thank you.

Best regards,
Kari S. Larsen
McDermott, Will & Emery
600 13th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005
Ph:    (202) 756-8374
Fax:  (202) 756-8087
Email:  klarsen@mwe.com

(See attached file: ETS Risk Assessment Report Memo.doc)

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

This message is a PRIVATE communication.   If you are not the intended
recipient, please do not read, copy, or use it, and do not disclose it to
others.  Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this
message, and then delete it from your system.  Thank you.
******************************************************************************
*******

For more information on McDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY please visit our website at:
http://www.mwe.com/

 - ETS Risk Assessment Report Memo.doc


Gerald,

Let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks,
Chris Hilgert
Enron Compression Services
Work: 713-853-7350
Cell:   713-857-2479
www.enron.com/compression

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gruesen, Karen
Sent:	Thursday, October 04, 2001 3:46 PM
To:	Hilgert, Chris
Subject:	RE: Notice Letter for ECC

I have written the entries up, reviewed them with Greg and they will be posted today before I leave.  Let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,
Karen

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hilgert, Chris
Sent:	Thursday, October 04, 2001 3:31 PM
To:	Gruesen, Karen
Subject:	RE: Notice Letter for ECC

That's fine, the numbers I was using came from Carol.  The journal entries did get made, correct?  Let me know.

Chris Hilgert
Enron Compression Services
Work: 713-853-7350
Cell:   713-857-2479
www.enron.com/compression

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gruesen, Karen
Sent:	Thursday, October 04, 2001 3:03 PM
To:	Hilgert, Chris
Cc:	Whiting, Greg; Cruz, Jorge
Subject:	FW: Notice Letter for ECC

Chris,
Wanted to let you know that the investment in Kachine/Gallup is $1,775,144.85, not $1,742,855.41.  This will reduce the net gain to $324,158.15.

Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Karen

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hilgert, Chris
Sent:	Friday, September 28, 2001 11:03 AM
To:	Gruesen, Karen
Subject:	FW: Notice Letter for ECC

Karen,

Per our discussion, you will find attached the letter that Jean is going to sign.  According to the numbers showed to me by Carol earlier this week, we should expect to book a gain of $356,447.59 as a result of doing this (calculations below).  Please review and let me know if you have any comments.  I will deliver you the signed letter when I get it along with the detailed calculations.

 << OLE Object: Microsoft Excel Worksheet >>

Thanks,
Chris Hilgert
Enron Compression Services
Work: 713-853-7350
Cell:   713-857-2479
www.enron.com/compression

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald
Sent:	Thursday, September 27, 2001 7:08 PM
To:	Hilgert, Chris
Cc:	Carter, Carol; Sherman, Cris; Dobin, Nora
Subject:	Notice Letter for ECC

Attached is the notice letter to EMP ECHO, LLC for ECS' election to take and make the distributions resulting from the payment of the note for Gallup and Kachina.  As we discussed Chris, Section 5.03 of the LLC Agreement governs the distributions and assuming the requirements of that section are met and upon provision of this notice, the note proceeds can be distributed to ECS.  Upon payment of the note by whoever HPL's assignee is, the original notes will need to be cancelled.  Nora, can locate these originals.

I am not sure if the address and fax for EMP ECHO is correct.  I pulled these from the agreement.  Need to verify.

 << File: EchoNotice.doc >>


FYI.  PCG is up $1.6 as we speak.


Since it is a sleeve with EES, I receive all there daily spreadsheets, I will
check there and see what date it is under.  We'll hold up and I will let you
know.  Thanks

   Kate Symes                12/19/2000 10:30 AM

To: Stephanie Piwetz/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Deal 474440.01

This deal was a sleeve done for EES, and we've had problems with the trade
dates on these before. EES reported this trade to us on 12/6/00, and it was
Matt Motley's understanding that the trade was executed the previous day. He
doesn't care either way, but he suggested you talk to someone at EES - maybe
Jubran Whalan or Neil Bresnan - about what their intent was with the date.

In the meantime, I can change the date to 12/4 if you'd like. What would be
best? E-mail or call and let me know.

Thanks a lot!
Kate @ 503-464-7486

Stephanie Piwetz   12/19/2000 08:15 AM

To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Deal 474440.01

Kate-
Please verify trade date for trade 474440.01, we received our executed Enron
Confirmation Letter back from Powerex Corp and they struck thru our trade
date of 12/4/00 and placed 12/5/00.  Matt Motley was trader, Jan 2001,
$375.00,
Cob N/S.  Please check and I will make note and send to Powerex.   Thank you.


Thanks for the summary.  Mark


No. thank you

Frank Sosa
03/20/2000 04:18 PM
Sent by: Frank Sosa
To: Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: EMISSIIONS FEES

Larry. your Emissions fees for Eunice compressor station is in system.
Thanks


Sally - The following people will be the core of the EGM due diligence team:
Scott Earnest, Michelle Bruce, Sheila Glover, Kevin Sweeney and Michelle
Thomason.  Of course, we will utilize others as needed depending on the
demands of the transaction being reviewed.  Michelle and/or myself will
follow-up with you next week to discuss next steps to finalizing a template
and team for all of wholesale.


for your reading pleasure.

tim
---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 04/16/2001 07:25 AM
---------------------------

Alan Comnes
04/13/2001 01:50 PM
To: gfergus@brobeck.com, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, rcarroll@bracepatt.com, Ray
Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Fw: Fact sheet re: Cal ISO study

From the Bonneville Power Administration:
>
> > This fact sheet addresses statements in a recent L.A. Times article
> > asserting that BPA, among others, manipulated prices on the California
> > electricity market.
> >
> > AEs, CAEs and other BPA staff may distribute the fact sheet to outside
> > parties as you believe appropriate.
> >
> >                       <<CA_sales_TP3.doc>>
> >
> > For additional information, contact Steve Oliver at (503) 230-3295.
>

 - CA_sales_TP3.doc


fyi....I'm going to check into this.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Bolton, Stacey
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 9:08 AM
To:	'"Siegfried, Stuart" <Stuart.Siegfried@puc.state.oh.us>@ENRON'
Subject:	RE: Navitas/certificates

I wonder if this was the Minnesota project that developers like Community Energy are suspicious of them using the power for the green pricing program -- although they deny it.  It would be interesting to see how Excel is "advertising" their commodity purchase and if their customers are paying a premium.  I"ll do a little "sniffing" and see what I find out.

Good morning to you too, pardner.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Siegfried, Stuart" <Stuart.Siegfried@puc.state.oh.us>@ENRON
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 6:53 AM
To:	Bolton, Stacey
Subject:	Navitas/certificates

Good morning  Stacey,
I came across  the following blurb (see below) in a NREL electronic newsletter ---  would the concept conveyed here cause you any concern??????   To  me, this smells of double-counting, but I was curious as to your  reaction.
Have a great  morning,
SMS
--------------------------------
Green Power Marketing Monthly  Update (NREL) - September  2001
Navitas Selling Wind Certificates
Navitas Energy, an independent power  producer and an affiliate ofwind  developer Northern Alternative Energy, is selling "WindWatts"green energy certificates on the Internet. Each  "green tagcertificate" represents one  megawatt-hour (MWh) of wind generationand is sold for $15, or 1.5?/kWh.  The certificates represent the
environmental attributes of the power  generated from two Minnesota-based wind projects commissioned in mid-1998: the  11.25-MW LakotaRidge project and the  11.88-MW Shaockatan Hills project.

According to the State Energy Office, the  energy output of theprojects is being  purchased by Xcel Energy (formerly Northern StatesPower) to meet a legislative requirement to  build or contract for425 MW of wind power  by the end of 2001. Navitas claims that itretains the rights to the wind  energy attributes and only the
commodity energy is being sold to  Xcel.


Question:

Do we have a schedule of assets to be involved in the transaction?  I recall
that Janelle had some stuff that wasn't on the list.

Thanks,

Kay


Gaurav:
FYI.  Please add to the distribution list that you will be circulating.
Carol
----- Forwarded by Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT on 05/31/2000 06:05 PM -----

	"SCOTT AVITABILE" <SAVITABI@LLGM.COM>
	05/31/2000 01:42 PM

		 To: <Carol.St.Clair@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Update on Insurance/Derivative Transaction

Carol:  I received your voice mail this afternoon and it looks like we just
need to wait for the documents to role in and then try to review them ASAP.
In the meantime, would you please add Sam Berins in our Washington DC office
and John McGreevy here in New York to the distribution/working group list.
Their email addresses are sberins@llgm.com and jmcgreevy@llgm.com.  Best
regards.


I would suggest working through Sheila Knudsen and the Compensation Council
to get this done Enron-wide.  Let me know if that isn't successful.  Thanks.
Michelle

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Hector McLoughlin @ ENRON                           09/26/2000 10:40 AM

To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Norma Villarreal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shanna Funkhouser/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: PT exempt EEs paid hourly

What is your suggestion regarding disseminating the message to all other
Enron Companies that part-time employees from the staff level on up (all
exempt positions) should be paid on a salaried basis?   I could use your
input on this.    I called Brian Schaeffer approx. 1 month ago and he said he
was aware of the situation and that changes were going to be made but, I've
not heard anything about how the message is being communicated to other Enron
companies.


Gary & Seth,

 Thumbs up on the FOW article. Many thanks for working through it with me...
Joe

---------------------- Forwarded by Joseph Hrgovcic/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000
11:27 AM ---------------------------

Jane Sandiford <JSandiford@fow.com> on 10/25/2000 06:26:32 AM
To: Joseph.Hrgovcic@enron.com
cc:
Subject: weather article - photos?

Dear Joseph,

Thank you so much for sending me such an interesting article on the Internet
and weather derivatives. I really enjoyed reading it!

I just have one final question - do you have a photograph of yourself (or
the other authors) that you could send me? Tif, gif or jpeg files are fine
so long as they are 300 dpi.

Thanks again and I hope to hear from you soon.

Best regards,

Jane

Jane Sandiford
Deputy Editor
FOW Magazine
Tel: 0207 827 6493
Fax: 0207 827 6413
Email: jsandiford@fow.com

** Disclaimer **

The contents of this E-Mail is sent to the addressee only and may contain
information that is confidential.
Persons other than the addressee should not read, disclose, copy or otherwise
distribute this message except for delivery to the addressee.

This E-Mail and its attachments ( if any ) have been scanned by Trend Micro
Interscan Viruswall v3.4.

** Personal e-mails **

The Metal Bulletin e-mail system scans all e-mails and deletes personal
messages which contain items of a sexual, racial or other inappropriate
matter without notifying the sender. Therefore, the transmission of personal
messages, both incoming and outgoing, cannot be guaranteed.


Bummer.  Never hurts to ask.  I'll cycle on this and get back to you with
follow up if any.  Thanks for your help on this.  DF

	From:  Bob Chandler                           01/27/2000 01:49 PM

To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tim Kissner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: George Fastuca/ET&S/Enron@Enron

Subject: Multi year service contract

Per your request to ask AA where the chokepoint might be on renegotiating the
electricity contract at Cunningham to backload the payments and expense the
payments as made; the response is attached below.

First, it was difficult to point them in exactly the right direction without
tipping them off as to exactly what you had in mind.

However, they thought I might be talking about the TW compressor monetization
project...and even though I denied it...that is what they were thinking when
they did the research.   To make a long story short, they indicate that
straight line amortization of the total contract payments is the way it
should be booked unless there are circumstances to the contrary that would
indicate a different allocation over time.

I don't believe we'll be able to get any good feedback from them on the
chokepoint issue.  It boils down to how blatantly you want to skew the
payments and whether they or FERC compliance auditors ever stumble across it
in an audit.  If Accounting is not aware of such a contract with skewed
payments, then we would not be in a position to accrue expense on an
appropriate straight line basis over the life of the contract.

As to the issue of whether or not ENA should be a party to the transaction, I
did not seek AA advice on this issue, but I do believe that use of ENA as the
counterparty would double the chances for having the issue brought up in an
AA audit, since the issue could also surface in conjunction with AA's audit
of ENA.
---------------------- Forwarded by Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron on 01/27/2000
01:22 PM ---------------------------

Heather Mueck
01/25/2000 07:23 PM
To: Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Multi year service contract

Bob -

I left you a brief message on this, so I thought I'd send you a copy of the
guidance I was referring to.  In a nut shell, there is no pain threshold for
front end or back end loading the payments under a contract.  Generally, we
believe you would need to straight line the expense but I can't say for
certain without the details.

The below is from AA Interpretations and Examples "Accounting for Leases,
Interpretations of FASB Statements 13, 27, 28, and 98" - I've bolded the
applicable section.  Call me if you have any additional questions.

AA Interpretations and Examples\05. Leases
       Accounting for Leases, Interpretations of FASB Statements 13, 27, 28
and 98

1-12. Facility Management Arrangements
In a typical facilities management arrangement, the vendor purchases from a
company ("customer") its existing data processing equipment and hires all or
some of the customer's data processing personnel. The vendor is then engaged
to provide information technology services to the customer for an extended
period of time (typically 5 to 10 years).

Company's Obligation Under the Service Contract
Obligations under executory agreements that are contingent upon services to
be rendered in the future are not liabilities and should not be recorded
except to the extent losses are inherent in such commitments. No liability
should be recognized for a customer's future obligation under an information
technology services contract unless it becomes probable that the customer
will incur a penalty or loss from termination of the contract.

An issue arises as to whether the sale of existing data processing equipment
or facilities to a vendor that uses the purchased property to provide
information technology services to the seller is, in substance, a sale and
leaseback transaction that should be accounted for separately under SFAS Nos.
13, 28 and 98. An information technology services contract typically can be
distinguished from a lease for the following reasons:

The vendor is responsible for the financing and operation of the data
processing equipment and facilities.
Data processing personnel are employees of the vendor.
The vendor is not required to use the equipment purchased from the customer
to provide service to that customer and may use the equipment to serve other
customers.
The vendor provides guarantees regarding performance and retains risks
related to the operating costs.
The vendor is not entitled to payment unless the required services are
provided to the customer in accordance with specified standards.

As a result, generally we believe the sale of data processing equipment or
facilities pursuant to a facilities management arrangement should not be
unbundled and accounted for separately as a sale and leaseback transaction.
However, because of the customer's continuing involvement with the equipment
of facilities sold, we believe any gain or loss on the sale should be
recognized in a manner consistent with the guidance prescribed in paragraph
33  of SFAS No. 13 for sale-leaseback transactions.

Some outsourcing arrangements may involve dedicated equipment (so called,
"exclusive use equipment") that is physically located on the company's
premises and cannot be used by the vendor to service other customers. For
example, a significant amount of the equipment may consist of terminals or
work-stations operated by the company's personnel, such as point-of-sale
registers in a department store or design terminals in an architectural firm,
and the vendor may have only limited ability to replace or remove that
dedicated equipment because of contractual provisions or practical
considerations. In these situations, the customer effectively contracts to
use the terminals or workstations for a specified period * a lease. Such
dedicated equipment should be unbundled from the information technology
services contract and accounted for separately as a sale and leaseback
transaction. In unbundling the equipment from the information technology
services contract, the portion of the fee paid to the vendor applicable to
the equipment lease should be estimated using whatever means are appropriate
in the circumstances and the lease accounted for separately according to its
classification (capital or operating)

If significant, the customer should consider disclosing its commitment under
the outsourcing arrangement. The disclosures required for any portion of the
arrangement determined by the customer to be a lease are set forth in
paragraph 16  of SFAS No. 13.

Gain or Loss on Sale of Equipment or Facilities
Because of the interdependence of terms, there is no practicable and
objective way to separate the sale of data processing equipment, software,
facilities or "know how" from the service contract. For that reason, we
believe any gain or loss from the sale of data processing equipment,
software, facilities or "know how" pursuant to a facilities management
arrangement should be recognized similar to a sale and operating leaseback
transaction as prescribed in paragraph 33  of SFAS No. 13. That is, gain from
the sale should be recognized currently only to the extent such gain exceeds
the present value of the minimum payments due over the term of the service
contract, discounted using the seller's incremental borrowing rate. Any gain
not recognized at the inception of the contract should be deferred and
amortized ratably over the term of the service contract as an adjustment to
the minimum annual fees expensed in each period. Further, if the fair value
of the property at the time of the transaction is less than its undepreciated
cost, a loss should be recognized immediately for the difference between the
undepreciated cost and fair value, regardless of the amount actually received
from the vendor for the property transferred.

Expense Recognition
Payment terms may include fixed annual fees that increase or decrease over
the term of the service contract. These payment terms may be structured in a
high-to-low pattern (that is, to recognize the favorable price/performance
curve of data processing equipment/capabilities) or a low-to-high pattern
(that is, to recognize the estimated effects of inflation on future costs).
Further, there may be payment escalation provisions in the service contract
indexed to inflation and/or the volume of transactions processed by the
vendor. We believe total minimum fees to be paid pursuant to an information
technology services contract should be charged to expense on a straight-line
basis over the term of the contract unless the level of service performed by
the vendor is not uniform over the term of the contract. If the level of
service is not uniform over the term of the contract, the amount of fees
attributable to the additional services to be rendered by the vendor should
be expensed ratably over the time periods the additional services are
provided by the vendor. The amount of fees attributable to the additional
services should be based on their relative fair value, as determined at the
inception of the contract, to the fair value of all services to be provided
by the vendor over the term of the contract.

The "term" of the information technology services contract includes the fixed
non-cancelable term of the contract plus all periods, if any, for which
failure to renew the contract imposes a "penalty" on the customer in such an
amount that a renewal appears, at the inception of the contract, to be
reasonably assured. The expression "penalty" should be interpreted broadly to
include requirements that can be imposed on the customer (a) by the vendor
(for example, a monetary penalty for not renewing the contract) or (b) by
factors outside the contract to disburse cash, forego an economic benefit or
suffer an economic detriment. Factors to consider in determining if an
economic detriment may be incurred include the uniqueness of the equipment or
software, the "know how" of the vendor, the availability of comparable
replacement systems and data processing personnel or vendors, the disruption
to the company's business or service to its customers if the contract were
not renewed and the willingness of the customer to bear the cost associated
with replacing the vendor (either by bringing the functions in-house or by
engaging another vendor). The term of the contract should also include all
periods, if any, (a) covered by bargain renewal options, (b) preceding the
date at which the customer can exercise a bargain purchase option to
reacquire the equipment, software, facilities or data processing personnel
(see Interpretation 5(d)-3, "Bargain Purchase Option 'as Encumbered' by Fixed
Price Renewals "), and (c) during which a loan from the customer to the
vendor or a guarantee of the vendor's debt, directly or indirectly related to
the leased property, is expected to be outstanding or in effect.

Future fee increases that depend upon a factor that exists at the inception
of the agreement, such as the consumer price index or the volume of
transactions processed by the vendor, should be included in the computation
of fixed fees to be recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
contract based on the factor at the inception of the agreement. Increases or
decreases in fees that result from changes occurring subsequent to the
inception of the agreement should be included in the determination of income
as they accrue.

Incentives Offered by the Vendor
A facilities management arrangement may include incentives for the customer
to sign the service contract. For example, an incentive implicit in a
facility management arrangement may be the vendor's assumption of the
severance liability for existing data processing personnel not retained by
the vendor. Other types of incentives include up-front cash payments by the
vendor, below market financing, excessive rental paid to lease space from the
customer, equity transactions (purchase or sales/grants) with the customer at
off-market terms, and so forth.

The fact that the vendor "assumes" a loss or cost does not negate the
customer's need to immediately recognize the loss or expense. The amount of
the loss or cost assumed by the vendor should be estimated by the customer
using whatever means makes sense in the particular facts and circumstances.
The customer should recognize the loss immediately by a charge to income and
the offsetting deferred credit (incentive) should be recognized ratably over
the term of the service contract in proportion to the fixed contractual fees
expensed in each period. Similarly, incentives that result in the recognition
of an asset or a deferred charge should be reported on the balance sheet at
the amount received or fair value, and the offsetting credit (incentive)
recognized ratably over the term of the service contract.


Car Rental Options for Enron Travelers

Rental car contracts for 2001 have been awarded to:

National Car Rental (Primary) and  Alamo Rent-A-Car (Secondary).

The intent of these agreements is to consolidate and leverage Enron's total car rental spend to achieve the most favorable rates and non-pricing provisions (i.e. insurance).

National Car Rental, due to its service levels, availability and total value proposition, has been awarded Primary status and is recommended as the first choice for Enron travelers' needs.

Alamo Rent-A-Car, a sister company to National, has been awarded a contract reflecting a Secondary status, due to its service levels, availability and low cost solutions.  Alamo is recommended as an alternative to National, where available.

When you rent a vehicle in the United States, (including Puerto Rico) or Canada, the following insurance provisions are included, regardless of rate selected:
1.	L/DW (Loss/Damage Waiver) - This is what is called Comprehensive or Collision on your personal auto. It covers the rental vehicle and pays for any damage to it.
2.	Liability - This covers people and property outside the rental vehicle. For both National and Alamo, the coverage is $100,000 per person, $300,000 per occurrence and $50,000 for property damage.
** IMPORTANT ***
These coverages apply regardless of rate selected, as long as the following contract ID is communicated at the time of reservation and rental is recorded on the transaction rental agreement.  (National -  5000838 Alamo    - #143974)

To enjoy the highest levels of service while renting a vehicle from Enron's preferred suppliers, it is recommended that each traveler enroll in National's and Alamo's preferred traveler programs.  National's Emerald Club membership and Alamo's Quicksilver program are designed to speed the transaction time by providing services such as counter bypass and rapid return.  The enrollment fees for these programs have been waived for Enron travelers.  Enrollment packets will be mailed to the addresses of Enron American Express T&E Cardholders.  You may also find an enrollment form on the Enron Travel Program intranet @ gss.enron.com <http://gss.enron.com/>.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact Jeff Leath at 713-646-6165.


Here is a revised draft of an Agreement to finalize the retail issues.  It is
marked to show changes from the previous draft.  Please note that I did not
include Ed's comments regarding a true-up in light of the mechanism Colleen
proposed.

Your thoughts and comments will be appreciated.  I look forward to hearing
from you.


Please remember that MELISSA MURPHY (X31886) handles ALL financial power
confirmations.  Any financial power confirm questions should be directed to
Melissa.  Joe Hunter's group does NOT prepare financial power confirms except
in extrememly limited cases (i.e., NYMEX based trades).  If you have any
questions, please call.  Thanks.  Sara


Pushing our TECO call back is fine with me.  I am good until 4 pm.  I have to
leave by 4:45 today for a meeting outside the office.

Fred

-----Original Message-----
From: Jacoby, Ben
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 2:09 PM
To: Mann, Kay; Mitro, Fred
Subject: RE: Blue Dog

OK. We can push back on the TECO term sheet call. Let Fred and me know what
works.

Who at GE are you talking to?

-----Original Message-----
From: Mann, Kay
Sent: Wed 5/23/2001 2:03 PM
To: Jacoby, Ben
Cc:
Subject: Blue Dog

I'm on the phone with GE.  Their initial response to the assignment stuff is
positive.  They want a letter which sets out the ownership of the LLC and
what we are doing on payment.

I've been working on TECO term sheet, but I'm not sure I'll be done by 300,
depending on this call.

Kay


I sent this to my friend at FERC.  Souldn't we be opposing this?
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 01/25/2001 11:20 AM
---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  "Ronald Carroll" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com>
01/24/2001 10:48 AM

To: <douglass@arterhadden.com>, "Charles Shoneman" <cshoneman@bracepatt.com>,
"Jeffrey Watkiss" <dwatkiss@bracepatt.com>, "Jacqueline Java"
<jjava@bracepatt.com>, "Kimberly Curry" <kcurry@bracepatt.com>, "Paul Fox"
<pfox@bracepatt.com>, "Tracey Bradley" <tbradley@bracepatt.com>,
<rreilley@coral-energy.com>, <jhartso@enron.com>, <mary.hain@enron.com>,
<smara@enron.com>, <snovose@enron.com>, <tkillory@wilmer.com>,
<gackerman@wptf.org>
cc:
Subject: Fwd: AG suit to oust ISO Board

Received: from mcafee.bracepatt.com by bracepatt.com; Wed, 24 Jan 2001
11:57:56 -0600
Received: FROM hountnmail3.ngccorp.com BY mcafee.bracepatt.com ; Wed Jan 24
12:01:49 2001 -0600
X-Proxy: keymaster.bracepatt.com protected
Subject: AG suit to oust ISO Board
To: rcarroll@bracepatt.com
From: Joel.Newton@dynegy.com
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 11:48:36 -0600
Message-ID: <OFEADB0A86.526E511A-ON862569DE.0061D08C@ngccorp.com>
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on HOUNTNMAIL3/HOUSRV/Dynegy(Release 5.0.5
|September 22, 2000) at 01/24/2001 11:48:43 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Joel Newton/HOU/Dynegy on 01/24/2001
12:51 PM ---------------------------

Joe Paul
01/24/2001 11:41 AM

To:   Joel Newton, "Tiffany, Joseph R., II" <Tiffany_jr@pillsburylaw.com>
cc:

Subject:  AG suit to oust ISO Board

ATTORNEY GENERAL SUES TO REMOVE STAKEHOLDER MEMBERS OF ISO BOARD
Seeks To Allow Replacement By Consumer-Oriented Members

January 23, 2001
01-006
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(SACRAMENTO) - Attorney General Bill Lockyer today filed suit to have the
26 stakeholder members of the California Independent System Operator
Corporation vacate their office, seeking to pave the way for a newly
reconstituted board representing the interests of consumers.

The "quo warranto" action was filed in Sacramento County Superior Court.
The lawsuit asks the court to have the 26 sitting ISO members ousted from
their positions. The Attorney General has offered current members an
opportunity to resign and avoid further litigation.

The legal move seeks to speed implementation of the new law, AB 5X, which
reconstitutes the ISO into a board of five members appointed by the
governor and confirmed by the Electricity Oversight Board.

Governor Davis has appointed the five new members of the ISO governing
board pursuant to the new law.

The ISO board is responsible for operating, controlling and managing the
power transmission lines that deliver electricity throughout California and
between neighboring states.


Hey guys,

Less than two weeks now...

Just wanted to find out when everyone would be arriving.

they want us to pick up the tuxes and pay for everything on Thursday
evening.  I know some of you won't be in until Friday, so we'll work around
that.  The shop is also in the city, so we may have to try and move to one
of the shops in the burbs if you all are headed out there.  Let me know when
you'll be available and I'll figure it out for the group.

Later,

Jason
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


Devon Energy Corporation
405-235-3611 (Tel)
405-552-4667 (F)


smith, pallen and others are talking about a ski-trip ASAP....as in leaving this weekend.  and smith has recommended visiting you in Deer Valley.  just wanted to give you some sort of fore-warning on the matter.

chat w/ you later,
SueBob

ps - he has also said he may stay longer...eek!


Can you please send me the latest version of the JV model.  Thanks!
Ben


Fellas,

My bachelor party is Saturday, Feb. 17th here in Austin. We will meet at my
house at 4803 Marblehead 78727 at 6:30. The boys are renting a van and we
have a driver that will take us around town. I hope you all are thirsty. I
look forward to seeing you there.

512-496-3997 mobile or
512-821-3855 home

GT


Are any of you interested in this happy hour????  BRATS for 2 bucks...free
pint glass sponsered by St. Arnolds Brewery....okay, you know it's bad when
you are on a brewery's distribution list.  See Details Below...

Carrie E. Nolan
ExxonMobil Production Corporation
US West: West Texas Geoscience
WGR 614
(713) 431-1832 Office
(713) 431-1510 Fax
carrie.e.nolan@exxonmobil.com
----- Forwarded by Carrie E Nolan/U-Houston/ExxonMobil on 02/21/01 07:50 AM
-----

                    "cnolan"
                    <cnolan@mail.ev      To:
<carrie.e.nolan@exxonmobil.com>
                    1.net>               cc:
                                         Subject:     FWD: Brats, Brats and
Astronauts

                    02/20/01 07:59
                    PM
                    Please respond
                    to cnolan

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Saint Arnold <brewery@saintarnold.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:08:55 -0800

Dear St. Arnold's Army:
>
>Bratwurst Promotion!
>Bratwurst Promotion! Bratwurst Promotion!  Come eat a yummy St.
>Arnold bratwurst!  Buy a brat for $2, get a pint glass for free!
>What a deal!  Supplies are limited!  We promise to have fun!
>
>Friday, February 23
>5 pm - 7 pm
>The Volcano
>2349 Bissonnet
>713-526-5282
>
>By the way, our brats are also available at some of the Spec's and
>Rice Epicureans.
>
>Astronauts at the Brewery on February 24 Tour
>What do you want to be when you grow up?  An astronaut, just like the
>rest of us.  Here is your chance to meet the men and women with the
>right stuff.  Some of the astronauts from the October 2000 shuttle
>mission will be coming to the brewery to give a presentation on what
>it is like to be in space.  For those of you that have not traveled
>in space, it is pretty cool (so we're told).  Needless to say, the
>normal beer speech will be drastically shortened to give them lots of
>time.  We have met these guys and they are down-to-earth and fun.
>How often do you get to meet an astronaut?  Children are welcome!
>
>Saturday, February 24
>1 pm tour
>Saint Arnold Brewing Co.
>2522 Fairway Park Dr.
>
>By the way, for those of you that have not been on the tour for a
>while, please note: you need to arrive by 1:15 because that is when
>we stop giving out the beer tokens!  On this tour, we highly
>recommend arriving early as there should be a large crowd.
>
>Thanks for all your support!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Brock, David, Frank (both), James, Jamie, Jesse, Pete aka the Brew Crew!
>
>4
>
>
>Saint Arnold Brewing Company
>2522 Fairway Park Dr.
>Houston, TX  77092
>713-686-9494 phone
>713-686-9474 fax
>
>Free tour every Saturday at 1 pm.
>


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

From:  </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=TJONES>
To: Allario, John </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jallari>, Bridges, Michael </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Mbridge2>, Carter, Carl </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ccarter4>, Diamond, Daniel </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ddiamon>, Gros, Thomas D. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Tgros>, Mesquita, Ross </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rmesquit>, Pacheco, Leonardo </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Lpacheco>, Pavetto, John <John.Pavetto@ENRON.com>, Richter, Brad </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Brichte>, Shults, Bob </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rshults>
CC: Greenberg, Mark </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Mgreenbe>, Koehler, Anne C. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Akoehle>
Date: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:09:30 GMT
Subject:

Attached please find a current list of the Networks, EnronOnline and CommodityLogic executed and draft Confidentiality Agreements for your review.


is this per the load flow study shown by the ISO

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Cunningham, Lance
Sent:	Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:28 AM
To:	Gilbert-smith, Doug
Subject:	2002 Load and Generation

Doug attached is a n Excel spreadsheet that shows load and generation by 2002 CM zone.

 << File: 2002 Summer Peak gens and loads.xls >>

Lance


I got the message that you couldn't meet this afternoon.  Thought I would do
a quick note to bring you up to date on some things.

Commercialization Efforts- Services:  Delayed by several days due to the
unexpected absence of Mary Solmonson for health reasons.  I learned about
this when I returned to the office on Tuesday, and have worked to replace her
as best we can during this market sizing phase.  Jennifer Denney (who was in
Dallas with us and works under Sheri Thomas in the EOL Product Control Group)
will partner with James Scribner in Mary's absence to help us run down
additional data on potential customers.  Beth Apollo will be working closely
with James and Jennifer.  They will welcome Rahil's help and will continue to
work with Jennifer on developing the revenue model.

Commercialization Efforts - Consulting:  Bjorn Hagelman in the RAC group made
a presentation at the Risk Forum luncheon last week outlining a plan for
providing risk consulting services to external customers.  Some of his ideas
overlap the ideas around consulting that we fleshed out in our Dallas
meeting.  Some of his ideas included providing services from my risk
operations team.  I want this to be a concerted and not disjointed effort.
Bjorn's vision is to create an Enron sub that will be the consulting
company.  Our team in Dallas saw wisdom in partnering with an
accounting/consulting firm - established marketing arm, existing customer
contacts, proven consulting skills, depth of resources, etc.  There could be
a play to get a hefty sum up front from a consulting firm to partner with us
- we impart our risk knowledge, they get the edge in the marketplace from
pairing with us, we take our upfront payment, they do most of the grinding
work - not necessarily a bad model.  Bjorn seems to be in a hurry, as he has
identified a shipping company in Europe that is in need of risk consulting
and is ready to pay.  Probably okay for him to start this effort in that
way.  Prove concept, and then we can consider the wisdom of partnering with
someone else.  I spent some time with him today.  I want to be sure that he
doesn't commit my team to provide a service without our understanding and
being in agreement with the fee structure.  We are okay for right now.  I
will be following what Bjorn is doing and looking for ways to work together
if there is a good upside.  I will keep you posted.

Commercialization Efforts - Internal Marketing:  We have to change some
business practices within Enron and create a mind shift when originators are
selling operational services to their customers.  We must price those and we
must have a mechanism for granting the appropriate income to Operations.
Deal is in the works through power origination team - they priced our
services to customer without our involvement- pricing may not even be
sufficient to cover our costs.  We are researching.  To do's here are to
create an internal marketing document to review with lead originators and to
change DASH process so that Operations has a sign-off.  I met with Louise
today on this.  I will plan meetings with origination teams during the week
of March 19.  Would love to get your input on our presentation to the orig
teams.  I will get you a draft for your comments.

Operational Risk:  Key focus this week has been on rebuilding a risk team in
Portland.  Have worked with Stacey White (my power risk director) and Tim
Belden to make sure we have a short term and long term plan that will work.
I am comfortable that we have devised a good plan.  (We lost the manager of
that group last week - a planned move to London to follow her husband to an
Enron job there.  Our unexpected change this week was the resignation Monday
of another risk book administrator from Portland.)

Operational Risk:  Another key area that we are focusing on is the HPL sale.
End of day today we will know which employees are going to AEP.  We are
working on a smooth transition plan and how we will handle trailing issues
with customers after the sale effective date.  We expect to eliminate 46
positions with the sale.  This number was much larger earlier in the year
(around 70), but have had a lot of attrition with the news of the sale.  Bob
Hall is focused on the details around this issue.

Operational Risk:  We completed a Doorstep Review on the Monterrey office
last week.  (This is the review of operational controls and procedures.)
Went well - Max was skeptical about the process at first, but pleased in the
end.  I will forward and e:mail to you from Max proclaiming his support of
these reviews.  We overhauled this week the Doorstep Review schedule for the
remainder of the year and reviewed that today with Rick Causey.  He likes the
revisions that we have made.  Beth Apollo on my team is leading this effort.

Spring Break Plans:  My children are on Spring Break the week of March 12 and
the nanny has the week off.  We will be out of town through Wednesday, March
13 with the whole family looking at colleges for Meagan.  Patti has contact
numbers for me if needed.  I may decide to come back into the office on
Thursday and Friday.  I will let Patti know when we get back in town.  I will
either see you the end of next week, or back on Monday, March 19.  See
separate e:mail for contact names and numbers in Operations while I am out.


Is the PCG fellow who will be handling changes to the database long
descriptions on an ongoing basis. I am being phased out of the loop as we
move processes from the startup team to the operational team.

Dave


Requests for RiskTrac have been sent.

John


Louise - Thanks.  It looks very good.  I made a few minor changes this evening to add "units of measure" to 1-2 slides ($ in millions).  Also, will increase the size of fonts on the US map/structuring slides so the group will be sure to see them.  Terry and Steve now have the "Master" and will shoot it back to you on Monday, probably around mid-morning so you will know of these minor changes, each intended to enhance visibility without changing any content.  Terry will be in touch, or you can reach her at ext. 36910 if necessary.  Again, thanks.  'Have a great weekend.  Paula

Terry - Please be sure Wes sees the Financial Highlights chart from Butts.  THX

-----Original Message-----
From: Kitchen, Louise
Sent: Fri 10/5/2001 6:16 PM
To: Lavorato, John; Whalley, Greg
Cc: Rieker, Paula
Subject: Board Presentation

We are awaiting the financial numbers slide from Bob Butts.

The rest should be there. <<board101301.ppt>>


Start Date: 3/9/01; HourAhead hour: 13;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No
variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001030913.txt


BLOW?
BLOW?
NICE D?

-----Original Message-----
From: Fenner, Chet [mailto:Chet_Fenner@bmc.com]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 8:22 AM
To: 'chad knipe'; Fenner, Chet; Joe Parks; Brian Constantine; Brad Corrier; EriK Wollam
Subject: RE: Last night!

Sounds like you were the one blowing it off.
-----Original Message-----
From: chad knipe [mailto:knipe3@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 7:29 AM
To: Chet Fenner; Joe Parks; Brian Constantine; Brad Corrier; EriK Wollam
Subject: Last night!
UUhh..what happened to ya'll last night. Thanks for blowing it off w/o letting me know. Ritas were good and plenty, had a few and decided to stick it out alone.  Actually met a whole new PILE of friends there.

HALLELUJAH!!!!!!!!!


This note is authorization to make the following changes:

1.  Set up a new book for Frank Ermis-NW Basis

2.  Route these products to NW Basis:
 NWPL RkyMtn
 Malin
 PG&E Citygate

3. Route EPNG Permian to Todd Richardson's book FT-New Texas

Call with questions. X37041

Thank you,

Phillip Allen


maybe saterday morning if it holds.

>From: "Parks, Joe" <Joe.Parks@bridgeline.net>
>To: "Erik Wollam" <erwollam@hotmail.com>, <brianc@saltgrass.com>,
><akoenig@hhw-law.com>, <knipe3@msn.com>, <chet_fenner@bmc.com>,
><john.chambers@bisys.com>
>Subject: RE: surf looking realy good
>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 14:28:21 -0500
>
>so anyone going!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Erik Wollam [mailto:erwollam@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 2:27 PM
>To: brianc@saltgrass.com; akoenig@hhw-law.com; knipe3@msn.com;
>chet_fenner@bmc.com; Parks, Joe; john.chambers@bisys.com
>Subject: RE: surf looking realy good
>
>
>Join tournament and keep a landing net with you on your trophy hunts.
>
>
> >From: "Brian Constantine" <brianc@saltgrass.com>
> >To: "Erik Wollam" <erwollam@hotmail.com>, <akoenig@hhw-law.com>,
> ><knipe3@msn.com>, <chet_fenner@bmc.com>, <Joe.Parks@bridgeline.net>,
> ><john.chambers@bisys.com>
> >Subject: RE: surf looking realy good
> >Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:25:10 -0500
> >
> >OOooohhhhh...just looked at the Surfside cam and its...well, damn. Its ON
> >boys. Go...go now...do not wait. Cancel all evening appointments and go.
> >Wind is 6 mph out of the Northwest...that wont last long.
> >
> >Report from yesterday...Fished West side of Pelican Island shoreline on
> >point closest to Sand Island  waist deep over shell. Caught 6 on
> >Chart/Orange/blue Top Dog and blue/chart/silver mirrolure.
> >LOST THE STAR TOURNEY LEADER TROUT!!!! Blew up on TopDog, got her to
> >hand...I was shaking like a freaking leaf. Made "the grab" she exploded
>out
> >of my hand, threw the hook, and Top Dog lodged in my shirt!!! 2nd 28?plus
> >trout I've lost on that shoreline in 2 years!!! Then, after I quit
>shaking >and what not, I realized I wasn't even ENTERED in the damn
>tourney, so I am
> >glad I didn't catch her!!! She was every inch of 28 and fat with hardly
>any
> >spots. Big, old female. Damn I love fishing.
> >
> >										OINK
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Erik Wollam [mailto:erwollam@hotmail.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 9:30 AM
> >To: akoenig@hhw-law.com; knipe3@msn.com; chet_fenner@bmc.com;
> >Joe.Parks@bridgeline.net; john.chambers@bisys.com; Brian Constantine
> >Subject: surf looking realy good
> >
> >surf cams show flat and green. fishing reports positive. forcast unkown.
> >Zander says he will fish surf tomorrow am if looks good. Alfred, you
>still
> >planning on going down tonight for your galveston hearing?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
> >
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
>http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
>
>
>************************************************************************
>This e-mail is the property of Bridgeline Holdings, L.P. and/or its
>relevant affiliate(s) and may contain confidential and privileged material
>for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use,
>distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not
>the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please
>contact the sender and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and
>any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance)
>and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between
>Bridgeline Holdings, L.P. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended
>recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the
>basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you.
>************************************************************************

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


Hey...did you talk to Forney about Olinde going to Vegas...

T.Jae Black
East Power Trading
Assistant to Kevin Presto
off. 713-853-5800
fax 713-646-8272
cell 713-539-4760


see other email i am sending. it's always something.
i talked to dick about sending this out.

Lisa J. Mellencamp
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith St.
Houston, TX  77002
Tel:  (713) 853-7986
Fax: (713) 646-3393
----- Forwarded by Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT on 07/14/2000 01:38 PM -----

	Richard Lydecker@ENRON
	07/14/2000 10:34 AM

		 To: Bob Licato/ECP/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary Keevill/ECP/Enron@Enron
		 cc: (bcc: Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT)
		 Subject: Infineum lawsuit

Bob, Gary given the fact that the lawsuit has been filed I think any
communication/discussion internally and externally should be initiated and
controlled by our lead counsel for the litigation.  There are issues of
privilege/disclosure, etc. the senstivily of which we non-lawyers are not
aware that now become very important.   This is particularly important in
respect to strategy and evaluation/interpretation of past events and comments
on the clarity or ambiguity of those events.  It would be a good idea to pass
the word to this effect throughout the organization.  I do know enough about
litigation that the legal team now takes the lead and any material or
summaries or analyses prepared should be directed by them and handled
specifically as they advise.   We need to be especially careful not to
circulate any written material without legal clearance.  For the time being,
please coordinate anything relevant to the Infineum situation with Lisa
Mellencamp for guidance.  Thanks.  Dick.


Meeting location to be determined.


I will be out of the office Wednesday 11/21/01.  You can ask Jessica Presas or Laura Vuittonet to assist you.

Thanks
Ina Rangel


I've been keeping track of this with Tracy Ngo, our credit gal, and the last
thing I heard on it this morning was that it's still pending credit. Tracy is
in a meeting right now, but I'll grab her as soon as she gets out (she sits
next to me) and find out what the status is. Unfortunately, Tracy said when a
deal is "pending credit approval" it's a little vague as to when the decision
will be made. Mike Swerzbin told her last night that he wasn't concerned
about whether or not the deal was approved, so without the trader on credit's
case, I think sometimes deals get lost in the shuffle. But I'll keep on top
of it and let you know this afternoon.

Thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/13/2001 11:22 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Missing deal?

Hi Kate, what's the status of this deal?

   Kate Symes @ ECT                03/12/2001 10:57 AM

To: Evelyn Metoyer/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Missing deal?

this deal is contingent on credit - he'll let me know later today whether or
not it's a good trade.

thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/12/2001 09:00 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Missing deal?

sorry Friday, 3/9

   Kate Symes @ ECT                03/12/2001 10:52 AM

To: Evelyn Metoyer/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Missing deal?

what was the trade date on this?

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/12/2001 08:58 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Missing deal?

Prebon sent over a confirm for a deal where:
Enron (Mike Swerzbin) buys from PPL Montana Cal'04-Cal'06 25 mw of Mid-C at
$45.00 off-peak hours.

They did not tell me about this deal during checkout.  Can you please check
with Mike.

Thanks!!


The latest financial news from the ISO

Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 05/01/2001 01:29 PM -----

	CRCommunications <CRCommunications@caiso.com>
	04/30/2001 02:49 PM
	Please respond to "Leiber, Phil"

		 To: ISO Market Participants
<IMCEAEX-_O=CAISO_OU=CORPORATE_CN=DISTRIBUTION+20LISTS_CN=ISO+20MARKET+20PARTI
CIPANTS@caiso.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: CAISO Notice: Market Notice--February Preliminary Invoice

> ISO Market Participants:
>
> Cash clearing related to the preliminary invoice for February 2001 was
> scheduled for today, April 30, 2001.
>
> A preliminary overview of the cash received follows:
>
> Funds due ISO (Accounts Receivable):
>   GMC         $23,049,950.38
>   Market         $972,588,030.84
>             ------------------------
>   Total         $995,637,981.22
>
> Funds Received:
>   GMC         $4,500,303.61
>   Market         $59,136,334.68
>             ------------------------
>   Total         $63,636,628.29
>
> Funds due for ISO GMC, Market Participants (Accounts Payable):
>   GMC         $23,049,950.38
>   Market         $952,742,085.50
>
> Preliminary shortfall:
>   GMC         $18,549,646.77
>   Market         $893,605,750.82
>
> Reallocated shortfall:
>   GMC         $0
>   Market         $912,155,397.59
>
>
> Funds available for distribution to market participants are reduced by the
> GMC shortfall, accordingly, $40,586,687.91 ($59,136,334.68 less GMC
> shortfall of $18,549,646.77) will be available for distribution against
> February ISO market accounts payable of $952,742,085.50, and against prior
> months balances.  Due to this shortfall in receipts from market debtors,
> the ISO is required to perform calculations in accordance with ISO Tariff
> Section 11 and Settlements and Billing Protocol ("SABP") Section 6 to
> determine the appropriate pro-rata distributions to market participants.
> Any potential distributions are reduced to pay previously defaulted
> amounts, or current month GMC obligations of that market participant.
> Distributions will be made upon completion of these calculations.   These
> figures also do not consider any amounts payable directly to market
> participants from the California Department of Water Resources.
>
> As noted in previous communications, the ISO will provide a comprehensive
> reporting of the monthly settlement results after the cash clearing for
> the final (true-up) monthly invoices, and will thereafter distribute a
> current certification of amounts owed.   This report for January 2001 will
> be published shortly.
>
>
> Phil Leiber
> Dir. Financial Planning & Treasurer
> California ISO
> 916 351-2168
> 916-351-2259 (fax)
>
>


Megan,

I changed the demand fee for Jan.  It looks like Trisha has changed the Transport ticket for the $.11.  I agree with the header charges.

D

	Enron North America Corp.  From:  Megan Parker @ ENRON                           03/14/2001 03:47 PM

To:	Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:	Re: Tenaska IV 1/01

TXU revised their rates for Jan 2001. They are now billing us at $0.10 and $0.08 for contract 1671.  This was previously billed all at $0.10.  Please change the demand fee on deal 384258 from $3,841,888.11 to $3,830,131.18.

Also, I spoke to TXU about the rate on contract 1856 (deal 452475).  They have been billing us $0.11 and we have $0.10.  The extra cent is for the El Paso header fee.  The pricing you gave me is for contract 1671, but also has the header fee if you look on page 5 of 6.  You'll see a a section called "Compression & Header Expense if Utilized".  The current rate for 1856 is $0.01 and 0% fuel.  I will leave a copy of the contract in your chair.

Thanks,
Megan

Daren J Farmer@ECT
03/13/2001 10:54 AM
To:	Megan Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject:	Re: Tenaska IV 1/01

I have made the changes mentioned below.  I've also adjusted the spreadsheet based on our conversation yesterday.  Take a look at it when you get a chance.

D

	Enron North America Corp.  From:  Megan Parker @ ENRON                           03/13/2001 09:06 AM

To:	Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:	Tenaska IV 1/01

We need to change the demand fees for Tenaska IV based on actuals for Jan 2001.   Tenaska owes us some additional money.  I have attached my netting spreadsheet if you need it.

Deal 514353		Change MMBtu from 45,000 to 46,113
Deal 384258		Change amount from $3,934,644.50 to $3,841,888.11

I got your message regarding Apache.  I will just leave the pay the lesser ofs there until they come back for it.   Also, Mark checked with TXU and we do not have the rights to get dailies for the Tenaska meters.  He said that only the interconnecting pipes get dailies.  For the spreadsheet, I am just going to prorate the actuals based on the noms.

I will let you know when we receive the payment from Brazos for Feb 2001, so you can enter the demand fee to forward the cash to Tenaska IV.

Thanks,
Megan

<Embedded StdOleLink>
<Embedded StdOleLink>


Dave,

I would like to recommend to you Sandeep Kohli who is likely to approach you
regarding a
position in your area.

I have  been working with Sandeep for a number of years and I was always
impressed with his
skills, intelligence and mature, thoughtful approach to solving business
problems.

He is currently located in India (our DPC unit) and is looking for a
permanent position with Enron in Houston
for family reasons (his wife is from Houston and has a family here). Of
course, there are
some  other obvious factors affecting his decision.

Vince


This is an excellent summary of competition in the local loop prepared by
Kelley, Drye and Warren.

 - KDWWhitePaper.doc


In regard to the market monitoring issue below, this effectively adopts NY's
circuit breaker proposal for mitigation.  FERC's approval leaves little hope
to overturn this in NY and makes it likely that similar measures will be
adopted in other markets.  This is not a good development.  It entrenches
regulatory manipulation and will serve to dampen volatility.

Tom

From: Sarah Novosel on 05/08/2001 10:04 AM EDT
To: Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Edward D Baughman/Enron@EnronXGate, Joe
Gordon/Enron@EnronXGate, Janelle Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, mbrown9@enron.com,
Mark Bernstein/HOU/EES@EES, John Llodra/Corp/Enron@ENRON, George
Wood/Corp/Enron@Enron, Paul J Broderick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jason
Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Mason Hamlin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Stalford/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom May/Corp/Enron@Enron, Gautam Gupta/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Narsimha Misra/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Garrett
Tripp/TOR/ECT@ECT, Berney C Aucoin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jason
Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob Wheeler/Enron@EnronXGate, Jim
Meyn/NA/Enron@Enron, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Daniel
Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Pearce W Hammond/HOU/EES@EES, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Howard
Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom
Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Thane Twiggs/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Charles
Decker/HOU/EES@EES
cc:

Subject: FERC Orders

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.


Per your request, attached is the hedge strip file that we use to calculate
your bench every night.  On one of the tabs R2, you will find your positions
and a conversion factor.  I have tied these to the benchmark groups
conversion factor numbers.  Let me know if we need some of these points
changed, i.e. CGPR-DAWN's conversion factor is 0.  Shout with any questions.
Thanks.
PL


Michael,

It's a cottage industry and nobody can read all that's
published.  The Journal of Derivatives and
the Journal of Finance are two primary publications I would recommend.

Vince

From: Michael SCHILMOELLER/ENRON@Gateway on 05/30/2000 06:05 PM
To: Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT,
wiz.ixgate.Vkamins@wiz.ixgate.Vkamins@GWISE@Gateway
cc:
Subject: Fwd: Journal Subscription

Hi Grant and Vince,

What do you think of the Journal of Derivatives?  Would you recommend a
subscription?  If not, which publication would you suggest?

Thanks,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
Date:  05/30/2000  01:38 pm  (Tuesday)
From:  Jay Tinker
To:  Marlene Huntsinger;  MIKE NIMAN;  William Valach
CC:  Patrick Hager
Subject:  Journal Subscription

I recently received a brochure for the Journal of Derivatives.  This
quarterly publication is put out by Institutional Investor, Inc. and the
International Association of Financial Engineers.  It claims to provide the
latest in both theory and application of derivative instruments.  PGE does
not currently subscribe to this publication.  Do you think that your
respective departments could benefit from the subscription?  The cost is
$200/yr. and would be split by the number of departments (if any) interested.

Let Patrick or myself know if you are interested.

Thanks
Jay T.