The Rise and Fall of Enron
The New York Times- 11/02/01
The Enron Debacle
Business Week- 11/02/01
Derivatives Danger?
Business Week- 11/02/01
Commentary: Enron's Clout Won't Sway the SEC
Business Week- 11/02/01
AFL-CIO, Amalgamated Bank Call on Enron to Redirect the Mission of Newly Created Special Committee: Outside Directors Must Adopt Independent Role
PR Newswire- 11/02/01
Williams CEO Sees Validation Of Co's Bandwidth Model
Dow Jones Energy Service- 11/02/01
USA: Enron shares plunge after S&P credit rating cut.
Reuters English News Service- 11/02/01
Goldman Declines Enron's Request for Loan Amid Credit Concerns
Bloomberg- 11/02/01
POWER POINTS: Time For A Bronx Miracle In Houston
Dow Jones Energy Service- 11/02/01
Enron Says It Remains 'Biggest' Player In EU Gas, Power
Dow Jones Energy Service- 11/02/01
USA: UPDATE 1-Enron shares fall as investor concerns linger.
Reuters English News Service- 11/02/01

Editorial Desk; Section A
The Rise and Fall of Enron

11/02/2001
The New York Times
Page 24, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company

Earlier this year, most companies would have loved to have Enron's problems. Californians resented the energy trading company's huge profits during their energy crisis, and Democrats in Washington raised questions about Enron's influence within the White House and about the cozy relationship between Enron's chairman, Kenneth Lay, and Vice President Dick Cheney. Nobody seemed better positioned to thrive during the Bush presidency than this Houston-based apostle of deregulation.
Wall Street was impressed with Enron's strategy of swooping into formerly regulated markets to broker contracts for natural gas, electricity or unused telecom bandwidth. The company was celebrated as a paragon of American ingenuity, a stodgy gas pipeline company that had reinvented itself as a high-tech clearinghouse in an ever-expanding roster of markets. Enron's push to force utilities into the Internet age with its online trading systems, at a seemingly handsome profit, became an epic tale of the dot-com revolution.
It now appears that Enron's tale may be more cautionary than epic. Enron envy has crashed, along with the company's stock price, as serious questions emerge about its bookkeeping. Enron disclosed earlier this month that $1.2 billion in market value had vanished as a result of a controversial deal it entered into with private partnerships run by its chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow.
Most alarming was Enron's reluctance to shed light on management's wheeling and dealing. ''Related-party transactions,'' as the accountants call them, are fraught with conflicts of interest. Though much remains to be learned about these transactions, their scope and lack of transparency suggest that Enron may have in effect created its own private hedge fund to assume some of the risk and mask the losses of its complex trading. The extent to which company insiders profited from the partnerships is not yet clear.
Enron has scrambled to dampen Wall Street's concerns, acknowledging its credibility problem while insisting on the health of its core businesses. On Wednesday it brought in William Powers, the dean of the University of Texas School of Law, to review the transactions. The Securities and Exchange Commission has launched its own formal investigation. Mr. Fastow was forced to resign, following Jeffrey Skilling, the man credited with driving Enron into new cutting-edge businesses, out the door.
Enron's former admirers on Wall Street, mindful of recent scandals involving high-profile companies doctoring their earnings, and of the spectacular collapse of the Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund in 1998, are alarmed. Carole Coale of Prudential Securities summed up the prevailing sentiment when she told The Times: ''The bottom line is, it's really difficult to recommend an investment when management does not disclose facts.'' Analysts, as well as the media, are not entirely blameless. Enron did mention, albeit in passing, the troubling related-party deals as early as March 2000. But few analysts bothered to raise questions at a time when the company's revenues, profits and stock price were soaring.
Harvey Pitt, the new Securities and Exchange Commissioner, must pursue the Enron inquiry aggressively in order to assure investors that he will be as vigilant as his predecessor, Arthur Levitt, when it comes to protecting the integrity of financial markets. Indeed, even if Enron is cleared of any wrongdoing and regains some of its past luster, as it well might, the company that preaches the merits of self-regulating marketplaces has reminded us all of the need for a strong regulator on Wall Street.

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

NOVEMBER 12, 2001

FINANCE
Business Week
The Enron Debacle
Byzantine deals have shattered the energy outfit's credibility
Executives at high-flying Enron Corp. (ENE ) never seemed overly concerned with how the rest of the world viewed their business practices. Earlier this year, the California Attorney General had to get a court order to collect documents in an industrywide investigation into energy price fixing. And when an analyst challenged former CEO Jeffrey K. Skilling in a conference call to produce Enron's balance sheet, Skilling called him an "ass----." Still, even some Enron executives worried that the company had gone too far with two complex partnerships set up in 1999 to buy company assets and hedge investments. With Enron's then-chief financial officer acting as general manager of the partnerships and in a position to personally benefit from their investments, the potential for a conflict of interest and backlash from investors seemed overwhelming. "Internally, everybody said this is not a good idea," says a source close to the company.

But no one could have predicted such a jaw-dropping outcome for the nation's largest and most innovative energy trader. Since Oct. 16, when Enron revealed a $35 million charge to earnings to reflect losses on those partnerships and was forced to knock $1.2 billion off its shareholders' equity, the company's stock has plunged 60%. The Securities & Exchange Commission is investigating Enron's accounting for its partnerships and whether it properly disclosed them to investors.

Suddenly the company, which brought high-tech and complex finance to energy trading, is essentially trying to avoid a run on the bank. Moody's Investors Service has already downgraded the company's debt. Enron says it is meeting with credit agencies to calm their fears, and analysts say Enron is working on a turnaround plan that would likely include accelerating asset sales, issuing shares, and obtaining new credit lines. Enron's board has set up a special committee to look into its controversial partnerships. But analysts also worry that Enron's trading partners could pull the plug if they lose confidence that it can honor its trades.

"ON CRACK?" Inside Enron, once-cocky employees are reeling. They were still puzzling over the abrupt Aug. 14 departure of CEO Skilling when the company announced on Oct. 24 that CFO Andrew S. Fastow, architect of the controversial private LJM investments--which got their name from the first initials of his wife and children--was removed from his post and on leave. In a tense meeting held at a Houston hotel after the latest financial disclosures, soft-spoken Chairman and CEO Kenneth L. Lay faced 1,600 employees, with another 5,000 hooked up via the Web. One irate worker asked if he was "on crack." Lay, an economist by training, turned over day-to-day management in 1997. Until Skilling quit, citing personal reasons unrelated to Enron, Lay was talking about retirement, sources say. Now he is facing his biggest fight ever. "Ken is looking at a 30-year career of accomplishment going down in flames. This is just awful," says one friend.

On the surface, at least, Enron's off-balance-sheet maneuvering hardly seems the stuff that would crater a company. Amazingly, sources close to Enron claim that one rationale for Fastow's deals was to save an estimated $30 million a year in investment-banking fees. Fastow's involvement in the partnerships, which bought assets from Enron, including stakes in telecom and energy, was supposed to make the deals simpler for the investment bankers and thus cheaper. They were also meant, according to sources close to the company, to hedge Enron's investments in potentially risky assets while allowing it to maintain some control over them. Enron says Fastow made money for himself on some of the deals, but insiders insist there were less controversial ways to enrich him if that were the aim. Fastow did not return calls seeking comment. Lay, who declined to comment for this story, has said that the partnerships were properly vetted by Enron's attorneys and internal and external auditors and were approved by its board. A source familiar with Enron agrees: "We had the best lawyers in the world saying, `It looks fine."'

But whatever Enron's reasons for creating the LJM partnerships, the problems were compounded by scanty disclosure. The deals were first revealed in a 1999 proxy, raising concerns from investors and analysts. By this summer, when Enron's stock was falling and its bets in broadband were souring, complaints about LJM grew louder. So in June, Fastow pulled out of the partnerships. When the write-offs came, Enron enraged analysts and investors further by failing to disclose the hit to equity in its third-quarter earnings press release. Instead, Lay mentioned it in a conference call with analysts. "We found it disconcerting that the company waited to disclose the additional $1.2 billion charge to equity in a fleeting comment in the middle of its conference call," says UBS Warburg analyst Ronald Barone.

BAD BETS. Still, Enron's credibility did not vanish overnight. Analysts have been lobbying for years for more information about how and where Enron makes its money in its often byzantine trading business. While the company's revenues were soaring from $9.2 billion in 1995 to $100.8 billion in 2000 and its stock was returning 500% during the same six-year period, Enron's aggressive, even arrogant managers could ignore Wall Street's complaints with impunity. But after its stock price collapsed this year (chart), the company's attitude and operational missteps quickly caught up. And there was plenty to worry about. The company's $3 billion power plant in India wasn't paying its bills amid a political controversy; its highly ballyhooed business for trading high-speed communications capacity was crippled by the telecom industry meltdown; and its calamitous foray into the water business with Azurix Corp. has already cost Enron at least $574 million in write-offs.

These bad bets and the expensive LJM shock have investors worried about what else might be lurking at Enron. Many aren't sticking around to find out. "I think the lack of disclosure on their financial engineering killed the credibility of the management team," says Richard A. Giesen, who manages the Munder Power Plus fund, which dumped its Enron shares about a month ago.

It's not clear just how many off-balance-sheet financing vehicles Enron has used over time. Some were created years ago to finance oil and gas producers. Analysts and sources close to the deals say there's no particular risk in these to Enron shareholders. Other interconnected entities, such as Whitewing, Osprey, Atlantic Water Trust, and Marlin Water Trust, were a way to get assets no longer central to Enron's strategy off its balance sheet, freeing capital and credit for the core energy business and ventures like broadband (table).

To entice institutional investors such as pension funds and insurers into these deals, Enron promised to kick in equity if asset sales weren't enough to cover debt. Such "mandatory equity" deals have been used by at least a half-dozen others in the energy and telecom industries, including El Paso (EPG), Williams, and Dominion, says Standard & Poor's director Todd A. Shipman. "Nobody's going to find anything that's particularly unique or below board" in such deals, says one investment banker specializing in the energy business.

Worst case, which Shipman considers unlikely, Enron could be on the hook for about $3 billion in its mandatory-equity deals. That could mean diluting its shares by more than 25% at today's prices. Analyst John E. Olson at Sanders Morris Harris Inc. (SMHG ) figures a 9% dilution is more likely. Even if this $3 billion in debt were included on Enron's balance sheet now, the debt-to-capital ratio would climb to 54% from about 49% at the end of June. Such a change would pressure Enron's credit rating but not push it below investment grade, says Shipman.

HUGE HIT. Fastow's LJM, a private equity fund, was a different kind of animal, according to sources familiar with the arrangements. It bought energy and other assets from Enron, which booked gains and losses on those deals. LJM was also involved in complex hedging that was supposed to reduce the volatility of some of Enron's investments, including stakes in high-tech and telecom businesses and an interest in New Power Co., which markets power to consumers. When Enron terminated these deals in September, it took the $1.2 billion hit to equity.

But the more immediate question is whether trading partners will stick with the company. The first place that might show up is in Enron's highly successful online platform, which trades everything from gas and electricity to weather derivatives. To reassure its partners, Enron is scrambling to shore up its liquidity. It has already tapped $3 billion in credit lines and is trying to arrange another $1 billion. Shipman says he has seen no signs of massive customer defections or drastically worsened credit terms. Still, rival traders are wary. "We certainly have taken a closer look at Enron in the last week to 10 days and will continue to manage the credit risk, but we're still doing business with the company as usual," says Keith G. Stamm, CEO of power and gas trader Aquila Inc. (ILA )

"SPEEDING TRAIN." Still, with the stock battered and rating agencies considering further downgrades, that could rapidly change. In recent days, the uncertainty about Enron's future has reduced investors' appetite for Enron debt. "No one wants to speculate on the direction or their likelihood of survival," says a credit-derivatives salesperson. "It's really difficult to get in front of a speeding train."

Even if Lay can calm his trading partners, he and his management team face a much tougher task of restoring their credibility on Wall Street. With the stock now hovering around $14--down from a high of $90 in August, 2000--some even believe that Enron could be a takeover target for the likes of GE Capital or Royal Dutch/Shell Group. (RD ) Both declined to comment. Would Enron sell? One source close to the company says Enron has talked about possible mergers and strategic alliances in the past with Royal Dutch/Shell, among others. "If they're really worried about liquidity, they might take the easy way out," he says.

If Enron does pull through this crisis, some suspect it will be a humbler, more risk-averse place. The company that once believed it could expand its trading and logistics empire to all manner of commodities--from advertising space to steel--will be forced to scale back its grandiose visions. That's something some investors applaud. "The company should focus on its strengths," says William N. Adams, senior energy analyst at Banc of America Capital Management, a major shareholder. But that's a far less exciting place than Enron's energy cowboys ever hoped to roam.

By Stephanie Anderson Forest and Wendy Zellner in Dallas, with Heather Timmons in New York

NOVEMBER 12, 2001

FINANCE
Business Week
Derivatives Danger?
Lately, owners of Enron's (ENE) equity, bonds, and loans have been struggling to understand how exposed the company is to risks of losses that they didn't know about before. Now, as a fuller picture of Enron's entanglements with partnerships begins to emerge, investors have something else to worry about: credit default swaps, known as CDSs for short.

That's financial marketspeak for insurance on bonds and bank loans. Their owners pay a premium for coverage that reimburses them for any losses they have if their investments go bad. The CDS market has existed only for about two years, but it's growing fast. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS ) and others estimate that bonds and loans with a face value of between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion are covered. Not surprisingly, big banks with hefty balance sheets such as J.P. Morgan Chase (JPM  ), Merrill Lynch (MER ), and Deutsche Bank (DB ) dominate the market.

Enron, however, is a player--and the only significant one that isn't also a bank. Competitors say that although Enron has issued only between $500 million and $700 million worth of CDSs so far this year, it had ambitious plans to offer them online. "They don't belong in this market," says one trader. "They don't understand the implications." Enron did not return calls seeking comment.

Of course, neither Enron nor others will have to pay out unless the loans and bonds they're insuring turn bad. Trouble is, this year is potentially a doozie for losses on corporate debt. Corporate defaults could reach a record of $100 billion, says Standard & Poor's, like BusinessWeek a unit of The McGraw-Hill Companies. Regulators say shaky bank loans hit a record $193 billion by early October.

If Enron has insured any of the bad debt, it might have to take charges for losses if they exceed the premiums it has been getting. With all that has been happening in recent weeks, that's the last thing it needs.

By Heather Timmons in New York

NOVEMBER 12, 2001

FINANCE
By Mike McNamee

Commentary: Enron's Clout Won't Sway the SEC
For Securities & Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey L. Pitt, the SEC's investigation into Enron Corp. (ENE) could hardly have come at a worse time. The future of Pitt's ambitious agenda of reforms in securities regulation could depend on how well he handles this case.

Enron's political clout and close ties to President George W. Bush create real risks for the SEC. Enron CEO Kenneth L. Lay is a longtime Bush backer, and the company was the biggest corporate contributor to the President's campaign. A Bush appointee, Pitt is attempting a delicate balancing act. He has made it clear he wants to speed up the SEC's enforcement, in part by rewarding companies that cooperate with probes. But he insists the SEC will still come down hard on true corporate miscreants--and knows that any signs of let-up could jeopardize the rest of his reform agenda.

Enter the Enron probe. The fine shadings of securities enforcement--where most cases are settled by negotiated penalties, not court-imposed fines--often make it hard for outsiders to tell whether the SEC is being tough or lenient. But Pitt must go out of his way to make it clear that the Enron case is handled by the book--getting the same strict scrutiny from the SEC as any other, less connected company.

For now, top SEC aides say that's happening. The SEC Enforcement Div. in Washington is looking into whether Enron adequately disclosed to shareholders the risks of its complex deals with Andrew S. Fastow, the company's former chief financial officer. Agency insiders say Pitt and his fellow commissioners will be briefed on the case as it proceeds. But they insist Pitt hasn't heard from the White House or Enron's other political allies.

TOP LOBBYIST. Enron's connections are numerous. Besides Lay's links to Bush, an Enron director, Wendy Lee Gramm, is the wife of Texas Senator Phil Gramm, top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee. And Enron spreads its lobbying budget--$2.13 million in 2000--across both parties. Just this year it hired four lobbying firms with Democratic roots. Enron says it lobbies heavily because it operates in regulated industries. It notes that electric utilities outspend it 35 to 1.

On Oct. 31, a special committee of Enron's board hired William R. McLucas, former SEC enforcement director, to represent it. McLucas should know that any attempt to muscle the stock cops is likely to backfire. Pitt, who joined the SEC out of law school in 1968, "remembers how the [Nixon-era] SEC tainted itself by turning a blind eye to [fugitive financier] Robert Vesco," says an agency veteran. Pitt has too much riding on the Enron probe to let its connections sway his judgment.

McNamee covers finance in Washington.

AFL-CIO, Amalgamated Bank Call on Enron to Redirect the Mission of Newly Created Special Committee: Outside Directors Must Adopt Independent Role

11/02/2001
PR Newswire
(Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire)
WASHINGTON, Nov. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- In a shareholder letter sent today to the Board of Directors of the Enron Corporation (NYSE: ENE), the AFL-CIO and the Amalgamated Bank called on Enron to expand the mission of its newly created Special Committee and for Enron's Board to adopt a package of reforms designed to restore investor confidence in the battered energy firm. America's working families are significant shareholders of Enron stock through their pension, health and welfare benefit funds.
Among other suggestions, the letter urges the Board to expand the Special Committee's mandate to: * Examine all transactions with entities in which Enron employees
or directors have an interest
* Adopt procedures for reviewing insider participation in investments
* Commence an extraordinary review of executive compensation
* Adopt a stricter definition of director independence and disclose
director conflicts of interest
"The Special Committee's mandate is far too narrow to address the current crisis," said Richard Trumka, Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO. "In light of Enron's recent balance sheet write-downs, share price decline, and credit rating deterioration, the Special Committee must be forward looking and consider sweeping governance reform measures," he explained.
"In this time of crisis, outside directors must reform Enron's traditional lack of transparency and communicate directly with shareholders," said Gabriel Caprio, President and CEO of the Amalgamated Bank. "This is particularly important since several outside directors have apparent conflicts of interest that compromise their objectivity," he added.
AFL-CIO affiliate unions sponsor benefit funds with over $400 billion in assets and hold an estimated 3.1 million Enron shares. The AFL-CIO is joined in its call for reform by the Amalgamated Bank, the trustee of the LongView Funds which hold 251,304 shares of Enron. The Amalgamated Bank's Longview Funds are collective investment trusts that manage equity assets on behalf of workers' benefit funds.
A copy of the letter sent to Enron's Board of Directors is available by contacting the AFL-CIO Office of Investment at 202-637-3900 or online at http://www.shareholdervalue.org .
MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here
http://tbutton.prnewswire.com/prn/11690X92872585

/CONTACT: Lane Windham, +1-202-637-5018, or Bill Patterson, +1-202-637-3900, both of AFL-CIO/ 13:39 EST

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Williams CEO Sees Validation Of Co's Bandwidth Model

11/02/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- At the beginning of the year, two telecommunications units born of energy companies seemed to symbolize the different ways to sell bandwidth.
Enron Corp. (ENE) was viewed as the hot pioneer blazing a trail for selling telecommunications network capacity as a commodity like natural gas or electricity.
On the other hand, Williams Communications Group (WCG) seemed to promote the old-fashioned method that telecommunications companies have used for making long-term agreements.
On Thursday, WCG reported third-quarter earnings of $22.6 million before taxes and interest. WCG Chairman and Chief Executive Howard Janzen told Dow Jones Newswires that the earnings validated Williams' model of a bandwidth company being a provider of services, not a trader of commodities.
"I think bandwidth trading has its place," Janzen said. "It's developing relatively slowly. The reality is (that) bandwidth is not a commodity except for lower-capacity services and on certain routes with large amounts of capacity."
Enron reported an $80 million third-quarter loss for its Broadband Services unit.
As Janzen views it, bandwidth is defined by the technology used to provide it.
"The bandwidth we'll sell five years from now will be different from what we're selling today because of changes in technology," he said.
After taxes and interest, Williams reported a loss of $272.7 million on revenue of $297.8 million in the third quarter. An extraordinary gain of $223.7 million from the repurchase of senior redeemable notes in the open market enabled Williams to post the positive result before taxes and interest.
In the same period a year ago, Williams reported a net loss of $150.5 million on revenue of $209 million.
Williams also announced Thursday that it has agreed to buy the assets of CoreExpress, a company which operated on Williams' network. CoreExpress guarantees data delivery over multiple networks and developed software to monitor quality of service over multiple networks.
Terms of the agreement weren't disclosed. The deal won't close until undisclosed conditions are met.
Williams also announced a 20-year agreement valued at $267 million to provide bandwidth to Boeing Co.
-By Erwin Seba, Dow Jones Newswires, 713-547-9214 erwin.seba@dowjones.com

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

USA: Enron shares plunge after S&P credit rating cut.

11/02/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.
NEW YORK, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Shares of Enron Corp. dropped more than 8 percent in early trade on Friday, as the stock took a new plunge in a two-week free-fall, a day after its credit rating was cut for the second time this week.
Enron was down 89 cents, or 7.4 percent, to $11.10 on the New York Stock Exchange, after briefly slipping to $10.95, a price it also touched briefly on Tuesday and last closed at in July 1992.
Enron, the nation's largest energy trader, lined up $1 billion of new credit on Thursday in a bid to restore investor confidence. Even so, Standard & Poor's cut Enron's credit rating after stock markets closed on Thursday, saying it could do so again if the situation worsens.
Enron has been rocked by a stock slide that has slashed two-thirds of its share price since Oct. 16, when the company reported a $1 billion charge that was caused, in part, by dealings linked to a chief financial officer who was subsequently ousted.
Houston-based Enron is facing an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission into those dealings. At issue are off-balance sheet deals with limited partnerships, run by then-CFO Andrew Fastow, which contributed to a $1.2 billion reduction in shareholder equity.

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Goldman Declines Enron's Request for Loan Amid Credit Concerns
2001-11-02 11:22 (New York)

Goldman Declines Enron's Request for Loan Amid Credit Concerns

     New York, Nov. 2 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
refused to participate in a $1 billion loan to Enron Corp. because
it was unwilling to risk its capital on a client with falling
credit ratings that has been using its investment-banking services
less often, according to people familiar with matter.

     Enron Chief Executive Kenneth Lay asked for the line of
credit after meeting with bankers from Goldman, J.P. Morgan Chase
& Co. and Citigroup Inc. last month to discuss ways to alleviate a
cash crunch. J.P. Morgan and Citigroup agreed to lend on the
condition that the Houston-based energy trader pledge two
pipelines as collateral.

     Goldman's refusal highlights its reluctance to provide credit
lines to all but its top fee-paying clients. By not lending to
Enron, the firm also is able to advise companies that want to buy
Enron or some of its assets, or make a bid of its own.

     For Enron, the decision makes it harder to resist the demands
of its existing lenders, who made the company give up collateral
and pay higher interest rates to get its new loan.

     ``People smell resistance to Enron,'' said Glenn Reynolds, an
analyst with CreditSights.com, an independent research firm. ``The
balance of power is the with the banks now.''

     Kathleen Baum, a spokeswoman for Goldman, said the firm had
``a long history of putting its capital to work for clients.'' She
wouldn't comment on the firm's relationship with Enron. Karen
Denne, a spokeswoman for Enron, said, ``I won't confirm who we
have had talks with.''

                             Shut Out

     Enron needed the $1 billion secured loan to supplement cash
reserves and help the company pay off existing debt. Yesterday,
Standard & Poor's cut Enron's long-term credit rating to ``BBB,''
the second-lowest investment grade rating, from ``BBB+.''

     The SEC is investigating partnerships run by former Chief
Financial Officer Andrew Fastow that bought and sold Enron shares
and assets. Those trades cost Enron $35 million. The company also
lost $1.2 billion in shareholder equity.

     Enron's dealings with the partnerships have shut it out of
commercial-paper markets, where corporations borrow money for days
or weeks. Lenders are concerned that the company may have further
losses from its trading business.

     A week ago Enron tapped $3 billion in credit lines, arranged
by J.P. Morgan and Citibank, to pay off $2.2 billion in commercial
paper it has outstanding.

     Already loaded down with Enron debt, J.P. Morgan and Citibank
forced Enron to pay as much as 2.5 percentage points more than the
London interbank offered rate, or Libor, on its new loan,
according to the people familiar with the matter. That's about
five times the spread Enron is paying on its existing lines,
according to Bloomberg data.

     The extra yield wasn't sufficient incentive for Goldman to
lend. Securities firms such as Goldman are required to value
lending commitments at market prices, exposing them to potential
losses from declines in loan prices. Banks such as J.P. Morgan and
Citibank are allowed to carry the assets at full value.

                          Falling Prices

     Enron's existing loans have already fallen to between 80 and
90 cents on the dollar since the company drew them down, according
to traders.

     The company's 6.4 percent coupon notes due in 2006 fell as
much as 6 cents on the dollar today, with price indications
between 68 and 73 cents, traders said. Yesterday, traders bid for
the bonds at 74 cents and offered to sell them at 77 cents

     Goldman has been getting less investment-banking business
from Enron.

     The No. 3 U.S. securities firm by capital hasn't arranged a
bond sale for Enron since 1995, and Enron hasn't picked Goldman to
advise on an acquisition or sale since at least 1993, according to
Bloomberg data. The firm is a dealer on Enron's $3 billion
commercial paper program and has arranged six of the company's 15
preferred share sales.

     Without a steady flow of investment banking fees, Goldman is
reluctant to make loans that tie up capital in a business that is
less profitable than advising on mergers or underwriting
securities.

     Among clients the firm has turned down: Ford Motor Co., the
second-largest automaker, and Vodafone Group Plc, Europe's largest
cellular phone company.

     Goldman did extend $2 billion in credit to AT&T Corp. as part
of a $25 billion credit facility last year. The largest U.S. long-
distance phone company is one of the firm's most lucrative
clients, however, paying out more than $100 million in investment-
banking fees during the past five years.

     After refusing to lend to Enron, Goldman is unlikely to
advise the energy trader on any of its planned $2.1 billion in
asset sales, the people familiar said.

     J.P. Morgan is advising Enron on the sale of its Azurix North
American water business and may be retained, along with
Citigroup's Salomon Smith Barney unit, to look at other disposals
and a possible sale of the whole company, the people said.

     Goldman, which has an energy trading business of its own, may
already be advising potential buyers of Enron's businesses, or
lining up a bid of its own, Reynolds said.

     ``We may well see Goldman pop up on the other side, which
would explain its reticence to lend,'' he said.

POWER POINTS: Time For A Bronx Miracle In Houston
By Mark Golden

11/02/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
A Dow Jones Newswires Column

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- With two outs in the bottom of the ninth and down by two runs with one man on, Enron Corp. (ENE) needs nothing less than a home run just to stay in the game.
This is the home run Enron must come up with: Full disclosure of the assets and liabilities of those troubled partnerships that have been kept off their balance sheet, and proof the corporation can cover the difference. It's what stockholders, bondholders and trading partners have been demanding, but time is running out, and Enron hasn't produced.
"We're going to get to that number soon and tell people. We have to do that," said a source at Enron, who didn't know how quickly the disclosure would come or whether it would be independently audited. "In this environment, we are going to be absolutely sure that it's accurate."
Enron has about $3.3 billion in debt on the two key partnerships payable in 2003. The company will sell the assets in those partnerships and, in a worse case scenario, will face a $1 billion shortfall that could be covered by selling stock and other company assets, Enron has said. The company hopes that when the time comes to issue new stock, shares will be trading closer to $20 than their current $11.
Investors, however, aren't acting as if they're reassured. Part of the trouble, analysts with credit-rating firm Standard & Poor's said Friday morning, is that until Enron sells the assets, nobody knows for sure what they're worth or how deep the partnerships are in the hole.
S&P is confident that Enron can raise enough capital to fill that hole, provided its trading partners in key energy markets continue to business with the company.
Credit Derivative Fizzle

To see the pickle the world's premier energy franchise is in, one needs to look no further than its credit derivatives trading desk. That relatively new and innovative operation was getting off the ground nicely, but the desk hasn't been able to transact for three weeks, since the value of Enron's stock and bonds began to plummet, according to another Enron employee.
Enron didn't respond to a request for comment, but the Enron Credit division in Europe said in a release that lines are "constrained" as the market continues to evaluate the company's credit position.
Until recently, customers would buy a credit derivative from Enron to cover its exposure to bankruptcy by a third company. A big supplier to a financially troubled company like Xerox Corp. (XRX) or Lucent Technologies (LU), for example, might pay Enron $1 million a year for a payout of, say, $10 million in the event of a bankruptcy.
But you wouldn't pay the premium on your insurance unless you were sure that the insurance company could pay your claims. Likewise, with Enron's creditworthiness in doubt, there's no reason to pay a lot of money just to exchange Lucent risk for Enron risk.
The same holds true, though less obviously, for Enron's core business of energy trading. Some utilities, large industrial companies and other energy trading companies could see their profits ruined if natural gas prices - already on the rise at $3 per million British thermal units - shoot to $10 this winter as they did last winter.
To guard against that risk, companies buy contracts now for delivery this winter at set prices. If a company wants to lock in winter gas at $3, should it turn to Enron? If gas were to rise to $10 in January and Enron couldn't deliver, Enron's counterparty paid a good price for no protection. And if Enron failed in a $10 gas market, that would send hundreds of companies scrambling for supplies. Gas could go to $20 in a heartbeat.
Leading Role An Asset

Enron does have a man on base. The company is so important to energy market participants that they desperately want Enron to survive. And any company that moves to lock Enron out of the market now could regret doing so if Enron survives as the big dog.
Enron's trading partners have a pretty consistent position at this point: They are continuing to trade with Enron, but are avoiding long-term deals that increase their exposure to the company. The only acceptable long-term deals are those that offset deals done earlier. Unless and until a bill goes unpaid, they'll keep delivering.
Enron, like the rest of the U.S. energy industry, paid its bills for September gas deliveries on Oct. 20 and for its September electricity deliveries on Oct. 25. Its next power and gas bills come due in the third week of November.
That means trading companies generally have just seven weeks of receivables at risk before Enron's creditworthiness faces another test. In exchange for taking on that small risk, they keep the great market maker in business.
Lenders Show Concerns

Lenders, whether through holding Enron bonds or providing loans, don't have the same luxury as energy trading companies that are keeping deals on a short leash. Lenders supply cash up front and for longer periods of time, usually years.
Outside of long-term commitments, what worries the banks, which presumably got a good look at Enron's books? If Enron is now unable to make the big bets with long-term energy deals that have kept it profitable for years, can it service all of its liabilities, known and unknown? If it has to sell profitable assets like pipelines and power plants, or otherwise put those assets at risk, will lower earnings be enough to pay rising credit costs? What happens if its greatest asset - its traders - leave in droves to work elsewhere?
If Enron is to have a chance, it needs energy trading profits to keep rolling in so that it can continue to service its debt. So far this year, trading and other wholesale operations have accounted for $2.2 billion out of $2.4 billion in net recurring income before interest and taxes. By comparison, Enron has made $617 million in interest payments so far this year.
J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Citigroup Inc. (C) unit Salomon Smith Barney, at least, don't show much confidence Enron can do it. When they agreed to provide Enron with a $1 billion line of credit, they did so only after Enron posted valuable gas pipelines as collateral.
Bond traders - the most sophisticated investors in the world - make their money by understanding the probabilities. They're trading Enron debt at levels typically associated with distressed companies.
The lenders have chalked up their runs. Shareholders have ratcheted up the pressure.
Enron, now, must step up to the plate.
-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Enron Says It Remains 'Biggest' Player In EU Gas, Power

11/02/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Enron Corp. (ENE) said in a statement Friday that it remains the "the biggest buyer and seller of gas and power in Europe," and that its EnronOnline platform "continues to be the key trading platform in Europe."
The company issued the statement in response to widespread rumors that several companies have ceased trading gas and power with Enron since its share price took a nosedive last week.
In the statement, Enron added that worldwide transactions in the power and gas markets were averaging $3 billion to $4 billion a day, up from a 30-day average of $2.5 billion at close of business Friday, Oct. 26.
Enron has been on the defensive after announcing a third-quarter loss of $618 million two weeks ago, followed by news that it took a $1.2 billion equity write-down, based partly on transactions involving a handful of its own officers.
On Wednesday, Enron disclosed that the SEC elevated its inquiry into Enron's alleged related-party transactions to a formal probe.
Enron Corp. secured $1 billion in new credit lines this week, but the deal did not appease credit-rating agency Standard & Poor's Ratings Group, which lowered its rating on Enron's long-term debt by one notch to triple-B from triple-B-plus and short-term debt to single-A-3 from single-A-2. Moody's Investors Service Inc. had issued debt downgrades earlier this week.
However, European industry sources reiterated Friday that several companies have ceased trading U.K. gas and power with Enron altogether, based on concerns about the company's overall credit position.

-By Sarah Spikes and Germana Canzi, Dow Jones Newswires; +44-(0)20-7842-9345; sarah.spikes@dowjones.com

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

USA: UPDATE 1-Enron shares fall as investor concerns linger.
By Janet McGurty

11/02/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.
NEW YORK, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Shares in Enron Corp., the U.S. energy trading giant facing a federal probe into its dealings, declined on Friday amid lingering investor concern about management credibility and the outcome of pending lawsuits.
Shares of Enron were off 62 cents, or 5.2 percent, at $11.37 in early afternoon trade on the New York Stock Exchange, recouping some losses after plunging briefly to $10.95, a closing price last seen in July 1992 and touched in intraday trade on Tuesday.
Enron debt due in 2006 declined about another 6 points, and was trading at about 65 cents on the dollar. The bonds were trading at about $1.01 two weeks ago, before Enron announced on Oct. 16 a $1 billion charge, caused in part by dealings linked to partnerships run until recently by a chief financial officer who was ousted last week, and that form part of the federal probe.
"There remain several fundamental issues that we believe need to be addressed before the clouds can clear above Enron's skies," said Ronald Barone of brokerage UBS Warburg.
Apart from the probe by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Barone said concerns include "the evolving state of the company's balance sheet, management credibility and ultimate outcome of shareholder lawsuits."
A handful of law firms have sued Enron, saying it overstated operating results, failed to write down assets on a timely basis and concealed investments that might require the company to issue large amounts of shares to cover loses.
Enron's woes have put it under intense investor scrutiny, with the company losing about $17 billion in market capitalization in the past two weeks. The AFL-CIO union umbrella urged Enron on Friday to review executive compensation and adopt procedures for insider investments, among other recommendations.
AFL-CIO affiliate unions sponsor benefit funds that hold an estimated 3.1 million Enron shares.
PREMIUM PLAYER IN RISK MANAGEMENT
Shares also plunged on Friday - they have fallen about two-thirds in the past two weeks - after Standard & Poor's cut Enron's credit rating late Thursday, the second cut this week.
Although S&P said another rate cut could ensue if Enron's situation worsens, a team of S&P analysts told investors on a conference call on Friday they were confident they were aware of all the company's financial obligations.
Enron has been criticized for providing scant details about its dealings, leading to concerns about the riskiness of its obligations.
"Enron is a premium player in the risk management area," said Ronald Barone, a member of the S&P team who is not related to UBS's Barone.
The S&P analysts said they were using about $1.5 billion as the amount of off-balance sheet items, about half the $3 billion calculated in past years, because of a change in reporting international energy assets, which no longer puts non-recourse debt onto the balance sheet in places like India and South America.
The S&P analysts also said they felt Enron's move to secure a $1 billion line of additional credit earlier this week sent out Enron's clear commitment to credit quality.
They also said it seemed reasonable to expect a long-term solution to fix Enron's hard to understand balance sheet would assume an infusion of long-term equity as well as asset sales.
The S&P ratings team also said it was closely monitoring Enron's trading partners for a change in their credit stance toward Enron and, to date, have seen no significant change.
But they cautioned that could change at any time and that was the reason for putting Enron on the credit watch listing.
Enron Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ken Lay, who has been criticized for not providing the public enough details on Enron, was a no-show at a business conference in Houston where he had been scheduled to speak on Friday morning.
Enron executive Robert Bradley, who declined to respond to questions from Reuters after his speech, said he had been sent to replace Lay because "Ken is better at putting out fires at Enron."

Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Yes, We're going home to Omaha tomorrow morning, we'll be back on Monday.  Take care and Happy Easter!


To:	AHA Walkers

Please read below attachment.  From what some of you have told me, we are way ahead of the game!

I registered everyone to walk this morning who did not tell me they won't be able to make it.  Frankly, my plan is to only walk about a mile, then to go home and start mixing the mimosas (and perhaps drinking one, too!)

Let's hope the weather is as nice as it's been this past week!

Leesa


Looks good to me.  Enjoy!

Marie Heard on 12/03/98 09:08:31 AM
To: Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Janet Dobernecker/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Vacation Request

I would like to schedule Tuesday, December 15 through Friday, December 18 as
vacation.  Please let me know if there is a problem.

Thanks!

Marie


Outlook Migration Team@ENRON
05/04/2001 03:26 PM
To: Alex Huang/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Amitava Dhar/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Anita
DuPont/NA/Enron@ENRON, Bob Lee/NA/Enron@Enron, Chonawee
Supatgiat/Corp/Enron@Enron, Elena Chilkina/Corp/Enron@Enron, Gwyn
Koepke/NA/Enron@Enron, Jaesoo Lew/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jason Sokolov/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Jose Marquez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kate Lucas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth
Parkhill/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kevin G Moore/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lance
Cunningham/NA/Enron@ENRON, Leann Walton/NA/Enron@ENRON, Martin
Lin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen Raymond/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Nelson Neale/NA/Enron@Enron, Paulo Issler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Pinnamaneni
Krishnarao/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rabi De/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rakesh
Bharati/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandeep Kohli/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Sevil Yaman/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sofya
Tamarchenko/NA/Enron@Enron, Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya
Tamarchenko/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Barkley/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom
Halliburton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, William
Smith/Corp/Enron@Enron, Youyi Feng/NA/Enron@Enron, Zimin Lu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan
Muntz/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Anita Swanson/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Bambi
Heckerman/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Christopher Burns/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Darla
Steffes/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Geneva Patterson/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Jerry
Boston/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Jody Warner/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, John
Freeman/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Judith Weakly/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Laurie
Willemyns/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Leon Schneider/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Loren
Charbonneau/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Ray Neppl/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Coburn/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Alliece Morris/OTS/Enron@ENRON, ETSWEB@Enron, Joe
Zhou/FGT/Enron@Enron, LaDonna Dervin/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Larry
Hill/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Max Brown/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Patty
Hermanek/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Peter Lu/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Randy
Cantrell/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Richard Abramowicz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick
Craig/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Robert Fugel/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tina
Dunnaway/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Wendy Koh/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Anne
Bike/Corp/Enron@Enron, Barry Tycholiz/NA/Enron@ENRON, Carli
Smith/NA/Enron@Enron, Doug Fletcher/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Jacquelyn Matthews/NA/Enron@Enron, Janelle
Russell/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt, JoAnne Smith/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Kayla Bruzzese/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael J Beyer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael J
Miller/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Michelle
Lincoln/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt, Shelly Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan
Huston/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Zachary Sampson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alison
Smith/NYC/MGUSA@MGUSA, Bernie Penner/NYC/MGUSA@MGUSA, Janet
Vala-Terry/NYC/MGUSA@MGUSA, Lilia Penagos/NYC/MGUSA@MGUSA, Patricia
Benington/NYC/MGUSA@MGUSA, Jack Netek/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications
cc:
Subject: 2- SURVEY/INFORMATION EMAIL 5-7-01

Current Notes User:

To ensure that you experience a successful migration from Notes to Outlook,
it is necessary to gather individual user information prior to your date of
migration.  Please take a few minutes to completely fill out the following
survey.  When you finish, simply click on the 'Reply' button then hit 'Send'
Your survey will automatically be sent to the Outlook 2000 Migration Mailbox.

Thank you.

Outlook 2000 Migration Team

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------

Full Name:       Vince J Kaminski

Login ID:  vkamins

Extension:  3-3848

Office Location:  EB1962

What type of computer do you have?  (Desktop,  Laptop,  Both)  Desktop, Laptop

Do you have a PDA?  If yes, what type do you have:   (None, IPAQ, Palm Pilot,
Jornada)  Palm Pilot

Do you have permission to access anyone's Email/Calendar?  NO
    If yes, who?

Does anyone have permission to access your Email/Calendar?  Shirley Crenshaw,
Anita DuPont
    If yes, who?

Are you responsible for updating anyone else's address book?  NO
    If yes, who?

Is anyone else responsible for updating your address book?  NO
    If yes, who?

Do you have access to a shared calendar?  NO
    If yes, which shared calendar?

Do you have any Distribution Groups that Messaging maintains for you (for
mass mailings)?  NO
    If yes, please list here:

Please list all Notes databases applications that you currently use:

In our efforts to plan the exact date/time of your migration, we also will
need to know:

What are your normal work hours?  From: 7:30     To:      6:30

Will you be out of the office in the near future for vacation, leave, etc? NO
       If so, when?        From (MM/DD/YY):      To (MM/DD/YY):


please facilitate this.

Jennifer Burns

11/01/2000 05:47 PM

To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Lorie Belsha/HOU/ECT@ECT, John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: LNG group move to Enron Building

Can we try and get these LNG guys on 29 when we move Nowlan's group????  I
think there are about 15 of them.

Jennifer
---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Burns/HOU/ECT on 11/01/2000
05:45 PM ---------------------------

Eric Gonzales
10/23/2000 06:15 AM
To: Jennifer Burns/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Brenda J Johnston/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: LNG group move to Enron Building

Jennifer,

Could you please co-ordinate with Brenda Johnston (Rick's Houston assistant)
to help facilitate the move of the LNG group to the Enron Building.  I
appreciate your help on this issue.  Send me note when you are able to
confirm timing etc.

Thanks
Eric


Neil left town yesterday.  I can't really complain since he rarely travels.
However, he is welcome to pamper upon his return!

Kay

From: Carlos Sole@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/27/2000 02:21 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: EB Top 10 List Winners!

I understand that you and Michael are sick with strep throat.  I hope you get
well over the weekend and that Neill appropriately pampers you and Michael in
the interim.


Set up wtih Eric Salinas 33968 - 10/3/00 - jar


here it is, good luck.
PL


Jennifer, you are very welcome and I look forward to continuing to work with
you - all the best.

Regards
Delainey


Can y'all help me get the document below signed by an officer of ECC and
return the originally signed document to me.  I will send them all out
together back to the counterparty.  FYI-Andy Zipper is second in command to
Louise Kitchen for EnronOnline.  Thanks for your help!
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 10/13/2000 08:24 AM -----

	Andy Zipper@ENRON
	10/12/2000 05:44 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: IntercontinentalExchange, LLC

Tana,
Can you please have ENA, EPMI, and Enron Canada Corp. each sign a copy of the
participant agreement attached below for the Intercontinental Exchange. When
signed please return them the fax number listed and let me know when they
have gone out. I got Mark Taylor's okay on this.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Andy
---------------------- Forwarded by Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron on 10/12/2000
04:52 PM ---------------------------

Duuna Richardson <duuna.richardson@intcx.com> on 10/05/2000 11:54:52 AM
To: "'Andy.zipper@enron.com'" <Andy.zipper@enron.com>
cc: Rafe Pirutinsky <rafael.pirutinsky@intcx.com>

Subject: IntercontinentalExchange, LLC

>  Dear Andy,
>
>  Per Rafael Pirutinsky of Intercontinental, attached is some
> additional information about The ICE.
>
>  First, is an electronically executed copy of our Participant
> Agreement signed by each customer and our Service and Pricing Schedules.
> If you have any questions,  please call Chuck Vice at 770.738.2129.  If
> not, you may execute and return a copy to Chuck's attention at the address
> below at your earliest convenience.
>
>  Also attached is our Customer Information Packet which contains a
> functional and technical overview of our trading system, The ICE, as well
> as instructions for downloading the application and requesting access as a
> Demo User.  If you have any questions regarding this packet, please call
> the ICE Helpdesk at 770.738.2101.  They can answer your technical
> questions or have an appropriate technology representative speak with you.
>
>  Thank you for your interest.
>
>  Regards,
>
>  Duuna Richardson
>  IntercontinentalExchange, LLC
>  2100 RiverEdge Parkway, Suite 400
>  Atlanta, GA  30328
>  Tel:    770.738.2137
>  Fax:   770.951.5481
>  ---------------------------------------------------
 <<Participant Agreement 080200.doc>>  <<Service and Pricing Schedules.doc>>
 <<Customer Information Packet.doc>>

 - Participant Agreement 080200.doc
 - Service and Pricing Schedules.doc
 - Customer Information Packet.doc


---------------------- Forwarded by Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES on 11/16/2001 12:04 PM ---------------------------

Delivery Failure Report
Your document:	Jack in the Box
was not delivered to:	James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES
because:	User James D Steffes/HOU/EES (James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES) not listed in public Name & Address Book

What should you do?
You can resend the undeliverable document to the recipients listed above by choosing the Resend button or the Resend command on the Actions menu.
Once you have resent the document you may delete this Delivery Failure Report.
If resending the document is not successful you will receive a new failure report
Unless you receive other Delivery Failure Reports, the document was successfully delivered to all other recipients.

EESHOU-LN12/EES, EESHOU-LN12/EES

________________________

To:	James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
From:	Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES
Date:	11/16/2001 12:02:42 PM
Subject:	Jack in the Box

---------------------- Forwarded by Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES on 11/16/2001 12:02 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Energy Services  From:  Michele Sorensen                           11/06/2001 04:57 PM Phone No: 562 901 3807 Office   714 813-0742 Cell   888 578 8404 Pager

To:	Andrew Wu/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES
cc:	Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, Ian McAbeer/HOU/EES@EES
Subject:	Jack in the Box

Andy and Mike,

Jack in the Box is in the process of opening 14 new stores in CA.  They have requested these stores be added to the Enron Agreement.
Based on the recent information from the CPUC - can we add new facilities to the Jack in the Box contract?

Here's the CPUC language:

"We reaffirm that for the time being, and unless the Commission states
 otherwise in a subsequent decision, utilities are required to process DASRs
 relating to contracts or agreements that were executed on or before
September 20th, 2001, including DASRs for service to new facilities or
 accounts if the underlying contract pursuant to which those DASRs
 are submitted allowed for the provision of that additional service.  Thus,
 for example, with respect to the specific ESP contract described by
UC/CSU in their rehearing application, the utilities are required to accept,
 even after September 20, 2001, any DASRs they receive that legitimatley
 relate to that contract...[W]e want to make it clear that...utilities cannot
set a deadline after which they could refuse to process DASRs relating
to contracts executed on or before September 20, 2001."

Here's the provision in the Jack in the Box contract:

ADDITIONAL FACILITIES	At any time during the term of this Transaction, you may request that we add to this Transaction certain additional facilities owned and operated by you on mutually agreeable terms and conditions, including pricing.  If the account(s) at such facility(ies) is/are eligible to receive "direct access service" and the Parties are able to agree to the terms and conditions for adding any such additional facility(ies), the Parties will execute an appropriate amendment to this Transaction effecting such addition.

Please advise.
Thanks, Michele


I am fine with the change.  Mary, please prepare executables and make the change in the NUI document as well.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kaiser, Jared
Sent:	Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:26 AM
To:	Nemec, Gerald; Crady, Ned E.; Ogden, Mary
Subject:

See the attached revision for the Peoples CA.  The same revision is necessary for the NUI document.

Let me know your thoughts.

Regards,

Jared


Michael Matthews
Salomon Smith Barney
First Vice President- Investments
Portfolio Manager
1661 International Drive
Suite 200
Memphis, TN 38120
(901)818-4224   (800)227-4146

> ----------
> From:  fclinx@ssmb.com[SMTP:fclinx@ssmb.com]
> Sent:  Friday, June 08, 2001 7:43 AM
> To:  Matthews, Michael L [PVTC]
> Subject:  ENE: Reiterate Buy; Merchant Energy Fundamentals Remain
> Strong
>
>  <<SBD42664FCR.pdf>>
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------
Reminder:  E-mail sent through the Internet is not secure.
Do not use e-mail to send us confidential information
such as credit card numbers, changes of address, PIN
numbers, passwords, or other important information.
Do not e-mail orders to buy or sell securities, transfer
funds, or send time sensitive instructions. We will not
accept such orders or instructions.  This e-mail is not
an official trade confirmation for transactions executed
for your account.  Your e-mail message is not private in
that it is subject to review by the Firm, its officers,
agents and employees.
--------------------------------------------------------------
 - SBD42664FCR.pdf


Member Services
Notice No. MS-21
April 11, 2001

COMMODITY EXCHANGE, INC.

SWITCH OF STATUS

Please be advised that effective immediately, April 11, 2001, Henry Chandler
(CHAN-7043) will switch his status from an option member to a licensee
member.  However, Mr. Chandler will remain a member guaranteed by Rosenthal
Collins Group.

Inquiries regarding the above should be directed to the Member Services
Department at (212) 299-2370.

__________________________________________________
Please click on the link below to indicate you have received this
email.

"http://208.206.41.61/email/email_log.cfm?useremail=sara.shackleton@enron.com&
refdoc=(MS-21)"

Note: If you click on the above line and nothing happens, please copy
the text between the quotes, open your internet browser,
paste it into the web site address and press Return.


The old lady says no.   So far, there is 5 power guys that will play if the game is on.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lavorato, John
Sent:	Tuesday, November 20, 2001 4:49 PM
To:	Presto, Kevin M.
Subject:

me, brad mckay, tych and 3 others would like to take on 6 power hacks in football on Thursday morning.  Touch.


I think his interest is a marketing/oringination/business development role.

Mariella Mahan@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
08/18/2000 02:18 PM
To: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: David Haug/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Max
Yzaguirre/NA/Enron@ENRON@ECT, Shawn
Cumberland/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Re: Resume

Scott,
I know James McCord personally.  He used to work for Coastal, as part of the
fuels marketing group.  I have worked with him in the past.  Do you know what
he is interested in?  His background at Coastal was, as I mentioned, fuels.
Thanks! Mariella
ps: sorry for the horribly late reply/reaction.

Scott Neal@ECT
07/31/2000 03:53 PM
To: David Haug/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mariella
Mahan/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Max Yzaguirre/NA/Enron@ENRON,
Shawn Cumberland/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:

Subject: Resume

David, Mariella, Max, Shawn,

Please see the resume of James McCord attached below.
He has extensive international experience in Central and South America and
Mexico.
Any interest?

---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 07/31/2000 03:46 PM
---------------------------

Scott Neal
07/07/2000 04:54 PM
To: David Haug/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Resume

David,

I left a voice mail for you today regarding James McCord.  I have attached
his resume below for your reference.
He has extensive international experience in Central and South America and
Mexico.
Can I have James call you or someone in your group to visit about possible
opportunities?

Thank you.
Scott Neal

---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 07/07/2000 04:49 PM
---------------------------

"James R. McCord" <jrmccord@hotmail.com> on 07/07/2000 04:36:37 PM
To: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Resume

 - 2000Resume.doc


Confidential Settlement Material under CPUC Rule 51

Gas Accord II Rule 51 List:

Attached are the electronic versions of our presentations at the November 7
and 8 Gas Accord II Workshop.

Thank you for your participation in Gas Accord II and in the Workshops.
Please feel free to contact us with any questions, concerns or suggestions.

Frank Lindh    Ray Williams
Attorney    Director
415-973-2776   415-973-3634
frl3@pge.com   rdw0@pge.com

 <<Overview of Supply-Facility Reliability.ppt>>  <<Demand-Supply Forecast
11-7-00 Workshop.ppt>>  <<Winter Supply Reliability Options for 11-7.ppt>>
<<Capital Expenditures for 11-8-00 Workshop.ppt>>  <<Transmission Pricing
Options for 11-8-00 Workshop.ppt>>

 - Overview of Supply-Facility Reliability.ppt
 - Demand-Supply Forecast 11-7-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Winter Supply Reliability Options for 11-7.ppt
 - Capital Expenditures for 11-8-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Transmission Pricing Options for 11-8-00 Workshop.ppt


Suzanne is going to track down Heather, then will call you to confirm if 330
works.

Kay

From: Gregg Penman on 10/31/2000 11:50 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Re: enovate stuff

1)

3) I think we want it to apply to whatever entity employs the individuals
with access.  Most of these people will probably Peoples Energy Corp.
employees, but I suppose we could make it also include all of their
affiliates.  enovate can sign the CA as well, but since enovate doesn't have
any employees I was assuming we could use Peoples Energy as the responsible
legal entity.

4) After 3:00 is fine, let me know for sure soon enough that I can lock Sarah
up.

Thanks,

Gregg

	Kay Mann
	10/31/2000 11:29 AM

		 To: Gregg Penman/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: enovate stuff

1)The cybergoblins ate the attachment.
2) OK
3) Which Peoples is it?  Also, I think enovate should sign at CA.
4)  I sent Heather an email re her availability.  There's a bunch of
construction near downtown, so I would hesitate to commit to an early call,
but I know I'm free after 300 tomorrow.

Kay

From: Gregg Penman on 10/31/2000 11:25 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: enovate stuff

Kay -

1) Attached is my quick attempt at writing something to make the management
changes at enovate that we discussed.  Could you please review this and add
the appropriate legal language.  I don't think that we need any Board
approval for any of these changes, so is some type of notification sufficient?

2)  I would like to address the idea of signature authorities other than
Laura at the same time.  My suggestion would be that Richard and myself be
granted some level of authority to execute CA's, Master Agreements, etc. that
have been reviewed and approved by legal.  If you can at least pull the
template you used to get approval for the Director you mentioned and see if
there would be any changes necessary that would be helpful.

3) I need to get the CA form for the curves and other information started.
We can discuss this any time you want.

4) What is your availability tomorrow either 8-9:15 or after 3:00 to discuss
the intercompany loan agreement, and will Heather be available?

I will be leaving around 2:00 for suburban trick or treating.

Thanks,

Gregg


Dawn,

I have not seen a request form for his contract.  I believe that Teresa Bien
was working on it with Mark Haedicke.  I am copying her on this email so that
if I am mistaken, she can let me know.

Thanks.

Michelle

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------

Michelle Cash
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3823
Houston, Texas  77002
(713) 853-6401
michelle.cash@enron.com

This message may contain confidential information that is protected by the
attorney-client and/or work product privileges.

	Dawn Doucet
	06/21/2000 10:01 AM

		 To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Contract/Keohane

What's the status, Michelle?  Peter was asking yesterday - I told him we
might have something to him this week - was I lying??


Tom and Cynthia--The SE reports includes some dings against TVA.

On 11/1/00, FERC Staff issued reports on its Investigation of Bulk Power
Markets in the Eastern Interconnection.  These reports were the result of a
Commission order earlier this summer.  Enron's Federal regulatory staff
(Christi, Charles Yeung, and Sarah Novosel) provided a great deal of
information for this investigation and Joe Hartsoe and Donna Fulton discussed
many of the problems with the grid with the new head of Staff, Scott Miller
(who recently joined FERC from PG&E Gen).    While the Commission is under no
obligation to take any of Staff's recommendations, the Commission typically
looks to Staff for guidance on transmission and market issues.  Importantly,
Staff concludes that the Commission should consider these options for the
Southeast and Midwest -- all of which Enron has been asking FERC to implement
for several years:

Reduce the advantages of network service over point to point service by
requiring that native load be served under the same tariff as other
transmission services to eliminate the current incentives that VIUs have to
favor their native load through the calculation of ATC and handling of
interconnection requests.

While the Staff Hotline is used productively, the Commission can direct Staff
to conduct formal investigations into entities that have a pattern of
complaints.

The Commission could require TPs to submit tariff provisions containing a pro
forma interconnection process specific to interconnection, rather than simply
relying on the Tennessee Power order that utilizes the OATT timelines and
procedures.

Require TPs to retain real-time transmission data on market functions
pertaining to daily load, internal generation to meet that load, and imports
and exports.

RTOs should submit the basis and methods for calculating ATC and TTC, as well
as standardized criteria for curtailment.  In addition, since even such
standardized criteria might not "get to the root of the problem" -- that
control area still control generation -- the Commission could require that
each RTO set a date certain by which it will create one control area.
Regardless of the implementation of these two options, the Commission could
standardize ATC and TTC methodology.

Staff finds that while electricity is a commodity with market characteristics
similar to many other commodities, it is still viewed as "different," with a
reaction of price caps.  Staff encourages that basic decisions about the
regulatory model be made in order to complete the transition from a
traditional cost-of-service model to a model that uses markets to price the
commodity and services.

DETAILS  (Also, the reports contain good summaries of the generation,
transmission, state retail, federal reg. and other issues for the region):

Midwest:  The Midwest is dominated by vertically integrated Transmission
Providers ("TPs") that control transmission, generation and load.  "As such,
they have weak economic incentives to provide access to transmission service
to third-parties and strong incentives to favor their own services."  Staff
received numerous complaints; however, due to the lack of information
available from TPs, Staff cannot conclude whether these are isolated
incidents or wide-spread.  At the very least, the complaints indicate a lack
of confidence in the bulk power market and the ability of market participants
to rely on transmission access, thus harming the liquidity of the market.

TLRs are the most important transmission issue in the Midwest, with an
"enormous" increase in 2000.  The region showed a decline in peak load from
1999 to 2000 and a growth in new generation since the 1998 price spikes.
Even though there was an increase in generation and mild weather with
virtually no price spikes, TLRs climbed to record numbers.  The TLRs were
highly concentrated:  only 5 flowgates account for 41% of ECAR TLRs and
another 5 flowgates in MAIN account for 42% in that region.  Notably, even
though the NERC procedures for Level 3 TLRs mandate transaction curtailment,
78 of the 191 TLRs in the Midwest do not show any curtailment amount.  The
total amount of relief that these curtailments are intended to produce are
not posted.  Staff notes that TLR rules are established by NERC, whose
procedures are voluntary and not enforced by penalties.  While the Commission
has required certain NERC standards and procedures to be placed in Open
Access Transmission Tariffs ("OATT") where the Commission has the power to
enforce provisions under the Federal Power Act, in practice the Commission
has generally deferred to NERC on transmission reliability questions,
including the propriety of TLRs.

TLRs inhibit optimal functioning of the transmission system and market
because load is not served by the least cost supplier.  TLR procedure is an
inefficient instrument in mitigating constraints -- curtailment by fiat.  In
addition, the NERC IDC can result in inappropriate curtailments or increased
loading on the affected flowgate.  The impact could be mitigated by one
control area per RTO.

Staff notes that the Midwest state commissions did not petition FERC for
price caps following the 1998 price spikes.  Some market participants believe
that the absence of price spikes is the single reason that NUG construction
increased in the Midwest.

Market participants must keep track of, and follow, a plethora of information
in order to make energy deals, submit reservations and provide schedules for
service.  Staff received many complaints about barriers to transmission
access, including TLR curtailments and a lack of standardized information and
protocols, particularly for ATC and interconnection requests, and
discriminatory conduct.  Unbelievably, key data was unavailable to Staff,
such coincident peak load data, system-wide snap shots for days when TLRs
were called, and import/export data.  This lack of data creates a market
inefficiency, because neither market participants nor regulators can fully
analyze market conditions in real time.  As such, the market is risk adverse,
eschewing long-term deals for short-term transactions.  Staff also noted that
because the Security Coordinators often work for the IOU, there is a mixed
incentive to enforce reliability on the grid and maximize profit for the
IOU.  (Staff cites Richard Tabors' paper, "Transmission Markets, Stretching
the Rules for Fun and Profit.")

Staff cites the lack of information on OASIS or on the NERC web site,
particularly about real time TLRs and curtailments.  Examples were provided
to Staff of transmission refusals when there were no TLRs posted and improper
implementation of TLRs causing substantial financial loss.

The currently proposed Midwest RTOs may mitigate some problems; however, all
three retain existing control areas with the favortism for generation and
native load.  These incentives will continue to remain until the RTO
exercises complete autonomy over transmission control and security
coordinator functions.  Staff notes that the Midwest is a balkanized region
of 61 control areas with no uniform method for calculating ATC and CBM.  The
result is that ATCs can be different on 2 different sides of an interface.
Staff notes examples in inaccurate ATCs and states that Staff's own ATC audit
this summer was consistent with market participant complaints.  Staff is
weighing follow-up options.  The result of these problems is a lack of
liquidity.

Staff next noted the problems with unfiled "business practices," especially
on the next hour market.  Staff's audit of OASIS sites revealed several areas
of non-compliance.

Information transparency is necessary for a market to function efficiently,
with equal and timely access to data, including ATC, CBM, TRM, and load flow
input data.  TPs have incentives to resist efforts to make this information
transparent because of native load.  This incentive will still exist under
RTOs if utilities are allowed to calculate their own ATC.  ***  "As a
consequence, the Commission may wish to eliminate the native load exemption
and have all transactions under the same tariff."  ***  The Commission could
benefit by having access to existing transmission data and should require the
TPs to retain data, including current real-time network status.

Interconnection Issues:  IPPs need to be compensated for VAR support.  Also,
Staff cites a number of Hotline complaints about TPs seeking large deposits
or failing to complete System Impact Studies timely.  One solution is to have
the RTO handle this function to eliminate the disincentive the utilities have
against IPPs.  The current practice of requiring IPPs to deal with a wide
variety of procedures inhibits the free flow of transactions within the
region.

Network service has inherent advantages over point-to-point, citing the
Entergy source and sink order.  The Commission has relied on "passively"
receiving informal and formal complaints to determine if discriminatory
behavior has occurred rather than actively canvassing market participants.
While Staff cannot conclude that discriminatory practices are widespread,
there is evidence of discriminatory instances.

Southeast:  The traditional vertically integrated utility ("VIU") model has
largely persisted in the SE.  This continued control has vastly reduced the
economic incentives to facilitate IPP activities.  In many cases, the VIUs
have dampened IPP involvement without violating any Commission regulation due
to the inherent flexibility of the current rules.

Staff cites examples of delays in performing system impact studies,
transmission hoarding in the name of serving native load growth and
manipulation of ATC.  TPs have shown little inclination to improve the
transmission system and use many TLRs.

There is also a lack of market information that has stymied the development
of markets in the SE.  ATCs change constantly that leads to uncertainty and
there is no clearinghouse for electric power prices.

TVA, despite having taken steps to participate in reformed markets, has acted
as a bulwark against the development of competitive energy markets in the
SE.  This is significant because of TVA's size and location.  IPPs have
reported TVA's discouragement of siting in TVA through excessive time to
perform studies, excessive fees, and rejection of requests to perform
interconnection studies.

In addition, Staff cites the Florida Sup. Ct. decision against merchant
plants as significantly impeding the competitive market in Florida.

Staff discusses the significant flow of power from the Midwest to the SE this
summer.  Much of this resulted from the import of cheaper coal power, than
the use of gas fired peakers due to higher gas prices.  Peak prices were
radically lower this summer because utilities appear to have been better
prepared for peak events through the use of forward contracts, increased
generation capacity on line and reduced number of forced outages.

SE utilities reported that they have not used market-based rates to
extensively increase sales.  (Less used than in the midwest.)

The SE region lacks information, which has retarded the Staff's efforts to
discern the truth about the numerous complaints about transmission in the SE
(including ATC and TLRs).  Market participants seem to have less confidence
in the SE market than in any other market region.  This appears to be
justified based on Staff's investigations.  This lack of confidence
discourages investment and participation in the markets.  Staff concludes
that the Commission may need to be more prescriptive in terms of how
transmission is allocated in the SE RTOs, since there are market concerns
that the incumbents will continue to dominate operations.  The investigation
found numerous problems in bad ATCs and TTCs and poor OASIS postings.  In
addition, several OASIS audit logs actually erased historical data.  Staff
thinks that additional affiliate transaction information should be posted.
Staff could not obtain summer demand data and the Commission's lack of
jurisdiction over TVA made it difficult to obtain transmission access
information.

The Staff investigation revealed unclear interconnection procedures and lack
of adherence to schedules and arbitrary cost estimates and deposits.  In
addition, the TPs have reserved a huge amount of network transmission
capacity, much of it reserved shortly after the IPP approached the TP to
interconnect.  Staff cites the recent Skygen order in which Southern denied
Skygen's request for transmission stating that the only option was the
construction of an 80 mile 500 kv line that would take 8 years to complete.
Staff solutions include allowing network requests by IPPs and limiting
self-build capacity in the incumbent's territory.

ATC variations are a big problem in the SE.  SERC coordination of a
standardized ATC is a long process and may not be resolved soon without
direction from the Commission.  An improved method and improved communication
are needed.

The SE experienced a 354% increase in TLRs this summer.  This increase raises
the issue of whether curtailment has become an impediment to the competitive
operation of the market in the SE.  Staff cites information provided by
Charles Y. that an Ameren TLR was not implemented according to NERC
criteria.  Staff also wonders if transmission is being oversold since TPs do
not generally refund transmission revenues when TLRs are implemented.  RTOs
must have a broad geographic area to internalize much of the constraints.  In
addition, RTOs will adopt pricing mechanisms that obviate recourse to TLRs.
However, if control areas are retained, VIUs will retain mixed incentives.

*** As noted in the Midwest report, the manner in which load is calculated
weighs heavily on the value of this information.  This is an issue that the
formation of RTOs may not resolve.  Eliminating native load exceptions -- ie,
treating all load equally -- and placing all transactions under the same
tariff may be an option that provides the right incentives for the provision
of transparent and standardized information.

Finally, Staff describes specific problems with TVA and FP&L, TVA is a
"problem area" for the Eastern Interconnect grid.  TVA is a transmission
bottleneck due to the many TLRs called this summer.  The current federal law
and lack of Commission jurisdiction are impediments to the development of
deep and robust power markets in this area.  TVA simply has no strong
incentive to provide effective and efficient transmission service.  In
addition, the Commission does not have full information on TVA.  Staff lists
a number of complaints against TVA, including unjustifiably increasing the
tag deadline and allowing TVA Marketing, but not others, to sink and park
power.  Staff concludes that recent proposals by TVA to enhance the
development of markets and its system do not appear to have great potential.

A Staff audit of FP&L revealed violations of standards of conduct, including
confidential information on FP&L's transmission system (including interchange
information for other entities) posted on EMS systems that were available to
FPL's merchant function.  Staff's report found that FP&L does not have an
established procedure for review of EMS to ensure that information is not
displayed in error.  It is "up to individual Managers discretion."  ((FRCC
web site report dated 9/8/00)).  Violations such as these undermine
competition.

The reports are attached below.

 - southeast.pdf
 - midwest.pdf


Whoops!!! Move date is Friday, 5/18/01 at 5 pm.

Taffy Milligan
Sr. Admin Assistant
EWS-Legal
Tele: 713-345-7373
Fax:  713-646-6058

----- Forwarded by Taffy Milligan/HOU/ECT on 05/15/2001 08:09 PM -----

	Taffy Milligan
	05/15/2001 05:49 PM

		 To: Marie Heard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan
Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samantha Boyd/NA/Enron@Enron, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Rae Meadows/ENRON@enronXgate
		 Subject: Marie's arrival

Marie's move is scheduled for Friday, 5/25/01 at 5pm.

Taffy Milligan
Sr. Admin Assistant
EWS-Legal
Tele: 713-345-7373
Fax:  713-646-6058


Hey, I got an error back because the files were too big.  I'll stick them in the dropbox in a folder called scheadul.

Mat


-----Original Message-----
From: 	CustomerNotices, WGPHOU [mailto:WGPHOU.CustomerNotices@Williams.com]
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 1:31 PM
Subject:	Cash Out Indices - November 2001

November 26, 2001

To:  Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation Customers
     and Shippers

Re:  Cash Out Indices - November 2001

    FT                   AVG.          BUY        SELL
  ------                ------        ------     ------
  Zone 1                2.4525        2.0750	    2.9650
  Zone 2                2.4863        2.1075     2.9975
  Zone 3                2.5200        2.1400     3.0300
  Zone 4                2.5338        2.1522     3.0461
  Zone 5                2.5950        2.2060     3.1172
  Zone 6                2.6445        2.2495     3.1747

    IT                   AVG.          BUY        SELL
  ------                ------        ------     ------
  Zone 1                2.4525        2.0750     2.9650
  Zone 2                2.4863        2.1075     2.9975
  Zone 3                2.5200        2.1400     3.0300
  Zone 4                2.5745        2.1929     3.0868
  Zone 5                2.7807        2.3917     3.3029
  Zone 6                2.9387        2.5437     3.4689

   FTG                   AVG.          BUY        SELL
  ------                ------        ------     ------
  Zone 1                2.4525        2.0750     2.9650
  Zone 2                2.4863        2.1075     2.9975
  Zone 3                2.5200        2.1400     3.0300
  Zone 4                2.6016        2.2200     3.1139
  Zone 5                2.9045        2.5155     3.4267

                         AVG.          BUY        SELL
                        ------        ------     ------
  FTNT                  2.5375        2.1500     3.0500

For information concerning cash out transactions, please contact
Casilda Vasquez at (713)215-4504.

Stella Yu
Manager - Rate Systems
(713)215-3381


Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:10:30 -0600
From: "Tracey Bradley" <tbradley@bracepatt.com>
To: "Paul Fox" <pfox@bracepatt.com>
Cc: "Alfredo Perez" <aperez@bracepatt.com>, "Andrea Settanni"
<asettanni@bracepatt.com>, "Charles Ingebretson"
<cingebretson@bracepatt.com>, "Charles Shoneman" <cshoneman@bracepatt.com>,
"Deanna King" <dking@bracepatt.com>, "Jeffrey Watkiss"
<dwatkiss@bracepatt.com>, "Gene Godley" <ggodley@bracepatt.com>, "Kimberly
Curry" <kcurry@bracepatt.com>, "Mark Evans" <mevans@bracepatt.com>, "Michael
Pate" <mpate@bracepatt.com>, "Ronald Carroll" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com>
Subject: Potential Bankruptcy Petition Against SCE
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

Generator to sign bankruptcy filing
Report says Coram to sign petition against SoCalEd
By Myra P. Saefong, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 6:43 PM ET Mar 15, 2001

TEHACHAPI, Calif. (CBS.MW) -- Independent electricity generator Coram Energy
Group said it will sign a bankruptcy petition Thursday against Southern
California Edison, according to a published report.

The petition is being circulated among five other "qualifying facilities,"
also known as small generating plants, Coram owner Brian O'Sullivan told Dow
Jones Newswires.

O'Sullivan said his company is running out of cash and will have to shut down
operations in about a month, according to the report. Coram Energy, which was
one of several renewable power generators that formed a creditors' committee
in February, produces wind energy at three locations in Tehachapi, Calif.

The petition could be filed in a Los Angeles bankruptcy court as early as
next week, the report said. The move could prompt the start of involuntary
bankruptcy proceedings against the utility owned by Edison International
(EIX: news, msgs, alerts) .

The report also said FPL Group (FPL: news, msgs, alerts) , owner of several
qualifying facilities in SoCal Edison's area, may also join the group.

Southern California Edison and another of California's big utilities, Pacific
Gas & Electric (PCG: news, msgs, alerts) , have combined debts of more than
$13 billion. Both suffer from having to pay high wholesale power prices to
supply electricity to their customers who pay retail rates capped by state
regulators below actual costs.

Myra P. Saefong is a reporter for CBS.MarketWatch.com in San Francisco.


Here is the filing WPTF is making today opposing the SCE/PG&E/TURN filing at
FERC.
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 10/31/2000 10:36 AM -----

	"Daniel Douglass" <douglass@ArterHadden.com>
	10/31/2000 10:24 AM

		 To: <Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <Bob_Anderson@apses.com>, <berry@apx.com>,
<billr@calpine.com>, <jackp@calpine.com>, <glwaas@calpx.com>,
<Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>, <rreilley@coral-energy.com>,
<cabaker@duke-energy.com>, <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <GTBL@dynegy.com>,
<jmpa@dynegy.com>, <KEWH@dynegy.com>, <rpelote@energy.twc.com>,
<susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <foothill@lmi.net>,
<Curtis_L_Kebler@reliantenergy.com>, <PhilM@SCDEnergy.com>,
<rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, <charlotte@wptf.org>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Final FERC Filing

Attached is the final version of the FERC filing we are making today in
response to the Edison/PG&E/TURN price caps and cost of service rate  filing.
?
My thanks to the many WPTF members (and especially to Phil Muller) for all
your valuable comments and suggestions.? Far more people than usual  provided
comments and, as a result, we ended up with a much better  product.? Thanks
again!
?
Dan
 - 10-31 Comments - Final_.doc


Ditto Credit.

	Tana Jones@ECT
	06/07/2001 08:17 AM

		 To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie
Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marcus Nettelton/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry M
Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt, 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
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Approvals: 06-06-01

----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2001 08:17 AM -----

	Tom Moran/ENRON@enronXgate
	06/06/2001 06:07 PM

		 To: Karen Lambert/ENRON@enronXgate, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel
Schott/ENRON@enronXgate, Brant Reves/ENRON@enronXgate, Debbie R
Brackett/ENRON@enronXgate, Cynthia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, Enron Europe
Global CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Claudia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, William S
Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Lees/ENRON@enronXgate, Juana
Fayett/ENRON@enronXgate, Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Trang
Le/ENRON@enronXgate, Paul Maley/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT,
Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Karen O'Day/ENRON@enronXgate, Tanya
Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Kelly Lombardi/ENRON@enronXgate, Brian
Lindsay/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, EOL Call Center@ECT, Bill
D Hare/ENRON@enronXgate, Amy Heffernan/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Danny Clark/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Teresa Mandola/ENRON@enronXgate, Bill
Kyle/ENRON@enronXgate, Amber Ebow/ENRON@enronXgate, Thu Pham
Arnold/ENRON@enronXgate, Tandra Coleman/ENRON@enronXgate, Lesli
Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Wendi Lebrocq/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Approvals: 06-06-01

Please see attached

Regards,

Wendi LeBrocq
3-3835


I would treat it as business as usual.   If we are still having Associate/Analyst Super Saturday, we certainly can attend an energy panel discussion.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Herndon, Rogers
Sent:	Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:48 PM
To:	Presto, Kevin M.
Subject:	UVA Energy Symposium - Question for you

Kevin -

I think I recall metioning to you that I would be attending an energy symposium put on by UVA - date is next Friday.  Specifically, they asked me to participate in a panel discussion re: energy volatility, trading, and investment oportunities.  Other members of the panel will be:

Bryan Garnett - Williams NE power trader
Beau Taylor - VP Morgan Stanley
Rick Thatcher - VP Dominion

Other speakers include:

Paul Koonce: SrVP - Dominion
Jay Lukens - Lukens Consulting
William Utt - CEO Tractabel

ISSUE
What do you think about  my/ENE attending given the current press?  The Program Agenda has already been printed up and published.  I think bailing out may send a bad message, however, I would completely understand.  I think I can stay in the middle of the fairway and definitely avoid any inappropriate questions or discussions.  What do you think?

RH


Rod:  Will we agree to this?  Do you want to call this person? or should I?
SS
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 05/14/99 11:19
AM ---------------------------

Bernice Rodriguez
05/14/99 11:00 AM
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Koch Chemical International- EV9382.1

 In regards to this trade, I talked with the trader, Randy Degner, about
their confirmation.  He is in agreement on using our omnibus confirm since
their confirmation was incorrect as far as referencing a Master Agreement .
He would like to see if someone can speak with JoAnn Goza (316) 828-7169 in
their Wichita office to establish a Master Agreement between KCI and ECT.

Thanks

BR


Return-path: <VKaminski@aol.com>
From: VKaminski@aol.com
Full-name: VKaminski
Message-ID: <ee.a5c1c32.26ebfcb9@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 16:51:05 EDT
Subject: Fwd: your mail
To: VKaminski@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part2_92.9b97315.26ebfcb9_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 119

Return-Path: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
Received: from  rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (rly-yg05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.5]) by
air-yg01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:38:33 -0400
Received: from  postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by
rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Sep 2000 18:38:23 -0400
Received: from mailman.enron.com (mailman.enron.com [192.168.189.66]) by
postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id RAA04830 for
<vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 17:38:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (ene-mta01.enron.com [192.168.63.180]) by
mailman.enron.com (8.10.1/8.10.1/corp-1.05) with ESMTP id e88McMs09227 for
<vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 17:38:22 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: your mail
To: vkaminski@aol.com
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 17:38:21 -0500
Message-ID: <OFCB62E56E.1A48E0BE-ON86256954.007C5B61@enron.com>
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.3 (Intl)|21
March 2000) at 09/08/2000 05:36:11 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Unknown

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000
05:44 PM ---------------------------

Youyi Feng@ENRON
09/08/2000 05:18 PM

To:   Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@EC
cc:
Subject:  Re: your mail

Dear Vince,

      The following message is from co-PI, Prof. Baichun Xiao in Long
Island University.
In this message, he told me how Enron would be registered. To my best
knowledge,
IBM, Lucent and other big companies have registered in NSF for long.
Your kindly understanding is acknowledged very much.

     Good weekend,

Youyi
---------------------- Forwarded by Youyi Feng/NA/Enron on 09/08/2000 03:08
PM ---------------------------

Baichun Xiao <bxiao@liu.edu> on 09/07/2000 09:39:38 AM

To:   Youyi.Feng@enron.com
cc:

Subject:  Re: your mail

Dear Youyi:

The person in charge of external grants in your company needs to contact
nsf by calling the following numbers for institution registration.

FastLane User Support: 1-800-673-6188.
FastLane Availability (Recording): 1-800-437-7408.

After enron is registered (I think it's a free registration), you provide
the following information to the enron official so he/she will send it to
nsf.
NSF will assign you a password for future access to electronic submission
(called fastlane). Since all proposals have to be submitted through
fastlane after Oct. 1, 2000, this is the must.

Name
Highest Degree
Year Conferred
Present Institution
Department
Street Address
City
State
Zip Code
Social Security Number (SSN)
Email Address
Business Phone Number
Business Fax Number

For more information, you may go to

www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.htm

Baichun
At 05:14 PM 9/6/00 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Dear Baichun,
>
>       I am having no idea about contacting NSF while the
>managing director of this research group has kindly agreed
>on doing anything he can to help us pursue fund rising.
>Please let me know how enron can put my profile into NSF's
>database officially.
>
>      The first four pages of the project application have been revised by
>me. I do not
>really know if you like the revision. Appended is the primary
>and description of the project document files.
>
>Best regards,
>
>
>Youyi
>
>(See attached file: Project Summary.doc)(See attached file: Project
>Description.doc)
>Attachment Converted: "c:\bcx\res\eudora\attach\Project Summary.doc"
>
>Attachment Converted: "c:\bcx\res\eudora\attach\Project Description.doc"
>


hi folks, do not erase, this is a hoax. according to symantac. Consult others
before u decide to erase this crucial part to start windows.
have a good 2002

thunder wrote:

> Hi, I am sorry to have to tell you this but 2001 refuses to go out quitely
> for allof us.
>
> Someone who had us in their address book infected our computer with a
> nasty
> > virus.  It can be transferred to all in our address book -- and you happen
> to
> > be in our address book.  We caught it before it did any damage to our
> > computer.
> >
> > We received the message below, checked it out and found out we had the
> virus
> > in the C drive.  You are in our address book, so please check you computer
> > for the virus.
> >
> > The virus lies dormant for 14 days and then kills your hard drive.  Here's
> > how to stop it.  If you've got it, send this to everyone in your address
> book.
> >
> > Remove it by following these steps:
> > 1.  Go to "start" then to "find or search' (depending on your computer)
> > 2.  In the "search for files or folders" type "sulfnbk.exe" - this is the
> > virus
> > 3.  In the "look in" make sure you're searching drive C
> > 4.  Hit "search or find"
> > 5.  If this file shows up (it's an ugly blackish icon that will have the
> name
> > "sulfnbk.exe
> >      DO NOT OPEN IT!!
> > 6.  Right click on the file - go down to delete and left click
> > 7.  It will ask you if you want to send it to the recycle bin, say yes
> > 8.  Go to your desktop (where all of your icons are) and double click on
> > recycle bin
> > 9.  Right click on "sulfnbk.exe" and delete again - or empty bin
> >
> > If you find it, send  the e-mail to all in your address book because
> that's
> > how it is transferred.


o.k. I think our e-mails crossed each other.    I will check with Prebon.

Thanks

   Kate Symes @ ECT                12/04/2000 01:16 PM

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

Subject: Re: Missing deal for Jeff Richter for Dec.1

I don't know if you saw my second e-mail, but I checked it out with Chris
Mallory, who did the deal, and he verified the price at $214.95. If Prebon
still disputes this, let me know and I'll have Mallory talk to Prebon.

Thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
12/04/2000 10:40 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Missing deal for Jeff Richter for Dec.1

Kate Prebon shows $114.95 as the price and we show $214.95

   Kate Symes @ ECT                12/04/2000 12:31 PM

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

Subject: Re: Missing deal for Jeff Richter for Dec.1

This is actually deal #471975, which I just fixed because Jeff forgot to put
the broker name in there. It is with Prebon.

Thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
12/04/2000 10:18 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Missing deal for Jeff Richter for Dec.1

JEff Richter
Prebon sent over a statement where:
Enron buys from EES 12/5-12/30 25 mw of SP-15 at $114.95


Daren - There is flow at meters 6387 & 5192 for Oct. without a nom.

   Deal  contract  Last month of activity Counterparty

 Meter 6387 133179  HPL 215 Sept. 00  Duke Energy Trading

 Meter 5192 269123  ENA 201 Nov. 99   Duke Energy Trading

Thanks.

AL