Borderline
No.  2001-22
October 30, 2001<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

November 1 Tariff Change

Tariff revisions detailing and addressing the use of an Operational Flow Order (OFO) on Northern Border, which were part of Northern Border's approved Park and Loan (PAL) filing, will become effective on November 1.   Here is a brief overview of the upcoming changes.

Purpose of an OFO

An OFO will be used by Northern Border to 1) alleviate conditions that threaten the integrity of the system, 2) maintain pipeline operations at pressures required to provide efficient and reliable transportation service, 3) assure adequate system line pack, and 4) maintain service for all of Northern Border's firm shippers.

An OFO will be treated as a tool of last resort.  Northern Border will first attempt to utilize its system, its services (transportation and PAL), and if necessary, assistance of interconnecting systems to alleviate operational problems before invoking its OFO tariff provisions.

Posting of an OFO Watch

If resolution of an operational problem is unlikely, such as when a daily or cumulative OBA imbalance with an interconnected party is outside of a defined tolerance range, Northern Border will post an OFO watch.  Similar to a severe weather notice, the purpose of an OFO watch is to pre-alert shippers and interconnecting systems to a location or area on Northern Border's system in which underlying operational conditions could prompt the issuance of an OFO.

OFO Issuance

Northern Border will issue an OFO if it is determined that an OFO watch has failed to serve as a catalyst for corrective action.

A Northern Border OFO will be as localized as is reasonably possible.  Furthermore, each OFO will be tailored to match the severity of the known or anticipated problem being addressed.

OFO Impact

An OFO can result in either the curtailment of interruptible services and/or the forced balancing of nominations and actual flows through the confirmation process.

If service is reduced or interrupted due to an OFO, Northern Border will directly provide affected shippers, as soon as possible, a summary of the service interruption that will include the operational variables that prompted such action.  In addition, affected shippers will be notified of any imbalances that require immediate resolution.

Routine status updates will be posted throughout the period in which the OFO is in effect.

Failure to Comply

When an OFO is issued, it is the responsibility of the affected shippers to make a good faith effort to comply.  If such shippers fail to respond to the OFO, or their response is insufficient to correct the problem, Northern Border may take further action including the curtailment of firm service or the immediate cash out of cumulative imbalances that are in excess of 10% of the Historical Flow Quantity.

Northern Border will not be liable for any costs incurred by a shipper in complying with or be exposed to any damages that result from an interruption in service due to an OFO.

Impact of OFO Tariff Changes on Interconnects

FERC Order No. 637 requires that pipelines "take all reasonable actions to minimize the issuance and adverse impact of Operational Flow Orders (OFOs)."  Northern Border recognizes that maintaining daily and cumulative OBA imbalances with its interconnected parties within reasonable tolerances levels is critical in meeting such obligation across the grid.  Consequently, the November 1 tariff changes includes language which define what is an acceptable tolerance range on a Northern Border OBA imbalance.

To serve as a benchmark, Northern Border has already begun calculating a Historical Flow Quantity (HFQ) for each point of interconnection on Northern Border's system.  The HFQ is the lesser of the average daily scheduled quantity for the previous 15 consecutive Gas Days or the actual daily flow quantity for such time period.

On November 1, the default cumulative OBA imbalance tolerance level for a given interconnect on Northern Border's system will be +/- 10% of the point's HFQ.   If such approach fails to meet the needs of an interconnected party, Northern Border's tariff does permit the use of an alternative tolerance level at a given point of interconnect as long as it has been mutually agreed to both OBA parties.

Furthermore, the daily OBA swings at interconnects on Northern Border that are on pressure control will also be monitored more closely; the default daily OBA imbalance tolerance level will be +/- 5% of the daily scheduled quantity.  Once again, Northern Border's tariff does permit deviation from this "standardized" daily tolerance if an alternative method is mutually acceptable to the OBA parties.

For those who would like to initiate discussions on establishing OBA imbalance tolerance levels with Northern Border that deviate from the defaults described above, please contact Scott Coburn at (402) 398.7760.


continental.com Specials for Keith Holst
Tuesday, December 18, 2001
****************************************

CONTINENTAL.COM SPECIALS

Continental Airlines wishes you a safe and Happy Holiday Season. Due to the holidays, continental.com Specials will not be available this week. Visit continental.com at:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*UA
for all of your holiday travel planning.

GIVE THE GIFT OF TRAVEL THIS HOLIDAY SEASON

OnePass Gift Miles
It's easy to give OnePass miles this holiday season. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*VA

ShopOnePass
Earn OnePass miles for each dollar spent with your favorite retailers such as J.Crew, OfficeMax and Godiva. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*WA

Miles for Merchandise
Use your miles for discounts on name brand merchandise from Callaway, Coach, Sony and many more. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*XA

TRAVEL TIPS FOR THE HOLIDAYS

Carry-on Bags and Holiday Gifts
Carry-on luggage has been restricted to one bag plus one personal item. Gifts that are carry-on items should be unwrapped. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*YA

Customer Advisories
Stay informed on what to expect at the airport by visiting the customer advisories page on continental.com. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*ZA

Flight Status
Up-to-the-minute flight information is available at continental.com. Enter your flight number or your origin and destination to view real-time arrival and departure information. Visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*AA

Travel Updates
Be sure to check continental.com at:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*ZA
before leaving for the airport. We're looking forward to welcoming you onboard!
---------------------------------------
This e-mail message and its contents are copyrighted and are proprietary products of Continental Airlines, Inc. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, or transfer of the message or its content, in any medium, is strictly prohibited.

****************************************
If you need assistance please visit:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*BA
View our privacy policy at:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*CA

This e-mail was sent to: kholst@ect.enron.com
You registered with OnePass Number: EY090622

TO UNSUBSCRIBE:
We hope you will find continental.com Specials a valuable source of information. However, if you prefer not to take advantage of this opportunity, please let us know by visiting the continental.com Specials page on our web site at:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*VUA

TO SUBSCRIBE:
Please visit the continental.com Specials page on our web site at:
http://continentalairlines.rsc01.net/servlet/cc4?JHEVZB*rohslmQLJmELgkhgEJht*z*DA


Due to the U. S. and London markets being closed Monday, May 28, 2001 in observance of Memorial Day in the United States and Spring Bank Holiday in London, the Consolidated DPR for Friday May 25 will be reported Tuesday May 29.  Any trading activity that occurs in countries that do not observe a holiday on Monday, will be combined with Tuesday, May 29 trading activity, and reported on the Consolidated DPR on Wednesday, May 30.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Johnny Thibodeaux
713-345-4541


Joe:

	Here is a format that can serve as a starting point for Exhibit C.  Let me know what you think.

Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Rohauer, Tanya
Sent:	Tuesday, November 13, 2001 1:00 PM
To:	Hodge, Jeffrey T.
Subject:	lc format

to attach to master...just needs to be modified to replace ENA with generic "Party".  Call me if you have quesitons.


I would like to introduce Intercontinental Staffing Group.  Our offices in Houston and London are primarily focused on serving the energy trading industry, bringing together top energy trading talent with the worlds leading energy trading companies.  Our search consultants have past experience in either trading or brokering energy products.  This gives us a distinct advantage with respect to our knowledge of and exposure to the energy trading industry.

We are currently working on filling several trading and marketing/origination positions throughout the US.  If you have an interest or know of someone who is looking for a new career opportunity, please contact me at the phone number listed below or feel free to email me at possibilities@istaffinggroup.com.  We do offer a referral fee if we are successful in placing one of your recommendations.

Thank you for your time.  I look forward to speaking with you.

Sincerely,

Gary Pitt
Director
Intercontinental Staffing Group Inc.
Phone:  (713) 850-8399
Fax:  (713) 850-7746
Cell Phone:  (281) 467-0022
email:  possibilities@istaffinggroup.com


Here's this weeks material.? There's a handout  at the end that if you want
to use it you'll need to make copies of.?
?
See you,
Bobby
 - NEON Roaring 1.doc


What have they been flowing for the past week?

D

Tom Acton@ENRON
03/20/2000 09:00 AM
To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey Neuweiler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ami
Chokshi/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: 1st rev Mar. 2000 Josey Ranch nom

L et me know if you want me to change this.  They are currently at 12,000 and
want to go to 11,000.
---------------------- Forwarded by Tom Acton/Corp/Enron on 03/20/2000 08:56
AM ---------------------------

Susan D Trevino@ECT
03/17/2000 03:09 PM
To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lauri A Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom
Acton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stacey Neuweiler/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: 1st rev Mar. 2000 Josey Ranch nom

---------------------- Forwarded by Susan D Trevino/HOU/ECT on 03/17/2000
03:08 PM ---------------------------

Bob Withers <rww@KCSEnergy.com> on 03/17/2000 03:10:24 PM
To: Susan D Trevino/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Stretch Brennan <djb@KCSEnergy.com>, Knox Westmoreland
<rkw@KCSEnergy.com>, Kevin McLarney <kmm@KCSEnergy.com>, Vance L
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: 1st rev Mar. 2000 Josey Ranch nom

Here's REVISED March 2000 (effective 3/18/00 ) setup for Josey: (using 1.075
Btu/Mcf)
* Gas deliveries into HPL
    11,000 MMBtu/d  for KRI           (net
reduction of    <1,500> MMBtu/d)
     11,000 MMBtu/d into HPL

Bob Withers <*))>><
KCS Energy, 5555 San Felipe, Suite 1200
Houston, TX  77056
voice mail/page 713-964-9434


Fun quizzes from Cosmo...

http://cosmo.women.com/cos/you/quiz/00quiz11.htm


Attached is our Griffith nomination information for 03/20/02.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,
MaryAnne

(See attached file: NOMS_03_20_02.xls)
 - NOMS_03_20_02.xls


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

F O R

November 17, 2000 5:00pm through November 20, 2000 12:00am
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------

SCHEDULED SYSTEM OUTAGES:

ARDMORE DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

AZURIX: No Scheduled Outages.

EB34 DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

EDI SERVER:
Impact:  EDI
Time:  Sat 11/18/2000 at  11:00:00 PM CT thru Sun 11/19/2000 at  1:00:00 AM CT
 Sat 11/18/2000 at   9:00:00 PM PT thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  11:00:00 PM PT
 Sun 11/19/2000 at   5:00:00 AM London thru Sun 11/19/2000 at  7:00:00 AM
London
Outage:  EDI HUB DISK VOLUME INCREASE
Environments Impacted:  Corporate
Purpose: Continued EDI volume increases require the addition of more disk
space for EDI operations.
Backout: Utilize current configuration w/o new HACMP configuration
Contact(s):  Jack Metkus
  Jim Nelson  3-7799  713-327-2007
  Karen O'Grady  5-7149  713-327-4805
  Jack Metkus  3-0362  713-288-0743

EI:
Impact:  EI
Time:  Fri 11/17/2000 at  8:00:00 PM CT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  9:00:00 PM CT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at  6:00:00 PM PT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  7:00:00 PM PT
 Sat 11/18/2000 at  2:00:00 AM London thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  3:00:00 AM
London
Outage:  EI Load Balancing
Environments Impacted:  El
Purpose: to stabilize the EI environment
Backout: Remove new 6500s reconnect 5500s as previously installed
Contact(s):  Steve Hardy  713-853-9294  713-415-0672

ENRON NORTH AMERICAN LANS:  No Scheduled Outages.

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET: No Scheduled Outages.

LOTUS NOTES: No Scheduled Outages.

MARKET DATA: No Scheduled Outages.

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS: UNIX
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Fri 11/17/2000 at  5:30:00 PM CT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  7:30:00 PM CT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at  3:30:00 PM PT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  5:30:00 PM PT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at 11:30:00 PM London thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  1:30:00 AM
London
Outage:  Apply patch to TAS 6.0 on Pluto
Environments Impacted:  UNIX Users
Purpose: Applying patch to fix known issues with 6.0 release.
Backout: Uninstall patch.
Contact(s):  Troy Beyer  713.345.8316  713.406.1782

SITARA:  No Scheduled Outages.

SUN/OSS SYSTEM: No Scheduled Outages.

TELEPHONY: No Scheduled Outages

TERMINAL SERVER:  No Scheduled Outages.

UNIFY:  No Scheduled Outages.

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

(713) 853-1411   Enron Resolution Center
(713) 853-5536   Information Risk Management

Specific Applications Help:
Unify On-Call      (713) 284-3757  [Pager]
Sitara On-Call     (713) 288-0101  [Pager]
RUS/GOPS/GeoTools/APRS   (713) 639-9726  [Pager]
OSS/UA4/TARP    (713) 285-3165  [Pager]
CPR      (713) 284-4175  [Pager]
EDI Support      (713) 327-3893  [Pager]
All Other Systems    (713) 563-5797  [Pager]
      or (713) 563-5987  [Pager]


Mike, Jeff's intent is not that you would interview, but that you would put
the hammer (so to speak!) on some of your people to sign up.

Have a good weekend!  SRS

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Mike McConnell @ ECT                           12/07/2000 05:39 PM

To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: URGENT: Interviewer Request - Saturday, December 9

Jeff,

Sorry, I can't participate on Saturday.  I have serious commitments that I
can't break specifically on Saturday.  I know that we are short people and I
do take this process very seriously.

Mike

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Jeff Skilling @ ENRON                           12/07/2000 03:05 PM

Sent by: Sherri Sera@ENRON
To: James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Cliff
Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sanjay Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Raymond
Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Harold G
Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Diomedes Christodoulou/SA/Enron@Enron, Wade
Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, David Cox/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, James
Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steve Elliott/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew
S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, Ben F Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David
Haug/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@ENRON,
Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, James A
Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Larry L
Izzo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron,
Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth
Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES,
Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca
McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy
Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Rice/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey A
Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John
Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Marcia Manarin/SA/Enron@Enron, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy
Guidroz/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Beena
Pradhan/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly
Bobrow/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosane Fabozzi/SA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie
Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nicki
Daw/NA/Enron@Enron, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol Ann Brown/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Elaine
Rodriguez/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Mary E Garza/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rosalee
Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tori L
Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT, Loretta
Brelsford/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sue Ford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dolores
Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Dalton/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Mercedes Estrada/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lauren
Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Katherine
Brown/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES,
Bobbie Power/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Suzanne
Danz/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy McCurley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marsha
Schiller/HOU/ECT@ECT, Fiona Stewart/LON/ECT@ECT, Jana L
Paxton/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Connie
Blackwood/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Tammie Schoppe/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Kimberly Hillis/HOU/ECT@ect, Jennifer Burns/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharon
Dick/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Kerry
Ferrari/LON/ECT@ECT, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Adams/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Leah Rijo/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Lucy Marshall/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Kathy Campos/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Julie Armstrong/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathryn
Greer/HOU/EES@EES, Mrudula Gadade/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Brenda
Castillo/NA/Enron@Enron, Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jana
Giovannini/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shelly Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: URGENT: Interviewer Request - Saturday, December 9

We are in urgent need of approximately 35 interviewers for this weekend's
Super Saturday recruiting, to which 105 analyst and associate candidates have
been invited.  You all realize the importance of these efforts, and I would
appreciate you encouraging members of your organization to participate this
weekend.

Details are as follows:

Date:  Saturday, December 9
Time:  7:45 a.m. Breakfast
  8:30 a.m. Interviews begin
  1:30 p.m. Decision meeting (no longer than 2 hours)
Contact: Shelly Jones, x30943

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Jeff


You bet.

	"Sama, Anil" <anil.sama@intel.com>
	10/17/2000 11:49 AM

		 To: "'Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com'" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: RE: Study?

Hey! Are folks from that other cohort allowed in ;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Smith [mailto:michael@eeg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 9:24 AM
To: 'Sama, Anil'
Subject: FW: Study?

FYI-

-----Original Message-----
From:    Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com]
Sent:   Monday, October 16, 2000 12:43 PM
To:   Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com
Cc:   brodie@haas.berkeley.edu; Chris_Neale@gap.com;
clee@haas.berkeley.edu; dasovich@haas.berkeley.edu;
davis@haas.berkeley.edu; devroede@haas.berkeley.edu;
dshah@haas.berkeley.edu; esarte@haas.berkeley.edu;
hudacko@haas.berkeley.edu; Jacqueline Kelly; kazi@haas.berkeley.edu;
kupiecki@haas.berkeley.edu; Kwon@haas.berkeley.edu;
langridg@haas.berkeley.edu; mendelso@haas.berkeley.edu; michael@eeg.com
Subject:   Re: Study?

OK, lots of folks are interested.  Given that section is on Saturday, I
propose 10 AM, this Sunday, at my office (101 California, Suite 1950).
If
folks have a real problem with that, let me know.  Also, please RSVP so
that I can arrange things with building security.

Best,
Jeff

Jeff Dasovich

                                         To:   Jacqueline Kelly
<JKelly@FairIsaac.com>@ENRON
                    10/12/2000           cc:
brodie@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, Chris_Neale@gap.com@ENRON,
                    08:46 PM             clee@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,
dasovich@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,
davis@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, devroede@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,

dshah@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, esarte@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,

hudacko@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, JKelly@FairIsaac.com@ENRON,

kazi@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, kupiecki@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,

Kwon@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, langridg@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON,

mendelso@haas.berkeley.edu@ENRON, michael@eeg.com@ENRON

                                         Subject:   Study?(Document
link: Jeff Dasovich)

Greetings:
Well, there's a finance midterm coming up and some of us have discussed
getting together the weekend before for a study session.

I just grabbed an old list from last year so apologies if I've included
folks who ain't even in finance, or if I've left some folks off.  Sorry
to
those who received in error, and please forward to anyone else who might
be interested.  Anyway, anyone interested?
Hope all is well with all.
Best,
Jeff


Elizabeth- I think it best that at this stage I opt out of this engagement. The situation I described to you is looking more and more like it is going to happpen and there is a real possibility I am totally engaged by the time this conference comes around. I am sorry if this poses a problem for you but there should be plenty of time to arrange an alternate. Rick

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Elizabeth Bassine" <e.bassine@worldnet.att.net>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Elizabeth+20Bassine+22+20+3Ce+2Ebassine+40worldnet+2Eatt+2Enet+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, March 14, 2001 11:26 AM
To:	Buy, Rick
Subject:	Economist

Hi Rick, hope you're doing okay .  . .
Have a request re your write-up.  Can we,  please, shift the emphasis from the 'effective cro' - to how you managed the  risk inherent in the huge transition Enron has made, completely evolved, from an  energy to an ebusiness company.  Address online marketplaces/the value-add;  the shifting strategies involved in transitioning the company . . .
Is this okay?
I'll need the paragraph/bullets by Thurs pm, if at  all possible.  Thanks, Rick and take care -
PS  Also need your brief bio and complete  contact info (incl mailing address)


Please see attached file and call me if you have any questions at
(281)647-0769.


Greg,

I am forwarding to you for your further handling, 2 execution originals of
the Rio Nogales-HPL Interconnect Agreement in Guadalupe County, Texas.

Thanks,

Eric Gillaspie
713-345-7667
EB3886


Bill,

We spent about an hour  with Rick explaining the rationale behind different solutions
and I think he has a better understanding of the models at this point.

I think he was asked by Jeremy to look into it.

Vince

From:	William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/11/2001 09:05 PM
To:	Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:	Mark Ruane/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject:	FW: Credit Risk Model Comments - at this point.

Rick/Vince,

Should this not be a Credit/Research initiative while the business unit focuses on originating good economic transactions?  Not to be complaining, but shouldn't EES be focusing on infrastructure issues rather than waste resources on a project we are already moving forward on?  You can't run a portfolio model, unless you have deals in a risk system!  How complex do we want these MODELS to be?  Behavioral implications on credit default?  They still don't seem to understand.

Regards,
Bill

Mark - please attend.  You may want to include Martin to help EES understand the complexity of their deals.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni
Sent:	Wednesday, April 11, 2001 9:14 AM
To:	Kaminski, Vince; Dhar, Amitava; De, Rabi; William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ENRON; Tamarchenko, Tanya
Subject:	Credit Risk Model Comments - at this point.

Comments from Rick Jones on the credit reserve model. Anita Dupont is setting up a meet with Rick Jones to discuss  these. Vince & Bill -  if you want to join the meeting, please let me or Anita know.

Regards,
Krishna.
---------------------- Forwarded by Pinnamaneni Krishnarao/HOU/ECT on 04/11/2001 09:04 AM ---------------------------

Richard B Jones@EES
04/10/2001 04:16 PM
To:	Pinnamaneni Krishnarao/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:	Credit Risk Model Comments - at this point.

---------------------- Forwarded by Richard B Jones/HOU/EES on 04/10/2001 04:16 PM ---------------------------

Richard B Jones
03/23/2001 05:53 PM
To:	Cheryl Lipshutz/HOU/EES@EES, Trushar Patel/Corp/Enron@Enron, michelle.wenz@enron.com, Gayle Muench/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject:	Credit Risk Model Comments - at this point.

Hi everyone,

I have run the model and, along with the contract briefs I have some questions & ideas. I was hoping to talk to each of you so I could avoid writing this detailed, one-sided e-mail, but with our schedules being so exclusive, this will have to do for now.

Every deal has its own model because of the commodity deal structure complexity. So no aggregate results can be obtained without having the models for each contract. However, the JC Penny's version can serve as a testing platform for some of the items I am mentioning below. I have not talked to the people in research who are the most knowledgeable about the model, so some of these comments may be mute points. I plan to do that went I get back.

1)	Since the credit risk is developed for a time period, it makes sense to regularly update the commodity data (and credit rating if its chaged) and re-run the model for the time remaining.  I would expect this is done already.

2)	The default probabilities seem not to change. That is, if the input credit rating is E1, then the E1 default probability curve is used for the contract period. For annual accounting that seems OK, but in MTM, it seems to me that the credit analysis needs to take into consideration the credit rating transition probabilities.  That is, the credit implications of companies changing their credit rating during the contract period. with some constraints imposed by actually slow credits appear to change would give a more realistic view of our credit risk in the MTM world.

3)	Are all "defaults" created equal to us? Look at OC. It seems to me that the data used to develop the default probabilities are over different business segments and are OK ----for that range of companies. However, we are dealing with specific types of firms where "default" may not mean we do not get paid. Sure we still have some credit risk, but it's not like Montgomery Ward's where the lights are being turned off for good. Energy is so fundamental for a company's success and default actions can be used as a way to save a company albeit in a different form.  So financial default does not neccesarily mean default for EES commodity payments totally.

4)	A while back someone said to me that may, maybe the people who reach for a life preserver are more likely to live than those that don't. By that I mean that, perhaps our use of these default probabilities actually overstates the credit risk in that if a company has at least enough proactive vision to contract EES, then they are more likely to improve that one that doesn't. This is a type of behavioral variable that the data doesn't consider. This would be a useful MBA project to examine these types of corporate variables and compare it to their credit rating forward curve.

5)	This leads me to something I hope we can acomplish in the special finance team. The contract briefs are, to me, the begimnning of this exercise.  If we can combine our customers into "exposure group portfolios" (for lack of a better term), where a group has similar "risk characteristics" beyind the current parameter set, that we define, then this offers a potential to shop some of these exposure to specialized insurance markets.

6)	A technical point. Monte Carlo simulations are numerical experiments. Besides the model assumptions, numerical experiments have three inherent error attributes; the number of trials, numerical roundoff, and random number generator randomness statistical properties. The first two are not a problem in this application but the last one could be. Has anyone examined the effect of using different random number generators on Enron's aggregate credit risk?

7)	There is one last point here. For most of the above points, the "improved" analysis could make the credit risk be higher.

Rick

<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>
<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>


---------------------- Forwarded by Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT on 09/05/2000 01:24
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Mitch Robinson @ ENRON                           09/05/2000 01:04 PM

To: Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FE's NEW trans subsidiary

fyi.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mitch Robinson/Corp/Enron on 09/05/2000
01:06 PM ---------------------------

Patrick Hanse@ECT
09/05/2000 12:58 PM
To: Oscar Dalton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mitch Robinson/Corp/Enron@Enron, Corry
Bentley/HOU/ECT@ECT, James E Terrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alonzo
Williams/HOU/ECT@ECT, Larry Valderrama/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Benson/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Edward D Baughman/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Zufferli/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin M
Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: FE's NEW trans subsidiary

FE transmission has  changed it's name to American Transmission Systems, Inc.
(ATSI) as a Transmission Provider.  See details in the letter below.  FE will
continue to be a Control Area. FOR TAG purposes beginning Nov. 1st, the TP
for all FE OASIS references will need to be ATSI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Patrick Hanse/HOU/ECT on 09/05/2000 12:31
PM ---------------------------

JohnO@ecar.org@ecar.org on 09/05/2000 08:25:51 AM
Sent by: CarolC@ecar.org
To: tahern@buckeyepower.com, andreej@dteenergy.com, drbarker@cinergy.com,
ssbayer@nipsco.com, rbednarz@spp.org, cbedwell@vectren.com,
cbradley@bigrivers.com, bob.crosier@lgeenergy.com, mike.falvo@iemo.com,
dgoodson@hepn.com, rgursky@spp.org, phanse@enron.com, fredh@soc-dlco.lm.com,
dbidzior@cmsenergy.com, pbjohnson@aep.com, ljk@maininc.org,
rmkovacs@firstenergycorp.com, fredk@wvpa.com, JeffM@ecar.org,
jnickel@mpower.org, Robert.O'Connell@Williams.com, JohnO@ecar.org,
screadinger@pplweb.com, kevin.sherd@dplinc.com, bsquibb@ovec.com,
mtaylor@ipalco.com, juhrin@alleghenypower.com, jason@ekpc.com
cc:
Subject: More about ATSI

TO THE ECAR ATC PANEL AND LIAISONS:

I am sending this to you for your information.

Carol J. Cooper
E C A R
Direct Line: 330/580-8000
Phone:  330-456-2488
Fax:  330-456-3648
e-mail: carolc@ecar.org

-----Original Message-----
From: rmkovacs@firstenergycorp.com [mailto:rmkovacs@firstenergycorp.com]
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 10:52 AM
To: johno@ecar.org
Subject: More about ATSI

John,

At the ATC Panel meeting in South Bend, I provided some information about
FirstEnergy's new  transmission subsidiary, American Transmission Systems,
Inc. (ATSI).  I have some updated information.

ATSI went commercial today, September 1. ATSI is a wholly owned subsidiary
of FirstEnergy Corp. and owns and operates all of FirstEnergy's transmission
facilities at voltages of 69 kV and above. ATSI is the transmission provider
and performs the control area operator function for the FE control area. You
may want to visit ATSI's OASIS home page, which can be accessed the same way
as its predecessor FE OASIS home page. The organization charts, tariff,
provider information, etc., have been updated to ATSI. ATSI's public web
site is located at "http://www.atsi-transmission.com."

A change has been made in the timing for the recognition of "ATSI" as the
transmission provider mnemonic . NERC has informed us that upon reflection
it would be easier for them to accommodate the mnemonic change from "FE" to
"ATSI" at midnight on November 1 rather than 8:00 a.m. EST. So currently the
changeover is set for 0001 hours, EST (midnight) on November 1.

The control area designation remains "FE."  As you know, path POR/PODs are
based on the control areas. Thus, beginning November 1, the path name for
transfers to AEP, for example, will change from "E/FE/FE-AEP//" to
"E/ATSI/FE-AEP//." Note that the abbreviated path names, as used in the ECAR
ATC Coordination System, will not change (e.g., "FE-AEP"). Beginning
November 1, the Transmission Provider (TP) column on E-tags must show "ATSI"
not "FE" or they will be refused by ATSI's automatic tagging validation
software.

I hope this clarifies, rather than confuses. Please share this information
with the ATC Panel contacts.

Thank you,
Dick


you are correct however there are no nominations.

ds

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lindberg, Lorraine
Sent:	Thursday, January 10, 2002 9:01 AM
To:	Lee, Dennis; Schoolcraft, Darrell; Jolly, Rich
Subject:	NGPL/Eddy

NGPL notified me yesterday that they are ready to flow FT asap at the NGPL/Eddy point.

Lorraine


Thanks!!!

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


----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 12/22/2000 10:35 AM -----

	Christine.Lee@ubsw.com
	12/21/2000 07:29 PM

		 To: Sara.Shackleton@enron.com, david@dkelly.org
		 cc: Michael.Collins@ubsw.com
		 Subject: Re: 2 paragraphs

     Sara,

     Attached is the newly marked up version of the contract.  The
     highlights are as follows (not all changes are addressed below):

     1)  Dividend language has been inserted on page 6.  We may have to do
     something with the structure since there are two "Method of
     Adjustments."

     2)  On page 11 and 12, we reinserted our language in sections (iii)
     and (v) but conformed them to your Registration Provisions.  We needed
     to reinsert the language in (iii) for section (v) to work.

     3) On page 13, I reinserted our "best efforts ongoing obligation"
     language.  The reason I did this is because I realized that they way
     you had it drafted in the email does not work from an accounting
     perspective.

     4)  On page 14, 1st paragraph, the words "but prior to the Settlement
     Date" was added for accounting purposes.

     5)  The new ratcheting Trigger Price language was added on page 14.

     Please call me after you have reviewed the markup to verify that we
     are in agreement on the terms.

     Regards,
     Christine

______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: 2 paragraphs
Author:  Sara.Shackleton (Sara.Shackleton@enron.com) at unix,mime
Date:    12/20/00 3:25 PM

Trigger/Determined Amount inverse relationship:

"In the event the Trigger Price is increased to equal the Other Trigger
Price, the Determined Amount shall be reduced so that the Effective Share
Price is increased in direct proportion to the increase in the Trigger
Price.  The "Effective Share Price" shall be the result obtained by
dividing
X by Y where "X" equals the product of the Price Per Share multiplied by
the
Number of Shares, and "Y" equals the Number of Shares plus the Determined
Amount."

Paragraph 3(a) first paragraph, 3rd sentence replacement:

"In the event that, but for this Section 3, titled "Other Provisions,"
Party
B would be obligated to deliver a number of Shares equal to the Determined
Amount plus the Excess Shares, Party B shall have an ongoing obligation to
satisfy delivery of the Excess Shares; provided however that the number of
Excess Shares to be delivered hereby shall not exceed [________] shares.
Party B may, at its sole option, satisfy delivery of the Excess Shares by
using its best efforts to increase its Authorized Shares or by delivery of
a
cash payment equal to the [product obtained by multiplying the Excess
Shares
by the Final Price]."

 - MARKUP.DOC

Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com

This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for the individual named.  If you are not the named addressee you
should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.  Please
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.

E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.  The sender therefore
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents
of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.  If
verification is required please request a hard-copy version.  This
message is provided for informational purposes and should not be
construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or
related financial instruments.


Paul,

Thanks for your message. Look fwd to your call.

Vince

"Paul Bristow" <pbristow@riskwaters.com> on 10/19/2000 07:25:21 AM
Please respond to "Paul Bristow" <pbristow@riskwaters.com>
To: <pbristow@riskwaters.com>
cc:
Subject: Power 2000/EPRM 2001

As a speaker at EPRM's highly successful Power 2000 event in  Houston, I am
writing to inform you of our 2001 annual congress and to introduce  myself. I
will be responsible for the production of all North American EPRM  events
having moved from our banking conference and training course division in
July. Just to update you on the whereabouts of the EPRM team, Emma Wolfin is
developing our technology events for Waters conferences and Joel Hanley will
be  starting his new role as an EPRM journalist from November 1st.

EPRM 2001 will be held in Houston on the 14th, 15th & 16th  of May and I am
keen to start the initial research as soon as possible. I intend  to call
each Power 2000 speaker within the next two weeks. Initially, I would  like
to provide you with advanced notice of the event and wish to clarify some
issues.

What current industry developments merit streams or pre/post conference
seminars at EPRM 2001?

What research are you or your company involved in that would justify
inclusion in EPRM 2001?

Aside from your own work, what subjects are currently at the  cutting-edge of
energy risk management?

Who else would you recommend as a potential speaker? (Regulatory bodies,
academics, practitioners)

Any assistance at this initial stage of research is  appreciated. You can
email me or call on +44 20 7484 9883. I look forward to  working with you on
this event.

Paul Bristow

Senior Conference Producer, EPRM  Conferences


Just thinking about the fact that we will all be out of the office tomorrow, so we should probably e-mail Kathy with our agenda topics for Monday's meeting today if possible.

Virginia

"I haven't failed, I've found 10,000 ways that don't work."
Ben Franklin


yes....yes it does.

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  Bill Williams III                           03/20/2001 05:15 PM

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

Subject: Re: Changes to SAR Report

Another?  That implies ownership of some already...


long term pjm...


thanks.  That sucks

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Giron, Darron C.
Sent:	Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:24 AM
To:	Love, Phillip M.
Subject:	FW: Collegiate plates

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Arnold TRUAX" <ATRUAX@dot.state.tx.us>@ENRON
Sent:	Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:08 AM
To:	Giron, Darron C.
Subject:	Collegiate plates

Thank you for your inquiry to our web site regarding collegiate license plates.

The Texas Legislature provides the authority for us to issue collegiate plates.  We have not been provided with the authority to issue plates for any institution located in another state.

If you have further questions, please contact the Special Plates Branch at (512) 374-5010 or contact one of our Customer Information Services Specialists in the Vehicle Titles and Registration Division at (512) 465-7611, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CST.  When you call, please have the vehicle identification number (VIN) and the vehicle's registration expiration date handy.  Our Customer Information Specialists are available to discuss your vehicle title and registration inquiries in more detail.

Notice to all Web Site Inquirers:  Please note that there may be additional information contained in the entire body of the law that also addresses these issues. While we make an effort to provide our Web inquirers with current information, we do not represent this information as a legal opinion or as an approval or disapproval, implied or explicit, for any action.


Today's IssueAlert Sponsors:

[IMAGE]

The IBM e-Energy Executive Forum ) "Personalization, Partnership, and
Profitability"

Designed for executives in the utility industry looking to leverage Customer
Relationship Management in the competitive marketplace. Topics will focus on
how process and technology can be leveraged to gain competitive advantage.
Featured speakers will include IT analysts, solution partners, IBM
executives, and customers including: John Goodman, President of e-Satisfy;
Richard Grimes, Director of CRM Energy Services; David Bonnett, Global
e-Energy Sales Executive, Siebel Systems.

www.ibm.com

Miss last week? Catch up on the latest deregulation, competition and
restructuring developments in the energy industry with SCIENTECH's
IssuesWatch

[IMAGE]
The most comprehensive, up-to-date map of the North American Power System by
RDI/FT Energy is now available from SCIENTECH.

[IMAGE]

IssueAlert for  March 26, 2001

E.ON May Be Closing in on Purchase of Powergen

by Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis

[News item from Reuters] German utility E.ON AG is near a deal to take a
stake in Britain's fourth largest power utility Powergen (NYSE: PWG) at a
price 30 percent above current levels. According to the German paper
Handelsblatt, E.ON's supervisory board reportedly will make a final decision
in the next week. Powergen, meanwhile, said it is still in talks on a
possible offer from another company. "There can be no assurance that these
discussions will result in an offer being made for the company," Powergen
said in a statement. The company first announced that it was in talks to be
purchased on Jan. 16.

Analysis: The word that E.ON, Europe's second largest power company, would
buy a stake in Powergen at a fat 30-percent premium of around 6.90 pounds
increased Powergen's British stock price by as much as 7 percent to reach 739
pence. A combination of the two companies would create a power firm on par
with Europe's largest power companies, France's EDF and Italy's Enel. Since
talks about a potential acquisition by E.ON surfaced in January, Powergen's
stock price has climbed 21 percent. In addition, according to Reuters,
Powergen jumped to the top of the gainers list for the United Kingdom's FTSE
100 blue chip index. On March 22, Powergen stock reached 739 pence, while the
FTSE 1000 index was down 2.5 percent at 27-month lows. Powergen also trades
in the United States on the New York Stock Exchange, where Powergen shares
opened March 26 at $42.00.

If the rumors about Powergen's price tag are true, E.ON would end up paying
more than nine pounds a share or six billion pounds (U.S. $8.5 billion) for
the U.K.-based Powergen, which carries a debt of about 5.2 billion pounds.
These projections exceed previous reports from financial analysts who
suggested that E.ON would pay no more than eight pounds a share for Powergen.
E.ON might be feeling increased pressure to finalize a deal with Powergen
since other players such as Scottish Power have also expressed interest in
the company. With significant capital to spend (Reuters reported up to $50
billion including proposed divestitures), E.ON reportedly believes that
Britain, where demand is outpacing the rest of Europe, is the best country in
which to begin a rapid expansion strategy. Despite the fact that Powergen had
previously acknowledged that it was working on a deal with E.ON, over the
last week it has maintained that discussions continue with other companies.

E.ON, formed as a result of last year's merger between Veba and Viag,
supplies Germany and Europe with electricity, heating, natural gas, water and
petroleum. Germany, which opened 100 percent of its energy market all at once
in April 1998, has undergone a period of rapid consolidation. As a result,
the largest power companies in the country have begun seeking competitive
opportunities across the Continent (this is a growing trend in Europe as
companies from other countries are following the same competitive strategy).
E.ON must expand outside of its home country, where analysts have speculated
that core profits in its generation business have become unstable. In many
ways, consolidation is a means of survival for E.ON, as Europe continues to
liberalize and electricity prices fall as a result.

Powergen*which generates about 14 percent of the electricity used in England
and Wales and has electric and gas operations throughout Europe, India, Asia
and Australia*is a company that became known for its global expansion
efforts, especially in the United States. Just last December, Powergen
completed a $3.2 billion acquisition of Louisville, Ky.-based LGOEnergy Corp.
Powergen had wanted for some time to penetrate the U.S. market, as a result
of consolidation that had taken place in the United Kingdom. The acquisition
of LGObecame appealing to Powergen because of the U.K. company's desire to
establish a strong presence in the Midwest market. Altogether, LG&E's two
utilities and numerous unregulated businesses total about $5 billion in
assets, which was thought to support any further expansion that Powergen
might have had in mind.

Powergen has a market capitalization of $6.66 billion and P/E ratio of 11.02
(according to Yahoo Finance). However, the company has struggled over the
last year. Powergen's primary subsidiary, LGOEnergy, saw its profit for 2000
decline by 4 percent to $497 million from $518 million. As the parent
company, Powergen saw its profits decline by 12 percent in 2000, to $518
million from $590 million, although its revenue increased 11 percent to $6
billion, up from $5.4 billion in 1999. Keep in mind that Powergen's
acquisition of LGOwas not completed until December 2000, so LG&E's earnings
will be reflected fully in its parent's financial report starting this year.

If E.ON were to acquire Powergen, it would gain several strategic advantages.
E.ON would no longer be reliant solely on the German market, where falling
prices and continued consolidation limit competitive opportunities. In
addition, the purchase would give E.ON a hold on generating assets in the
United Kingdom, and the comparatively low-cost power production, 3.7 million
customers and various business operations that LGOoffers in the United
States.

As noted, Powergen has acknowledged that it has received approaches from E.ON
and other companies. Based on available reports, those "other companies" are
most likely RWE (Germany's largest power supplier and a rival of E.ON),
Vivendi and Suez Lyonnaise (French mega-utilities) and an unnamed American
power company (Enron or Southern Energy would be my best guess). However,
word from its management team is that Powergen is not interested in getting
tied up (as a purchased entity) in merger or acquisition proceedings at this
time as it may be planning additional purchases of its own in the United
States.

On the other hand, the rationale for Powergen to be sold to a company like
E.ON is taking shape. British restructuring law has forced large generators
to sell power stations to reduce any likelihood of market power. As a result,
Powergen has morphed from a pure U.K. generating company to a broad-based
company engaged in telecommunications, gas, and distribution services. Ed
Wallis, Powergen's CEO, has stated that presently it has become very
difficult for Powergen to compete with larger rivals in an enlarged European
market. As noted, Powergen's strategy over the last year has been one of
further expansion in the United States, and the purchase of LGOwas perhaps
more expensive than Powergen had planned. In order to make further U.S.
acquisitions, Powergen needs adequate capital or equity in order to finance
the acquisition, something that has become more difficult since its purchase
of LG&E.

Nevertheless, if the deal takes place it will require regulatory approval in
the United States from FERC, the SEC and the Kentucky Public Service
Commission (among other possible agencies). The climate for U.S. energy
industry mergers and acquisitions has become rather turbulent in recent
weeks. Three high-profile mergers (Entergy / FPL Group, Con Edison /
Northeast Utilities and Sierra Pacific Resources / Portland General) have all
encountered difficulties that could derail their pending deals. In addition,
according to a recent report in the Wall Street Journal, announced worldwide
mergers and acquisitions this year totaled $390.4 billion (as of March 21),
which is about one-third of the volume during the same period last year.
Also, about 164 merger deals have been withdrawn from the market, compared
with 153 deals that were withdrawn for the same period last year, according
to the WSJ report.

Analysts that have been closely watching the potential for an E.ON / Powergen
deal say that Powergen's U.S. operations in LGOcould prove to be a major
stumbling block for the two companies, and that E.ON may find U.S. regulatory
requirements to be much more stringent than those in Europe. Specifically,
the SEC has strict rules regarding what kinds of companies can own public
utilities (a category into which LGOfalls) and E.ON's diverse, non-power
operations may send some red flags to American regulators.  Consequently,
although E.ON appears rather confident that this deal will be completed
rather soon, Powergen's reported resistance and U.S. regulatory obstacles may
thwart this yet-to-be-formally-announced partnership.

An archive list of previous IssueAlerts is available at
www.ConsultRCI.com

Reach thousands of utility analysts and decision makers every day. Your
company can schedule a sponsorship of IssueAlert by contacting Nancy Spring
via e-mail or calling (505)244-7613. Advertising opportunities are also
available on our website.
SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free,  daily IssueAlert. Let us
know if we can help you with  in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH
information  products. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive our
free,  daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include  their full
name and email address or register directly on our site.

If you no longer wish to receive this daily email, send a message to
IssueAlert, and include the word "delete" in the subject line.
SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts(SM) are compiled based on the  independent analysis
of SCIENTECH consultants. The opinions expressed in  SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts
are not intended to predict financial performance  of companies discussed, or
to be the basis for investment decisions of any  kind. SCIENTECH's sole
purpose in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer  an independent perspective
regarding the key events occurring in the  energy industry, based on its
long-standing reputation as an expert on  energy issues.

Copyright 2001. SCIENTECH, Inc. All rights  reserved.


This would be an Enron deal.    And we just have to get over the hurdles here.

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard, Kevin A.
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 5:13 PM
To: Hayslett, Rod
Subject: RE: FW: Northern Border Partners Common Units

The 10Q describes Rawhide - although it does not list investments, it does reference domestic and international assets.  I assume we can use the same disclosure as is shown in the Q.  When you get back, we can talk more about it.  Any time constraint on this (other than the obvious need for cash)? I hope Jerry hasn't mandated anyone just yet (especially Citi/Solly).

-----Original Message-----
From: Hayslett, Rod
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 5:03 PM
To: Howard, Kevin A.; Mckean, George
Subject: RE: FW: Northern Border Partners Common Units

The issue is that in order to sell the units there is a public disclosure of the units being in rawhide which may have some more issues.  A 13d filing is required.  If we want to sell then we need to file and wait.
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


The previously approved 6 include some that should not have been approved
(e.g., London Electric) and have subsequently come off the list.
Additionally, my recollection is that we agreed on 25 for EOL at the
discussion in Houston.  Credit and Legal Europe have approved that there is
only one list, either we can trade it or not.  I have yet to understand why
this may not be true for legal in the states but if there is some difficulty
in approving additional US credits for the launch, we can replace these with
European names to get up to the full 25.  I am sure that Mark will be in
contact with the office regardless of whether he is physically there or not.
I will follow up first thing in the am Houston time.  If we cannot track down
Taylor, I will call Haedicke directly.

bs

David Forster
05/03/2000 18:46
To: Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Edmund
Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Weekes/LON/ECT@ECT,
William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rod Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Dilworth/LON/ECT@ECT, David Forster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Martin
McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT, John Metzler/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Reference credits

Bryan,

I believe Mark Taylor is out of the office until Wednesday.

At this point, I believe there are 6 approved Reference Entities for
EnronOnline.

We will add more up to the previously discussed 20 as approvals are received.

Dave

Bryan Seyfried
03/05/2000 04:43 PM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Edmund
Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Weekes/LON/ECT@ECT,
William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rod Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Dilworth/LON/ECT@ECT, David Forster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Martin
McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT, John Metzler/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Reference credits

After reviewing all of the lists, attached is the list of reference credits
that I forwarded to Mark to load on Enorn Online.

Call me if you have any concerns.


Yes I told Steve.  Your stretch number keeps growing.
You may need to take an evening job to cover all the stretch he has assigned you.

I will be attending a TW imbalance meeting on Thursday morning faciliated by Market
Services.  Dan Fancler has also been invited along with Kim Watson, Michelle Lokay
& T.K.

Have a good evening!

Jan

-----Original Message-----
From: Geaccone, Tracy
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 4:49 PM
To: Moore, Jan
Subject: Re: TW imbal revaluation

Ok.  Did you tell Steve?  I Guess that's additive to my stretch?
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


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

 - 10-29 1500 Report.xls


Hi there,

Could you send me three brochures?  I'm working on getting a couple of
friends together for a 2-3 night retreat to LAS.  Please send the info to Kay
Mann, 29 Inverness Park Way, Houston, Texas, 77055.

Thanks,

Kay


Michelle,

Thanks for the quick turnaround on the draft contract for Dan Reck.  Mark
Frevert, Mike Mcconnell and I had several conversations today about this
issue.  I have left a detailed voice mail for Mark outlining the target
amounts, and will wait to hear back from him (by tomorrow) before presenting
this to Dan.

Regards,

Jeff


TECO TAP                  100.000/ HPL IFERC
                                             20.000/ ENRON

LS HPL KATY                  30.000/ ENRON


Tana:
I sent to Luke Mickum a new draft of the Engage US amendment.  He never did
send me his comments.  The file with the new draft will be with the files
near the window just in case.   He wants to resolve the US one before we
resolve the Canada one.  Coastal is now going to Guaranty the US one.  I'm
not yet sure if they will also Guaranty the Canada one so we might end up now
with 2 separate guarantys.  I'll keep you posted.

Carol


---------------------- Forwarded by Nella Cappelletto/CAL/ECT on 06/06/2000
06:00 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources
	Canada Corp.

	From:  Peter Keohane                           06/06/2000 04:33 PM

Sent by: Nella Cappelletto
To: Andy Knight/Corp/Enron@ENRON, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, John
Suttle/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Derek Davies/CAL/ECT@ECT, David W
Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T
Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT, John J
Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT, Andre
Templeman/CAL/ECT@ECT
Subject: Alberta Power Purchase Arrangements Auction - Bid Deposit/Letter of
Credit

Please see the attached memo from Mark Powell.


As many of you already know, Brett Hunsucker has accepted a new position with
ERCOT in Texas.  His new position is a Client Representative for the new
deregulated market.

We will be wishing Brett and Holly a fond farewell on Thursday evening.  The
time and place will be determined later this week, but please plan on joining
us to congratulate Brett on his new opportunity!


Vince will not be available until Thursday, July 12, 2001.  He will be out of the country until Monday, July 9, 2001,  he has an all day PRC meeting on Tuesday, July 10, 2001, and Wednesday, July 11, 2001 is already fully booked.  Please let me know and I will be happy to schedule the meeting on Thursday, July 12, 2001 or any other date that might work for the others.

Regards,

Anita DuPont for Vince Kaminski
Enron Research Group
713-853-0329
EB 1969

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lebeau, Paul
Sent:	Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:38 PM
To:	Shankman, Jeffrey A.; Kaminski, Vince J; ',Christie.Patrick@enron.com'
Cc:	Burns, Jennifer; Crenshaw, Shirley
Subject:	FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002
Importance:	High

Jeff , Vince, & Christie,

I was wanting to try and get together first part next week to discuss our possible participation with the "Tiger Team" Field Application Program at Wharton.

Please let me know.

Thanks -=- Paul LeBeau/Recruiter

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Warner, Traci
Sent:	Monday, July 02, 2001 12:34 PM
To:	Lebeau, Paul
Subject:	FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002
Importance:	High

I know you received this also - but wanted to check to see if you were going to coordinate with Christie Patrick on this

TW

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	FAP <FAP@management.wharton.upenn.edu>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-FAP+20+3CFAP+40management+2Ewharton+2Eupenn+2Eedu+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Thursday, June 28, 2001 3:48 PM
To:	'twarner@enron.com'; 'paul.lebeua@enron.com'
Cc:	FAP
Subject:	FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002
Importance:	High

>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	FAP
> Sent:	Thursday, June 28, 2001 4:40 PM
> To:	'Jeffrey.A.Shankman@enron.com'; 'vkamins@enron.com';
> ' [Lebeau, Paul]
> Cc:	FAP
> Subject:	Wharton-Tiger Team-2002
> Importance:	High
>
> I am writing in anticipation of your participation in the Wharton School's
> "Tiger Team" Field Application Program (FAP) for the Academic Year
> 2001-2002.
> We are in the process of making preparations for the upcoming "Tiger Team"
> program. Last year we held focus groups to evaluate the quality of our
> program. One suggestion of these groups was better facilitation of the
> matching process between students and hosts. To achieve that end we
> request your assistance.
>
> We are asking for a verbal commitment to host a Tiger project no later
> than mid-July. No project scope needs be identified at that time, just a
> commitment to work with the program. We have experienced high sponsor
> demand and our resources are constrained. We don't want to reject projects
> because we lack the necessary resources. And, we want to identify our
> project hosts to students as early in the school year as possible. We feel
> this will allow students to better integrate the FAP experience into their
> recruiting efforts. It will also allow us to better match faculty
> expertise (especially institutional) with hosts.
> As an incentive to help us improve the FAP experience, we ask our
> returning hosts for the same contribution as last year - $10,000. This
> amount does not cover our variable costs, though we believe we offer hosts
> great value in terms of product output and recruitment opportunities.
> However, after July we will need to increase our requests for
> contributions to help cover these costs. While we realize that it is often
> difficult to forecast changes to operational, organizational and budgetary
> requirements, we ask that you take this factor into consideration. Please
> notify us of your decision to participate by email at
> <mailto:fap@management.wharton.upenn.edu>.
> I will forward you more detailed information and a calendar for the
> academic year with critical dates and deadlines for hosts. As you will
> see, we have "moved-up" our deadlines relative to last year to help us
> better facilitate the host-student matching process. Our staff also asked
> for extra time to allow faculty to have more input into the project's
> scope earlier in the process. Our focus groups suggested both students and
> hosts would benefit from this. Should you have any questions or concerns
> before then, please feel free to contact me.
> Thank you for your interest in helping the Wharton School achieve its
> educational mission. I look forward to working with you in the future
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Donna Piazze
> Program Director
> Field Application Project
> The Wharton School
> Univ. of Pennsylvania
> 215.573.8394   fax 215.573.5727
> fap@management.wharton.upenn.edu
> piazze@wharton.upenn.edu
>


Dear CERAWeek 2000 registrant,

Thank you for your recent registration to CERAWeek 2000, CERA's 19th Annual
Executive Conference and related events, February 8-10, 2000 in Houston, TX.

CERAWeek 2000 promises to be a premier international event offering senior
energy executives new ideas, insight, and strategic thinking, as well as
opportunities for discussion on the major issues facing the global energy
industries.

To keep abreast of new speakers and agenda changes, we recommend that you
visit our website at http://www.cera.com/ceraweek/.  Please note that there
have been slight changes to the agenda and schedule.

If you have questions or concerns regarding CERAWeek 2000 please contact
CERA Registration at  register@cera.com or 800 879-2372 ext. 800 (Outside
the U.S. (617) 497-6446 ext. 800.)

We look forward to seeing you in Houston.

Sincerely,

CERA Registration

 - att1.htm


Tana:

Please let me know if you did anything with this or I will assign.  Since you
were copied, I didn't know if you had a conversation with Tanya or Soma.
Thanks.  Sara
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 12/11/2000 08:14 AM -----

	Tanya Rohauer
	12/06/2000 08:19 PM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Bank of America

I have attached a credit worksheet per Sara's request in order to amend the B
of A master.  My understanding is that we intend to only amend the existing
document for holding and use of collateral so that we may be able to
rehypothecate collateral.  I have tried to construct the worksheet terms such
that they reflect what is in the current document, but the old document terms
should govern in the case of a discrepancy.  I will be out tomorrow, so
please contact Bill with questions.

Thanks,
Tanya


Last month you received an email about enrolling in the Enron PAC.  The
response has been positive.
Thank you to those of you that have already enrolled or made a change to your
current contribution!
If you have not had an opportunity to visit the enrollment site, please
consider taking a moment to do so.  The link to the website is at the end of
this message.

 Some of you may have experienced problems launching the site or enrolling.
We apologize for any trouble that you may have had.  The enrollment works
best in either Internet Explorer or Netscape.  The most frequent problems
were a result of the Lotus Notes web browser that many employees have
installed as a default browser.  If this is your case, please copy and paste
the link at the end of this message into either Internet Explorer or Netscape.

As a reminder - Following is the original message regarding the PAC
enrollment:

Last year the Enron Political Action Committee (PAC) launched a campaign to
become a "million dollar PAC".  Enron employees, who provide all of the
funding for the PAC, responded and the Enron PAC reached its objective,
becoming one of the largest corporate PACs.  This year we face a new
challenge.  With the sale of EOG, the announced sale of PGE and normal
employee turnover, we have lost a significant number of consistent
contributors.  We are seeking your support.  If you are not a member, please
join.  If you are a member, we hope you will consider increasing your
contribution.

The Enron PAC is an essential tool in our effort to promote sound public
policy.  Our PAC funds support local, state and federal candidates, of both
parties, who support open markets, deregulation and customer choice.  Amounts
contributed may be used to make political contributions in connection with
federal and state elections and are subject to the limits of the Federal
Election Campaign Act.  While our PAC has grown thanks to our employee
contributions, it still generates just a fraction of the expenditures of
those who oppose these ideals.

This year, as always, we face challenges and opportunities for every one of
our businesses, including such issues as taxation and regulation of
e-commerce, electric industry restructuring, regulation of derivatives,
international trade and investment legislation, pipeline safety, local and
state decisions affecting the siting and interconnection of power plants and
a variety of environmental and tax issues.  Enron has a long and successful
track record of supporting and advancing good public policy.  That track
record depends on access to and regular communication with, decision makers.
The PAC provides that access - - it shows policy makers that real voters care
about what they are doing.

One of the best things about Enron is that we don,t just take things as they
are.  We challenge the status quo.  We ask why.  We change things.  The PAC
helps us do that.  We need you to help the PAC.  Sign up today ) and please
consider the following contribution guidelines:

Manager    $500/year
Director     $750/year
Sr. Director/General Manager  $1,000/year
Vice President    $2,500/year
Sr. VP/Managing Director  $3,500/year
Executive Committee   $5,000/year

All contributions are voluntary and these guidelines are merely suggestions.
You are free to contribute more or less than the guidelines suggested and
Enron will not favor or disadvantage anyone by reason of the amount of their
contribution or their decision not to contribute.  You may refuse to
contribute without fear of reprisal.

Only U.S. citizens and resident-aliens living in the U.S. can contribute to
the Enron PAC.  Amounts contributed may be used to make contributions in
connection with federal and state elections and are subject to the
limitations of the Federal Election Campaign Act.  The maximum contribution
is $5,000 per year per individual.  An individual may not contribute more
than $25,000 to all federal candidates and committees within a calendar
year.  The law requires that Enron report name, address, employer and
occupation for every person who contributes over $200/year.

No portion of any contribution is deductible as a charitable contribution for
federal income tax purposes.

Thanks for your support!  Sign up now, or revise your current contribution
level by connecting with the PAC intranet site:

 http://pacmembers.enron.com


Hello Kenneth:

Nice talking to you this morning!  Below is your interview schedule for
Monday, Oct. 30th and directions to the Enron Bldg..  Please let me know
if you need any travel arrangements made.

Coming from the northwest part of Houston, your best bet would be to
take I-45 into town.  There is quite a bit of construction downtown, so you
will probably have to take the McKinney exit from I-45 (you will need to
stay in the left lane as you approach town.  Exit McKinney to Smith Street,
take a right on Smith Street go to Andrews Street, take a right on Andrews
(the Enron bldg. is on the left), pass the Enron Bldg. cross "Ruthvan" (1st
stop sign) and pull into the Allen Center Parking garage (Visitors area on
your right).  Come to the security desk on the 1st floor of the Enron Bldg.
and ask for me.  They will call me and I will meet you in the elevator lobby
on the 19th floor.

Monday, October 30th

9:00 AM  Vince Kaminski, Managing Director, Research
9:30 AM  Zimin Lu, Director
10:00 AM Vasant, Vice President
10:30 AM Krishna Krishnarao, Director
11:00 AM Paulo Issler, Manager
11:30 AM Stinson Gibner (He will take you to lunch)
1:00 PM  Molly McGee (HR Recruiter)

Have a safe trip.

Regards,

Shirley Crenshaw
(713-853-5290)


Access to the Internet and Intranet is currently being affected, throughout Enron. Global Infrastructure is working to alleviate the issue. There is currently no estimated time of completion.

You may be effected in the following manner:
?	slow access to internet
?	no access to internet
?	slow access to intranet
?	no access to intranet

Further updates will be provided


Please join me in welcoming Tobin Carlson to the Real Time desk.     Tobin is
an Analyst joining us from Enron Broadband Services.     He is a graduate of
The University of Portland.

He starts on November 27th,   so come by and introduce yourself.

JMF


How is Gail?

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


I agree with the exception of point 3 below.  I plan for them to be one of
several authorisers of bills (in no case however, the only authorisers).
Also, I spoke to Sally about the "agency" office and she agrees that in the
short term, the agency plan is what we need to implement.  However, a
mentioned by both Ted and Sally, we need to discuss what the ultimate goal is
for these offices (will they continue to exist?).  Let's call what we plan to
implement now "Phase I".

Best regards

To: Richard Sage/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT, Fernley
Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Jordan/LON/ECT@ECT, Shona Wilson/NA/Enron@Enron, Ted
Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Naomi Connell/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Trading v Origination Offices

Thanks - I think this is a good start as far as roles go, but as I outlined
to Shona last week, we should apply some basic rules to the process, (forgive
me if obvious) for example:

Rule 1: No confirmations issued, chased or matched by remote offices

This should be done centrally and further all the customers of the remote
office should be given contact numbers (e.g. fax) at the operations hub. That
way any incoming confirmations etc go to the independent ops group.

Rule 2: No cash payments or receipts in respect of transactions approved or
reconciled by remote offices

Operations hubs should reconcile cash movements to changes in position.

Rule 3: No physical settlements or receipts in respect of transactions
approved or reconciled by remote offices

This splits the logistics process somewhat, but is essentially as with cash
in that every movement of physical product should be approved (where
necessary) and reconciled to movements in the position at operations hubs.
The "initiation/optimisation" aspect of logistics could remain remote, since
arguably it involves pseudo - trading.

Not exhaustive but helpful I hope.
DP

Richard Sage@ECT
08/21/2000 03:40 AM
To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Jordan/LON/ECT@ECT, Shona
Wilson/NA/Enron@Enron, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Port/Market
Risk/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Naomi Connell/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Trading v Origination Offices

Sally, Brent,
There are three MG offices in North America outside New York which, previous
to the acquisition by Enron, acted much as trading offices.
Shona and Naomi have worked with the people in New York to put in place extra
controls so that they are not trading offices, for example having a trader in
New York or London own each book and sign off on profit daily.
This process has highlighted the fact that our non-trading offices are not
all the same, and cannot reasonably all be the same.
Some offices organise logistics things to happen on the ground, some
originate, and some execute for Trading Offices.

is a suggestion for how we can make this division explicit.
All the cc above are bought in to this approach.
What do you require to be comfortable so that we can put it up to Causey and
Buy?

It is worth noting that this approach would have caught Helsinki, except for
the Contract-in-a-bottom-drawer, but no system of control can reliably catch
that, as was evidenced by EOTT.

Thanks,
Richard


F:\Artists and Estates\Butterfield, Deborah\Butterfield.jpg
 - Butterfield.jpg


Please turn comments around as quickly as possible.  The folks in Sacramento
need them by 1 PM CST.  Thanks very much.

Best,
Jeff

	Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>
	02/20/2001 07:11 AM

		 To: Rick Shapiro <rshapiro@enron.com>, Jim Steffes
<james.d.steffes@enron.com>, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com>, Sandra
McCubbin <Sandra.McCubbin@enron.com>, Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com>, Paul
Kaufman <paul.kaufman@enron.com>, "Harry.Kingerski@enron.com"
<Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: SBX 6 / SBX 33 - Letters

As discussed, attached please find draft opposition letters to SBX 33
and SBX 6 for the Senate floor.  Mike Day originally drafted longer
versions of these letters for the committee hearings.  We tried to
shorten both letters to make them easier to understand for the general
membership.

Please advise as soon as possible.

 - sbx 33 floor alert.doc
 - SBX 6 floor alert.doc


<<CALPINE DAILY GAS NOMINATION 1.doc>>  <<CALPINE MONTHLY GAS
NOMINATION___.doc>>

RICKY A. ARCHER
Fuel Supply
700 Louisiana, Suite 2700
Houston, Texas 77002
713-830-8659 direct
713-830-8722 fax

 - CALPINE DAILY GAS NOMINATION 1.doc
 - CALPINE MONTHLY GAS NOMINATION___.doc


Are you and Muffy snuggleing?  I was in East Texas over the New Year's and I
saw snow - just enough to make the ground white with a little grass sticking
up thru the snow.


Here's a first draft of the NRG loi.

Kay


If you have any questions, please contact Kristin Walsh at (713) 853-9510.

Bridge Loan Financing Bills May Not Meet Their May 8th Deadline Due to Lack of Support
Sources report there will not be a vote regarding the authorization for the bond issuance/bridge loan by the May 8th deadline.   Any possibility for a deal has reportedly fallen apart.  According to sources, both the Republicans and Democratic caucuses are turning against Davis.  The Democratic caucus is reportedly "unwilling to fight" for Davis.  Many legislative Republicans and Democrats reportedly do not trust Davis and express concern that, once the bonds are issued to replenish the General Fund, Davis would "double dip" into the fund.  Clearly there is a lack of good faith between the legislature and the governor.  However, it is believed once Davis discloses the details of the power contracts negotiated, a bond issuance will take place.  Additionally, some generator sources have reported that some of the long-term power contracts (as opposed to those still in development) require that the bond issuance happen by July 1, 2001.  If not, the state may be in breach of contract.  Sources state that if the legislature does not pass the bridge loan legislation by May 8th, having a bond issuance by July 1st will be very difficult.

The Republicans were planning to offer an alternative plan whereby the state would "eat" the $5 billion cost of power spent to date out of the General Fund, thereby decreasing the amount of the bond issuance to approximately $8 billion.  However, the reportedly now are not  going to offer even this concession.  Sources report that the Republicans intend to hold out for full disclosure of the governor's plan for handling the crisis, including the details and terms of all long-term contracts he has negotiated, before they will support the bond issuance to go forward.

Currently there are two bills dealing  with the bridge  loan; AB 8X and AB 31X.  AB 8X authorizes the DWR to sell up to $10 billion in bonds.  This bill passed the Senate in March, but has stalled in the Assembly due to a lack of Republican support.  AB 31X deals with energy conservation programs for community college districts.  However, sources report this bill may be amended to include language relevant to the bond sale by Senator Bowen, currently in AB 8X.  Senator  Bowen's language states that the state should get paid before the utilities from rate payments (which, if passed, would be likely to cause a SoCal  bankruptcy).

According to sources close to the Republicans in  the legislature, Republicans do not believe there should be a bridge loan due to money available in the General Fund.  For instance, Tony  Strickland has stated that only 1/2 of the bonds (or approximately $5 billion)  should be issued.  Other Republicans reportedly do not support issuing any  bonds.  The Republicans intend to bring this up in debate on  Monday.  Additionally, Lehman Brothers reportedly also feels that a  bridge loan is unnecessary and there are some indications that Lehman may  back out of the bridge loan.

Key Points of the Bridge Financing
Initial Loan Amount:	$4.125 B
Lenders:		JP Morgan		$2.5 B
			Lehman Brothers		$1.0 B
			Bear Stearns		$625 M
Tax Exempt Portion:	Of the $4.125 B; $1.6 B is expected to be tax-exempt
Projected Interest Rate:	Taxable Rate		5.77%
			Tax-Exempt Rate		4.77%
Current Projected
Blended IR:		5.38%
Maturity Date:		August 29, 2001
For more details please contact me at (713) 853-9510

Bill SB 6X Passed the Senate Yesterday, but Little Can be Done at This Time
The Senate passed SB 6X yesterday, which authorizes $5  billion to create the California Consumer Power and Conservation  Authority.    The $5 billion authorized under SB 6X is not the  same as the $5 billion that must be authorized by the legislature to pay for  power already purchased, or the additional amount of bonds that must be authorized to pay for purchasing power going forward.  Again, the Republicans are not in support of these authorizations.  Without the details of the long-term power contracts the governor has  negotiated, the Republicans do not know what the final bond amount is that must  be issued and that taxpayers will have to pay to support.   No further action can be taken regarding the implementation of  SB 6X until it is clarified how and when the state and the utilities get paid  for purchasing power.    Also, there is no staff, defined purpose, etc. for  the California Public Power and Conservation Authority.  However, this can  be considered a victory for consumer advocates, who began promoting this idea  earlier in the crisis.

SoCal Edison and Bankruptcy
At this point, two events would be likely to trigger a SoCal bankruptcy.  The first would be a legislative rejection of the MOU between SoCal and the governor.  The specified deadline for legislative approval of the MOU is August 15th, however, some decision will likely be made earlier.  According to sources, the state has yet to sign the MOU with SoCal, though SoCal has signed it.  The Republicans are against the MOU in its current form and Davis and the Senate lack the votes needed to pass.  If the legislature indicates that it will not pas the MOU, SoCal would likely file for voluntary bankruptcy (or its creditor - involuntary) due to the lack operating cash.

The second likely triggering event, which is linked directly to the bond issuance, would be an effort by Senator Bowen to amend SB 31X (bridge loan) stating that the DWR would received 100% of its payments from ratepayers, then the utilities would receive the residual amount.  In other words, the state will get paid before the utilities.  If this language is included and passed by the legislature, it appears likely that SoCal will likely file for bankruptcy.  SoCal is urging the legislature to pay both the utilities and the DWR proportionately from rate payments.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Pv4pGD/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/NoOolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

We would like to remind you of this upcoming event.

Community Garage Sale

Date: Saturday, October 27, 2001
Time: 7:00AM - 12:00PM CDT (GMT-05:00)

Don't forget about the Neartown community garage sale to be held
on Saturday, October 27, 7 am to noon.  If you would like to
participate, let Amy know ASAP.  Maps of participating houses
will be available for $1 at the police substation, and balloons
will be provided to mark the houses.  It's a great chance to
clean house before the holidays!

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

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


Not necessarily for purposes of discussion on the SCE call, but for later
reference if we have to fight SCE over the justification for their crediting
proposal, I want to chime in with my critique of SCE's analysis.

First of all, their example does not properly characterize the obligations
of the direct access customers.  A Direct access customer (with the same
hypothetical load as in the SCE example) did not pay the same $60 toward
SCE's procurement costs and transition recovery, they paid a lesser sum, $60
minus the actual PX costs for that billing cycle.  What the direct access
customer paid (assuming the PX costs were $30), was a contribution directly
to CTC transition cost recovery, in this case $30.

When the price of energy exceeded the 6 cents in bundled rates for
procurement and transition cost recovery, the utility does begin to build an
undercollection from its bundled customers, and the entire $80
undercollection in the SCE example relates to the cost of power purchased
for the bundled customer but not recovered in rates.

The same is NOT TRUE for the direct access customer.  The negative credit
provided to the direct access customer is the same as the underrecovery from
the bundled service customer, in this case $80.  However, for the direct
access customer, this amount has nothing to do with power purchased by the
utility for the DA customer, and represents essentially a credit against
amounts overpaid toward the utility's CTC recovery in earlier periods.

This is one of the many perverse effects of the residual CTC collection
mechanism.  If a fixed CTC contribution had been established from Day 1,
direct access customers could have continued to pay that fixed contribution,
also pay their $40 share of the utility T&D costs, and would not have had
any role in creating the utility's undercollection.  However, because the
CTC calculation was a residual calculation:  the generation component of the
frozen rates less the actual PX costs = CTC (which later became negative)
direct access customers' contribution to CTC was dependent on the utility's
procurement risk in the market compared to the generation component in
frozen rates.  This was also consistent with the notion contained in AB 1890
and the Edison MOU that the utility bore the risk of power price volatility
in recovering its CTC.

In order for direct access customers to contribute to CTC symmetrically with
bundled customers, when bundled customers no longer contributed to CTC
(because of high power costs) and in fact REDUCED the CTC collected (the
power cost undercollection was to have been paid first before CTC was
booked, but the PUC did not properly account for this until it adopted the
TURN accounting adjustment), then the CTC contribution of direct access
customers had to be proportionately reduced, and that is the function of the
negative CTC credit.

Thus, a reduction in the CTC contribution of direct access customers to
ensure they paid the same proportionate share of CTC as bundled customers is
NOT a matter which SCE is entitled to recover after the fact because they
sustained an undercollection of power costs.  The undercollection of power
costs was entirely their risk, and direct access customers paid their fair
share of CTC and that is all they had to pay, period.  The fact that they
paid less than SCE expected because the high power costs generated a lot of
negative CTC credits at the end of the transition period is one more risk
that the utilities assumed when they selfishly and foolishly promoted a
residual CTC calculation instead of a fixed transition cost recovery system
as was used in most other states.  SCE is entitled to NO recovery of its
undercollection from direct access customers.

As you can tell, I am more than willing to discuss this ad infinitum.  If
you have questions, please call or email.

Mike Day

-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D. [mailto:James.D.Steffes@ENRON.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:19 PM
To: Mara, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff; Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet, Michael;
Huddleson, Diann; Swain, Steve; Curry, Wanda; mday@gmssr.com
Subject: RE: Sue's Retort to SCE's Premise

-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 2:36 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Steffes, James D.; Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet,
Michael; Huddleson, Diann; Swain, Steve; Curry, Wanda; 'mday@gmssr.com'
Subject: Sue's Retort to SCE's Premise
Importance: High

I don't agree Edison's premise -- that "direct access customers
contributed just as much to SCE's procurement costs undercollection as
bundled service customers." We need to make clear that we don't buy in
to their rhetoric.

Here's my reasoning.

DA Customers are completely different from bundled customers. SCE had to
buy power to serve the bundled load.  SCE did not buy power for DA
customers.  SCE's purchases of the power to serve the bundled load
coupled with high wholesale prices and an inability to raise rates was
the direct reason for the undercollection. I can make the argument that
the undercollection is SOLELY related to BUNDLED SERVICE.

There are two big reasons that back me up: AB 1890 and Top-down rates.
I will explain.  The utilities got what they wanted out of AB 1890 --
payments of $30 plus billion in so-called stranded costs and a real
delay in any competitive retail market until their costs were paid off.
One of the tradeoffs, however, was that the utilities were at risk FOR
HIGH PRICES in the WHOLESALE MARKET.  Everyone understood that if there
were high gas prices or bad hydro years, the utilities would be squeezed
and not collect their billions by the 3/31/01 deadline. That's the risk
they agreed to.  Now, they are claiming that they were ENTITLED to that
money and more.  This is in direct conflict with the statute. I can make
the argument that the statute requires SCE to assume this risk and
therefore any undercollection is theirs alone -- now the CPUC can bail
them out -- but that doesn't make ESPs subject to any presumed
"undercollection."

Now to the rates.  At the beginning of DA, the utilities did not want to
do a real rate case and separate the costs of the wholesale business and
the retail busness from T&D. So, they did a "top-down" calculation.
This meant that there had to be a "credit" put on the bills of DA
customers to account for the costs the utility avoided by having the
customers switch to DA. So, the PX Credit structure was a direct result
of the utilities unwillingness to unbundle specific components of the
rates.  Next, although bundled customers rates were capped, the
decisions from the CPUC made it clear that there was no similar cap for
DA customers -- their rates and bills would be whatever was charged by
their ESPs.  However, when the utilities filed their tariffs with the
CPUC, they added a cap for the PX credit that was neither proposed nor
authorized by the Commission.  Enron attacked it, but got nowhere, until
WPTF and Enron brought it up in the 1998 RAP Proceeding. Our argument
was that the bundled rates were capped but not the bills of DA customers
-- and the credit was supposed to represent the full costs the utilities
avoided by not serving DA customers.  We argued that anything less is
fundamentally unfair and anticomeptitive.  The utilities must have
thought we had a good case, because they agreed to settle. The
settlement was accepted by the Commission in the proceeding. Everyone
understood that eliminating the cap on the PX Credit was primarily to
allow the PX Credit to FLOAT ABOVE THE CAP when wholesale prices were
high. So, we have a legal right to receive the full PX Credit/Negative
CTC which is separate and distinct from any undercollection associated
with bundled customers. It seems as if we should be able to prosecute
this legal right. (keeping in mind I am not an attorney)

In summary, we have leverage and should use it.

Sue

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:12 AM
To: Mara, Susan; Steffes, James D.; Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet, Michael;
Huddleson, Diann; Swain, Steve; Curry, Wanda; 'mday@gmssr.com'
Subject: Proposal Edison Is Distributing to ESPs

FYI.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt.Pagano@sce.com [mailto:Matt.Pagano@sce.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:05 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: DA Credit

Hi Jeff,

Please find below SCE's proposal to settle past Direct Access Credit
issues
and determine the Direct Access Credit going forward. Please forward
this
to any other Enron participants to review prior to our conference call
with
John Fielder, November 1, 2001, 11:00 a.m. PST.

(See attached file: DA Proposal.doc)

Thanks.

Matt Pagano
Account Manager
ESP Services Division
tel-714-895-0222
fax-714-895-0347
Email-Paganomj@SCE.Com

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


Wonder how much worse it would have been if we had started with a doc that
you and I liked.

"Keffer, John" <JKeffer@KSLAW.com> on 03/25/2001 05:20:37 PM
To: "C. Kay Mann (E-mail)" <Kay.Mann@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: FW: A revision to your revision

whoopee!

-----Original Message-----
From: DeBerry, Jeremiah A. [mailto:JeremiahDeberry@paulhastings.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 5:24 PM
To: 'Keffer, John'
Subject: RE: A revision to your revision

Your change is fine.  Please send a clean and blackline of the final.

Thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Keffer, John [mailto:JKeffer@KSLAW.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 6:14 PM
To: Jeremiah A. DeBerry (E-mail)
Cc: C. Kay Mann (E-mail)
Subject: A revision to your revision

Let me know if this is acceptable

 <<Redlined Exclusivity Agreement_.doc>>

                    Confidentiality Notice
This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer.  It is intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  This
communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure.  If you are not
the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or
disseminate this message or any part of it.  If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete
all copies of the message.

"paulhastings.com" made the following annotations on 03/25/01 18:23:58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
NEW E-MAIL ADDRESSES AT PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER LLP

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

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

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

                    Confidentiality Notice
This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer.  It is intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  This
communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure.  If you are not the
named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or
disseminate this message or any part of it.  If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete
all copies of the message.


Approved.  I do not see that we have any trades currently under this master-
can you please confirm?

Thanks,
Tanya

Stephanie Panus@ENRON
09/07/2000 02:36 PM
To: Paul Radous/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rod
Nelson/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Merrill Lynch International Bank ("MLB") assignment to Merrill Lynch
International Bank Ltd. ("MLIB Ltd")

Credit - Just following up on this message from Sara - has anyone been able
to look at this matter?
Thanks.

Stephanie
---------------------- Forwarded by Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron on 09/07/2000
02:34 PM ---------------------------
From: Sara Shackleton@ECT on 08/22/2000 09:26 AM
To: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Rod Nelson/LON/ECT@ECT, Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul
Radous/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Merrill Lynch International Bank ("MLB") assignment to Merrill Lynch
International Bank Ltd. ("MLIB Ltd")

All:  During the fourth quarter, 2000, MLB intends to transfer all FX
business to MLIB Ltd.  ENA and Enron Corp. have been asked to agree to this
transfer with the result that any executed master agreement with MLB will be
transferred to MLIB Ltd as principal.  ENA has an ISDA Master Agreement dated
effective 7/1/95; I cannot locate a master between Enron Corp. and MLB.

Will someone in credit approve this transfer?  Please let Stephanie Panus
(X53249), our newest paralegal, know.  Thanks.  Sara


I guess we survived the "Crashing" of the systems.  Excellent !

Have a good evening.

Anne