Hello everyone,

Could someone please prepare an assignment letter to move trade q13022.4 from
NG Trading, LLC to NG Energy Trading, LLC.

Also, in the original confirmation certain credit language was added to
require an independent amount of $1MM be held through maturity of the trade.
NG Energy Trading, LLC recently received a guaranty from Alliant Energy
Corporation, an A-rated utility, which will be used to secure the trade after
the assigment.  Therefore, my question to you, is do we drop the independent
amount language from the original confirmation and provide alternative
language referencing the new specific guaranty.  If so, the date of the
guaranty provided is October 24, 2000 and it is due to expire November 1,
2001.

If you could e-mail such a document, I would be most grateful.

thanks
brant


sara,
as discussed attached is a cleaned up redlined version of the schedule.  as
you know, there are still several open issues, but hopefully, it will be
easier to work from this document.  in the meantime, i will work on
redlining the csa and reviewing some of the open issues in the schedule that
are in my court.  thanks for your help and have a great weekend! <<enron
isda 8-29.doc>>

 - enron isda 8-29.doc


Hello Mr. Lay,

It's been a long time since we've talked.  I'm Priscilla Slade, President of
Texas Southern University.  The primary purpose of this e-mail is to invite
you to attend a weekend at the home of President and Mrs. Bush September
16-18.  So many people have expressed a desire to  know more about the
University (it's new initiatives and successes) that  President Bush
volunteered to host a gathering of 25 CEOs and spouses (or a second person
in the corporate hierarchy).  In addition to having fun golfing, sailing,
boating, etc., we are presenting ALL YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT TEXAS SOUTHERN
UNIVERSITY.

The tentative schedule of events is as follows:
Saturday September 16 - Fun activities (sailing, boating, golf, etc.)
Sunday September 17 ---- Reception and dinner at the home of President and
Mrs. Bush
Monday Morning ------------ ALL YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT TSU
Monday afternoon ---------- Return to Houston

I know TSU is your favorite topic and we look forward to you joining us.  An
invitation is in the mail.  I will call you when you return.

Priscilla


Quentin,

I forwarded your resume to our Sydney office with a request
to invite you for an introductory interview. I would also like  to
arrange a phone interview with you sometimes next week.
My assistant will call you regarding the timing.

Vince


Let's start thinking about transitioning SJ to 100% flow.  I would like to
discuss all of the issues and costs of presenting such a product to the
market.  Think about what we might need in the form of Northwest transport,
storage, operations personnel, etc.  I realize that this will be risky and
that I may experience some financial downside with this endeavor, but I think
we should press forward.  Will we need intra-day traders to place the gas?
Do we need to establish intra-day relationships with SJ producers, utilities,
etc?  Will the allocation on EL Paso in April alleviate some of the cuts?

Let's discuss in detail.

Mike


I will call EV right now.
PL


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


A lot of shops are interested,  mainly speculators.       I have had at least 7 different counterparties use this.      Utilities or generators have a big interest in hedging their balancing energy exposure,  locking in a fixed return.   How they are exposed to the imbalance price is their business, as I am not encouraging running an imbalance, etc.
No problem with EOL,  as we are trading it up.
You need to add the US PWR Financial Swap to your EOL profile, in my opinion.     You will see Ercot S 8-22  and N 8-22.   You will need to add these and every other hour listed.
Thanks,

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Corley, Michael" <Michael.Corley@ElPaso.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:23 AM
To:	Forney, John M.
Subject:	RE: ERCOT financial swaps

Thanks for the info.  Just curious, are there many other shops showing an
interest?  Also, I haven't seen any numbers yet this morning, have you not
shown any or is it a problem with my EOL?  Thanks again.

MC

-----Original Message-----
From: John.M.Forney@enron.com [mailto:John.M.Forney@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:17 AM
To: Corley, Michael
Subject: RE: ERCOT financial swaps

Sure,  I am online everyday.
I get in about 6 am, usually putting the numbers on at 6:30.   I start with
hr ending 8-22 and change to 9-22 usually when the first interval of he 9
is printed.
This is at my discretion.
You may post a limit order (either a bid or offer) that covers mine and
transact online.   You wont necessarily be trading with me,  another
counterparty can lift your offer or hit your bid.

Let's trade it up!!!

JForney

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   "Corley, Michael" <Michael.Corley@ElPaso.com>@ENRON
   Sent:   Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:06 AM
   To:     'jforney@enron.com'
   Subject:  ERCOT financial swaps

   Are you all still showing numbers for intraday ERCOT swaps?  If so when
   do
   you normally post them.  Thanks.

   Mike Corley

   ******************************************************************
   This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso
   Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the
   use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
   If you have received this email in error please notify the
   sender.
   ******************************************************************

**********************************************************************
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.
**********************************************************************

******************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso
Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the
sender.
******************************************************************


Appreciate the offer but I won't be able to get out of work,

"Piasio, Stephen [FI]" <stephen.piasio@ssmb.com> on 05/10/2001 11:23:18 AM
To:	"'jarnold@enron.com'" <jarnold@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:	myrtle beach

do you or any one of your colleagues at the mighty Enron want to join us at
our annual golf outing in Myrtle Beach.  You pay the air, we've got the
rest.
Only 4 rules:
	no cologne
	no top button buttoned on the golf shirt
	not permitted to break 100
	no cameras
reminder:
	Friday June 1		2 rounds
	Saturday, June 2	1 round/poolside
	Sunday, June 3		1 round

Enron has an open invite.  Please let me know.


Cool.  This is in Baja?  Can we get pictures?

	Cameron Sellers <cameron@perfect.com>
	09/27/2000 03:26 PM

		 To: "'Prentice (Berkeley)'" <psellers@haas.berkeley.edu>
		 cc: "'Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com'" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>
		 Subject: FW: Mexico OnLine

Cameron Sellers
Vice President, Business Development
PERFECT.COM
1860 Embarcadero Road - Suite 210
Palo Alto, CA 94303
cameron@perfect.com
650.798.3366 (direct dial)
650.269.3366 (cell)
650.858.1095 (fax)

-----Original Message-----
From:    JanelB3@aol.com [mailto:JanelB3@aol.com]
Sent:   Wednesday, September 27, 2000 1:10 PM
To:   cameron@perfect.com
Subject:   Re: Mexico OnLine

Dear Cameron
The dates you requested are open.
As you have  recognized from our website,  we have a lush, lovely, peaceful
garden oasis in an authentic historical pueblo that is also gaining interest
as  home to many artists and  others interested in living in a most unique
environment.  Our aim is to provide a memorable experience with modern
facilities that also reflect the beauty and comfort of Mexican rustic
design.  Our casitas have kitchens, baths and covered patios that afford
privacy and a renewing atmosphere.  Great care has been taken to provide
service and comfort.
Our prime season is approaching so it is well advised to book early. We have
a number of inquiries for the dates you requested.
The rates as described are $80 USD per night for the casita .which is
separate and very private. The weekly rate is $450 USD.  To hold a
reservation we require a 50% deposit when you have your exact dates. Let us
know what they are and I will mail instructions.
If this is your first time to this area or if there are any questions you
might have, please fell free to write. and I will do my best to answer. Our
community site for up to date events is www.todossantos.cc
Mil gracias for your inquiry.  Linda Macfarlane for Las Palmas Casitas


The Commodity Fundamentals website is back in service.  Please use the link provided below to access the website:

http://fundamentals.netco.enron.com/main.asp

Thank you,

Amanda Rybarski
Gas Fundamentals
Office: (713) 853-4384
Fax: (713) 646-8453
Pager: (877) 482-0772
Cell: (713) 560-0934


Jim:

I was hoping that we could speak sometime today as I will be out of the
office Dec. 7 and 8.  I would like to discuss your comments the Schedule and
receive your blackline to the Credit Support Annex.  I am available all day
except between the hours of 10 am - 2 pm (Houston time).  I look forward to
hearing from you.  Regards.  Sara


----- Forwarded by Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 09:37 AM -----

	Eric Gillaspie
	04/25/2001 08:40 AM

		 To: jennifer-gillaspie@reliantenergy.com, Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: China Jonny

Latest message from Budda Brudda.

Eric Gillaspie
713-345-7667
Enron Building 3886
----- Forwarded by Eric Gillaspie/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 08:38 AM -----

	"jonathan gillaspie" <jongill78@hotmail.com>
	04/25/2001 02:33 AM

		 To: ragillaspie@hotmail.com, eric.gillaspie@enron.com,
jgillaspieci3@netzero.com, gillassa@fairfield.k12.ia.us
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: FW: Computer Features

Yo Pa:

They're just whining. It means nothing. I'm glad Bush Jr. didn't sell the
Aegis boats to Taiwan yet; if he had the Butchers of Beijing would have
raised a big stink. The common people read the newspapers, drink their tea,
and complain a little, but they won't raise the topic with a foreigner they
don't know personally. Remember- Sun Tze wrote the "Art of War" 2500 years
ago. We're doing exactly what the Chinese would do if they were able to, and
they understand this.

If the PLA weren't so stupid and belligerent a majority of the Taiwanese
would probably agree to a slowly enacted "One Country-Two Systems"
arrangement like Hong Kong and Macau. Unfortunately, the PLA adds 50 missles
every year on the Fujian coast aimed at Taiwan, and ceaselessly threatens
the Taiwanese. Also, the continued antagonism between the Kuomingtang (Chang
Kai Shek's KMT) and the commies doesn't help. Taiwan's economy is developed
and robust, a "little dragon" of East Asia; while the mainland still has 900
million peasants wiping their asses with leaves. If you were Taiwan would
you be racing to re-join the motherland? Jiang Ze Min promised the
hardliners in 1993 when he was coming to power that he would bring Taiwan
back in to the fold. This isn't going to happen during his tenure. He's
finished in 2003, and he's bummed that the glory of a unified China won't be
ascribed to him. Sorry, chum.

This won't affect the wedding or the Chinese people's reaction to your
presence in the motherland. This is a wedding, and everything should be back
to normal by June. None of my Chinese colleagues flip me shit about it. If
they raise the topic I just say I don't formulate American foreign policy.
If they have any questions or comments they can direct them to Colin Powell.
I'm a common bloke just like them and they understand. As they say in
Alabama, "It's all gooood."

Yesterday Ai Ping and I finally reserved all the hotel rooms for everybody
in Qingdao. I've got you booked from June 8-10: three nights. You'll be on
the 29th floor in the presidential suite- you've got 170 square meters and a
great view of the ocean. The room consists of a huge living room, two
bedrooms, a kitchenette and a bathroom. I'll be living with you on June 8th,
and then move to another room on the wedding night. Eric and Jeff will be on
the same floor. This hotel was built for the PLA brass in the late 1970's,
but now caters to corporate clients who want to live and work in the same
building.

Check your plane tickets to make sure when you're arriving in Shanghai. Is
it June 5th or 6th? If you leave Minneapolis on the 5th, you'll probably be
arriving in Shanghai on the 6th. Let me know. Ai Ping's heading back to
Taiyuan tonight for some final prep work in Shanxi. Later she'll be
returning to Qingdao one more time to make final arrangements. I'm swamped
with UK, US and Australian visa prep work. Right now is crunch time for me.
The weather here is great. Should be nice and steambath-like by the time you
arrive in June. Enjoy! Dress accordingly. No wool suits! We are six weeks
and counting..... Let the chaos begin. The weak shall be punished.

Hope all is swell in Iowa. I'll be in touch again soon. Give my favorite
schnauzer a big,juicy smooch on his black nose. Zaijian.

Love, Jon

>From: "Gillaspie, Rodger A. (IA)" <Rodger.Gillaspie@ia.ngb.army.mil>
>To: "'jongill78@hotmail.com'" <jongill78@hotmail.com>
>Subject: FW: Computer Features
>Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:40:59 -0500
>
>Jon,
>Hope you're well.  There is a little indication in the media that the PRC
>is
>not happy with our sale of weapons to Taiwan.  However, their displeasure
>seems somewhat muted.  Hopefully, the controversy will not be a factor
>during our visit.  Looking forward to seeing you and Anna, soon!
>Dad
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gillaspie, Rodger A. (IA)
>Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 2:39 PM
>To: 'jgillaspieci3@netzero.net'; 'eric.gillaspie@enron.com'
>Subject: FW: Computer Features
>
>
>Hey!  Some of these are funny.  How goes it in the city?  It's beautiful
>here today after a cold, blustery, wet weekend.  The morels should be
>popping through by this weekend.  Of course, it's drill weekend, but I plan
>to come in late/leave early later in the week.  I'll think of you while I'm
>grilling an Iowa, corn-fed steak, sauteing morels in butter , and hoisting
>a
>Coors Light!
>Love,
>Dad
>
>
>Subject: Computer Features
>
>
>Tim,
>I need some of these, thought you could use them too. Computer
><http://rita.thegourmet.com/computers.html> Features
>Steve

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.


Hey sweetie.  I am flying in early in the morning on Wednesday and will be at
Burnsys house most of the day.  I will give you a call later this evening
however, the better day for us to hang out will most be on Thursday night as
Burnsy and i had planned on going to the warrior vs lakers hoops game on
Wednesday night.  Anyway I will give ya a call.  Take care sweetie and see ya
soon.


Please draft an RCR for me on this.  Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2001 12:45 PM
---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  "Ronald Carroll" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com>
03/16/2001 12:15 PM

To: <Mary.Hain@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Revised RCR for PGE RFP:  $5,000

Mary,  I looked into your idea regarding using an index price approach along
the lines of the tariff that was approved for EPMI's market based sales to
PGE in Docket No. ER99-364-000.  I agree that the current situation is quite
similar to that.  thus, since the current proposal is similar to one that has
already been accepted, the matter is less controversial than I originally
thought and I do not think that this would entail much additional research.
Nor do I think that we necessarily need to pre-screen this with FERC since
that would delay the filing.  I would therefore revise my RCR projection to
$5,000 to prepare the filing and suggest that we simply file it.  (I would
let you know if I think it is more complicated once I dig in.)

FYI, I ran this through Dan, and he agrees with the foregoing.  As before,
however, we cannot get FERC approval within the time frame contemplated by
the RFP.  I agree with you that the conservative and preferable (from a
legal/regulatory perspective) way to proceed is to make your proposal to PGE
subject to FERC approval.  Since time is of the essence, let me know when to
begin, and we'll jump on it right away.  Ron

>>> <Mary.Hain@enron.com> 03/13/01 12:48PM >>>
Portland General Electric (PGE) has a request for proposals (RFP) that EPMI
wants to submit an offer on.  PGE is essentially seeking a fixed price for
50-200 MW 'round the clock for five years starting in '02 at Portland's
system, the Mid-C, or COB South to North.  Offers are due by March 28 and
PGE has until April 5, 2001 to accept .

I have told Mike that any deal with PGE has to be approved by FERC under
the terms of EPMI's market based rate tariff.  I have also told him that
EPMI could either make the offer subject to FERC approval or take the
regulatory risk that FERC would in some way change the benefits of any
contract in PGE's favor.  I would recommend the former.  Ron - would you
tell me how much you would charge to draft a FERC filing, for my review,
in the event PGE accepts our offer?  Jim - I intend to submit an RCR for
this FERC filing.  Is that okay?


---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 03/02/2000 02:26
PM ---------------------------

dkinney@columbiaenergygroup.com on 03/02/2000 01:14:03 PM
To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Final Final March First-of-Month Requirements

Chris--I discovered that the previous final March file that I sent you
contained a duplicate listing for NJN.  I have corrected it in this version.
Sorry for any inconvenience.

Thanks.

Doug Kinney
Ph:  703-561-6339
Fax:  703-561-7317

 - 03_00 SUPPLY NEED-ALL                     LDCS(MASTER).XLS.xls


Hi Sara, I have discovered quite a few long term deals that were done with
Enron Energy Services that have never been confirmed.  These trades were done
when the other group was confirming financial power deals.  I have created a
confirm for one of these deals.  Please look at the following and let me know
if you see anything that should be changed from a legal standpoint.  Then I
will continue to create the rest of them

Thanks for your help,
Melissa
3-1886


will do

Parker Drew <Parker.Drew@msdw.com> on 02/06/2001 09:58:41 AM
Please respond to Parker.Drew@msdw.com
To: john.arnold@enron.com, Kenneth E Girdy <Kenneth.Girdy@msdw.com>
cc:
Subject: swaps

Deals #852287, 851654, 851191 unintentionally were traded  as Gas Daily
swaps instead of last day average swaps.  Could you see to it that they
are switched.  Thank you.    Parker


I am pleased to announce that the Enron Board has elected Paula Rieker as corporate secretary, effective immediately.  She will replace Rebecca Carter, who has served in that role since 1999.  Paula will have dual reporting responsibility to me and to Jim Derrick, executive vice president and general counsel.

Paula joined Enron in 1990 and has experience in a variety of functions, including assistant treasurer for Enron Corp., vice president and chief financial officer of Enron Global Power & Pipelines, and vice president of Financial Initiatives in Accounting.  Most recently, she has been managing director of Investor Relations, where she has worked for the past four years.  Paula will continue in a dual role with IR through mid-October.  Paula has a bachelor's degree in finance from Texas A&M University, and she is a Certified Public Accountant.

Rebecca has been with the company for 11 years and served in a variety of capacities.  I want to thank Rebecca for her many years of service to Enron.  I am sorry she has decided to leave, but am grateful she will stay on through the end of January to ensure a smooth transition of her duties.

Please join me in congratulating Paula on her new responsibilities and in wishing Rebecca well in her future endeavors.


Scott:
?
As discussed, here's the particulars on the Bee County  Ranch:
?
795+ ac, lots of oak trees, one of the higher hills in Bee  County.? Good mix
of pasture and sage brush.? There's a water well and  tank.?
?
A real "honey hole".? Lots of quail and prime dove  hunting. Deer,?hogs and
supposedly some turkey.
?
Owner's name is Colton Brinkoeter.? Asking $675/acre, no  minerals.?
Negotiable.? I think for that price you ought to get 1/4 -  1/2 of the
minerals.
?
Ranch is three miles west of Mineral (NNW of Beeville about 15  miles).? His
number is 361-358-2582.? I found out about it from a  mutual friend of ours,
Bryan Key, also from Beeville.
?
P.S.? I've also attached my resume.? It looks like  our pipe deal fell
through, and I am looking hard for a job back in  international marketing.?
Let me know if you hear of anything.
?
James McCord
MC5 Operating Group
10655 Richmond Ave.,  Suite 180
Houston, TX 77042
?
e-mail: jrmccord@insync.net
Voice:  713-785-4141
Cell: 713-854-2044
Fax:  713-361-0470
 - 2001Resume.doc


Mark,  Attached is the Howell Petroleum comments we discussed.  Please handle
accordingly.

Joe Russo's numbers are (307) 332-3940
   (307) 850-4341 cell phone

Joe,  Mark Van Skoyk in our Denver office will be taking the lead on all Lost
Creek ROW issues.

Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT on 10/15/99 04:14 PM
---------------------------

joseph russo <hitekdude55@netscape.net> on 10/13/99 02:34:32 PM
To: Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jon Roderick <jon88@mindspring.com>, Jim Taylor <jim.taylor@merrick.com>
Subject: Fwd: []

____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com.

Received: from zenith.howellcorp.com [198.66.163.2] by mx07 via mtad (2.6)
with ESMTP id 088DJmPUE0111M07; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 15:46:30 GMT
Received: from ws-259.howellcorp.com (hwl.howellcorp.com [198.66.163.5]) by
zenith.howellcorp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA21294 for
<hitekdude55@netscape.net>; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:53:54 -0500
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:48:23 -0500
Message-ID: <01BF1568.78BD09A0.mheathcote@howellcorp.com>
From: Mark Heathcote <mheathcote@howellcorp.com>
Reply-To: "mheathcote@howellcorp.com" <mheathcote@howellcorp.com>
To: "'hitekdude55@netscape.net'" <hitekdude55@netscape.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:48:22 -0500
Organization: Howell
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Encoding: 50 TEXT

Joe

I have tried to call you several times but no luck.  I want to discuss the
proposed right of way.

With reference to consideration, Howell is not agreeable to 10% down.  We
expect 100%, further I believe we will require a minimum of $2,500
providing we agree on $12.00 per rod.

In the grant delete "communication line(s)".  Line 7 insert "pipeline"
before "communication equipment".  Further we need to delete any reference
to surface equipment other than markers, wireleads, vent pipes and
communication equipment.  If a gate plant, ground valve, pigging equipment
or cathodic protection equipment is to be located on Howell's property we
will need other agreements.  The systems Howell operated in Texas,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida were contracted in this manner.

Paragraph 3 we need to address our current operations in the area and its
precedence.

Paragraph 4 replace normal plow depth with a "minimum of four (4) feet"

Paragraph 8 and 12 I think will not be approved by management and it would
make expediting the execution of this document easier.

Paragraph 9, Howell in no way will grant any Power of Attorney for
anything.  Any amendment will be executed by Howell.  Delete all references
to POA in entire agreement and Exhibits.  Further we prefer the entire
right of way be recorded not a memorandum.

Paragraph 16 after "Right-of-way Grant" insert except for the term
"pipeline".

Paragraph 17 delete any reference to Tenant in the entire agreement.  We
will secure execution by the Bank, you may deal with the tenants.

Further, I believe we will need an indemnification provision protecting
Howell from any operation performed pursuant to this grant.

Let's talk.  We will make a deal that all parties can live with.  Our
perspective is a little different than the average rancher.

Mark W. Heathcote, CPL
Howell Petroleum Corporation
1111 Fannin, Suite 1500
Houston, Texas 77002-6923
(713) 658-4126
(713) 658-4114 Fax


The following file contains a graphical view of the North American Gas
average deal count by Trader and Product for EOL. This information is for
comparative analysis only.  Do not update links when opening this file.

If you have any questions regarding this breakout, please let me know .

Thanks,
Adam Johnson
x54877
EnronOnline


I will be in attendance.  Please advise as to location.  Thank you.

Julie Pechersky
09/08/2000 01:38 PM
To: Rogers Herndon/HOU/ECT@ect, John D Suarez/HOU/ECT@ECT, David J
Botchlett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phil Clifford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas S
Friedman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Spencer Vosko/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Wilson/NA/Enron@ENRON,
John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT, Hunter S Shively/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip K
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas A Martin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Madhur Dayal/HOU/ECT@ECT, David J Vitrella/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Pushkar Shahi/HOU/ECT@ECT, William Patrick Lewis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Selena
Gonzalez/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: MEETINGS REGARDING MARKET DATA APPLICATION

IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY RESPONDED TO THE MAIL REGARDING THE MEETINGS THAT
WILL BE HELD ON TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY OF NEXT WEEK WITH BRIDGE,
REUTERS AND GLOBALVIEW PLEASE DO SO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

You should have received a message inviting each of you to a one hour meeting
on each day.  If you have any questions or
concerns regarding this issue please contact me as soon as possible at
x-39225.

It is important that I hear from each of you regarding your attendance at
these events.  We realize that this is a large time committment on your
part,  but your input is essential in the decision making process of choosing
a new front end application for your Market Data needs.

I appreciate your assistance!

Julie Pechersky
x-39225


Documentum just called back.  They said they manually reviewed everything that has not yet been scanned into the system and cannot find any Agreements or Amendments for New Power Company.

I have checked with Karen Cordova since her initials are on the document to see if possibly she had any extra documents, and she does not.  I doubt we will be able to get an executed copy of this Amendment.

Christy


good stuff.   mcs

Jane Wilson@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
18/07/2000 03:48
To: K Seethayya/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
shruti.bhatia@ciionline.org
cc: Sandeep Kohli/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Neil
McGregor/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sanjay
Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Wade
Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark Schroeder@ECT, Akshay
Singh/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Amr
Ibrahim/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sisir K
Podder/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ashok
Mehta/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT

Subject: Re: ENRON COMMENTS ON VI DRAFT

Attached are Enron's comments on Draft VI of the Electricity Bill 2000.  We
note new and disturbing provisions in this draft that provide for
interference of regulators in the business of Supply Companies and the
unacceptable interference of the Central Government and State Legislatures in
the freedom of transmission and supply enabling the diversion of supply to
deficient regions.  Finally, there is a provision to cap supply prices in the
event of extraordinary circumstances that is discussed.

---------------------- Forwarded by Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on
07/17/2000 09:44 PM ---------------------------

K Seethayya
07/17/2000 01:22 AM
To: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: shruti.bhatia@iionline.org

Subject: Re: ENRON COMMENTS ON VI DRAFT

Jane: Ms Shruti is looking for Enron's comments on 6th draft. She wants put
our comments in the final submission from CII today evening. You may like to
make available electronic version of the latest comments on 6th version.

Seethayya

"Shruti Bhatia" <shruti.bhatia@ciionline.org> on 07/17/2000 11:35:43 AM
Please respond to shruti.bhatia@iionline.org
To: K.Seethayya@enron.com
cc:
Subject: ENRON COMMENTS ON VI DRAFT

Dear Mr Seethayya,

This is in continuation to our telecon on the above subject. I am
writing to request if it is possible to get enron comments on the 6th
draft by this afternoon. Please treat this as urgent.

regards

shruti bhatia
CII
********************************************
Please contact Ms Shruti Bhatia
Executive Officer - Energy Dept.
Confederation of Indian Industry
Gate No.31, North Block
Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium
Lodi Road
New Delhi 110 003

Tel : 4367901, 4366225 / 73 / 76 / 81 / 82
Fax : 4367484, 4366271/ 6311
Email : Kindly send me email now at shruti.bhatia@ciionline.org


Jay,

I changed the FTS monthly amount from $1,065 to $715 as previously
discussed.  It is effective Feb 20th.  I need to change the amount
transferred to account  586-61L86 from $150 to $175 and to account 586-61M19
from $175 to $200.  I also submitted a transfer of $1,000 into my CMA
account.  I would like to transfer $500 each into account 586-94017 and
account 586-94019.  This is my 2001 contribution to the Education IRA's.  Let
me know if I need to do anything else.  Also, when are the
recharacterizations from Roth to Traditional going to take place?  I will
need a 1099-R for the transactions I think.  Call me if you have any
questions.  Thanks.

DG


Fred-

There are a number of issues we need to address with back office procedures immediately.  We are losing money on avoidable problems and gaining a bad reputation in the market.  Lets get Derek and Michelle together Tuesday afternoon.

2 of our counterparties are writing letters of complaint.. here's a sample of some of the quotes we have heard from the 10 counterparties we have added in the last 6 months.

"I shouldn't have to spend my time decomposing the invoices and confirmations you send out"
"It has been 10 days since we traded and we haven't received a shred of paper to give us the details of the trade"
"We are being told in a confirm something different than we are being invoiced for"
"We did not trade 300 contracts per day, it was per month - do you guys even think before you type"
"I am a CFO and an accountant and I can't decipher what you are trying to confirm here"

From a business dinner where a client of ours was speaking casually to large industrials and endusers. One, upon the mentioning of B2B exchanges said "they WILL NOT ever trade on EOL again because the backoffice procedure was such a nightmare.. they couldn't rely on the accuracy or timeliness of the confirm.  This was a captive client who and needs to trade... who will not show us their flow again.

The latest is the most disturbing:

"we just want to do a small trade to test your system. We have heard it is a nightmare but want to see for ourselves - I mean how difficult can it be to book the purchase of 50 lots of crude" And still 5 days later they do not have one paper to show the details, not one phone call to confirm the trade...nothing.  We even warned the BO that this was a new customer and to make best eforts to make sure the process runs smoothly and efficiently. Well, clearly we failed

We do not understand what is going on in the back office.  Is it that they are too disconnected from our daily operations to understand how integral their accurracy is to our business?  Is there too much turnover? How are they trained?  Who is in charge of the "backoffice"?  There seems to be a different manager for every step of the process.. who co-ordinates all their efforts?  Does anyone care?  Ok.. I'll stop.. For our part, we have Michelle coming up to NY for a week in December (we wanted this to happen as soon as she started but did not work for her).

We have to stop this before we lose clients (which we will).

All the problems are being caused by the following:

1. Our inability to generate an accurate position report for our clients.  This has already cost us money this year. Our clients do 10 trades a day.. they are constantly in and out of positions.. it is imperative that we get these right.  As well, this report is our ONLY check to make sure deals are entered and entered correctly into the system.

There are hundreds of books at Enron.  We have postions on with dozens of them.  We currenttly do not have an automated mechanism to pull deals from every book in one shot.  We have to select books one by one.. this method will always result in books being ommmitted given our deal flow.

Michelle is in charge of this process.  We need a IT person on this yesterday.  Michelle is spending most of her day verifying the validity of the report she generates.  Robyn, Russell, and I check it everyday.. there are always mistakes.

2. There is a breakdown in the backoffice functions after Michelle collects the tickets we write and verbally confirms them.  There is no check after they have been imput.  There are ALWAYS imput errors.  Michelle needs to check every deal after its entered into the system going forward.

We also have NO set procedures for the bookings of deals.  We have no idea where our job ends and the book admin's starts.. for non standard deals like gas dailies and swaptions we need to know the exact process from start to finish.

2a. Confirms are sent immediately after deals are entered.. what if deals are imput incorrectly? the confirm goes out anyway resulting in mass confusion at the client.  Going forward, confirms need to be delayed until we can confirm that everything about the deal is correct.

2b. Invoicing.. there have been dozens of occassions where the amounts we are invoicing do not match the deals done..

3. EOL- We are pushing hard to get counterparties on here.. we have signed Renaissance up (a 10B program fund) but I shudder to see how EOL will fair at these tasks.

4. Credit- All of our clients are margined.  If deals are in the system incorrectly, the wrong MTM goes to the client.. another mis-match.  We work closely with credit since we need to collect initial margin from some clients.. this amount changes daily- we need someone who can get on the phone with clients and explain these numbers through.. again, we are doing this now.


If you need to get hold of us next week, Mark and my cell phone numbers are
as follows:

Mark:  011 44 7881 512 535 (dial like you were calling London)
Tana:  (713) 206-8080


[IMAGE]   [IMAGE]  or  call 800-300-7066 & mention  bonus code 14305  [IMAGE]            This  offer Includes the   Get  More Plan   -  500 Whenever Minutes -  Unlimited Weekend Minutes -  Free Nationwide Long Distance   - Free Digital Roaming Nationwide   - Voicemail with Messaging Alert -  Caller ID, Call Waiting, Call Hold -  Ping Pong- 50 Text Message  Bonus!  Get $50 Cash Back with a VoiceStream Wireless Rebate        FREE*  Wireless Phone Offer  Motorola  T193  $99.99 Instant  Rebate -$99.99  [IMAGE]  Total FREE

* Phone free after  instant rebate. This offer is fulfilled by InPhonic, an authorized dealer  for VoiceStream Wireless. Offer subject to credit approval or deposit, and  is available to customers activating a new line of service on a one-year  contract with VoiceStream Wireless. Not all US markets are served by VoiceStream  Wireless. If you are in a non-VoiceStream Wireless area you will receive  another great offer from another major wireless company. Other restrictions  apply, see full offer for details. Offer Expires February 28, 2002. Offer  may vary.  You are receiving this Special Offer as a valued iExpect.com member. If  you do not wish to receive any Special Offers from us in the future, please  click here   to unsubscribe.[IMAGE]


Are you investing the right way?

Dear Richard,

There is an easy way to make sure your investment strategies are right
for you. We have the innovative research tools and educational
resources to help you do just that:

* PERSONALIZED SOLUTIONS
We'll help you create a portfolio that matches your goals and provide
mutual funds that have passed Morningstar's rigorous independent review.

* The E*TRADE KNOWLEDGE CENTER
Find time-tested investment strategies, retirement planning information,
explanation of market terms, and much more.

*OUTSTANDING SERVICE
Our dedicated financial service associates are available 24/7, 365 days
a year to assist you.

** 25 TRADES ON US! **
Open an E*TRADE brokerage account by June 30, 2001, and you'll receive
up to 25 stock trades on us! (E*TRADE will rebate commissions for up
to 25 stock trades made during your first month as an E*TRADE
customer.)(1) $1,000 minimum deposit required.

http://e-trade.0mm.com/ETR223006+275794428

Discover how rewarding and easy investing can be. Start making the
most of your money. Open an account today at E*TRADE and see why we're
the #1 place to invest online. (2)

(1)Offer not valid for IRAs, retirement, business, club, or E*TRADE
Bank(R) accounts. Excludes existing E*TRADE customers, E*TRADE
Associates and non-U.S. residents. E*TRADE will rebate the commission
of up to $19.95 per trade on up to a maximum of 25 stock trades for
the first 30 days the qualifying account is open. You will pay the
normal rate on all stock trades at the time of the trades, and your
account will be credited with the rebate within eight weeks of account
approval and funding. For listed orders over 5,000 shares, add $0.01/share
to the entire order. Add $35.00 for broker-assisted trades. Rebate
applies to stock transactions only. Account holders must maintain
minimum funding in all accounts ($1,000 for cash accounts, $2,000
for margin accounts, less any losses) for at least six months.
E*TRADE reserves the right to terminate this offer at any time. Not
valid with any other offer. This offer is nontransferable.

(2) E*TRADE ranked the #1 Internet broker by the Lafferty Internet
Ratings annual survey (9/00).

-----------------------------------------------------------
You received this e-mail because you registered on the
E*TRADE Web site, or on one of our partners' sites. If you
do not want to receive partner e-mail offers, or any
E*TRADE marketing e-mail, you can change your preferences now at:
http://e-trade.0mm.com/ETR223007+richard.b.sanders@enron.com+275794428 .
You are subscribed at: richard.b.sanders@enron.com. E*TRADE
takes your privacy seriously. To learn more about E*TRADE's
use of personal information, please read our Privacy Policy at:
http://e-trade.0mm.com/ETR223008+275794428
-----------------------------------------------------------

System response and account access times may vary due to a
variety of factors, including trading volumes, market conditions,
and system performance. The services described herein are
available to U.S. residents only.

(C) 2001 E*TRADE Securities, Incorporated, Member NASD/SIPC. All
rights reserved. E*TRADE and the E*TRADE logo are registered trademarks
of E*TRADE Securities, Inc.


Ken:  Where can I find the CFTC's statement that the swap policy statement is
not available for agricultural trade options?  We are in a "holding pattern"
for the time being.  No products have been developed.  Thanks.  Sara

	RAISLERK@sullcrom.com
	08/04/2000 11:41 AM

		 To: Sara.Shackleton@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Trade Option Exemption

With respect to agricultural trade options, the CFTC has specifically said
that the swaps exemtion and the swaps policy statement are not available.  I
will call you.

>>> <Sara.Shackleton@enron.com> 08/04 11:52 AM >>>

Ken:  In connection with our new product (and  absence of any physical
activity
in that product), I have the following question:

If neither ENA nor its counterparty is able to qualify as an offeree for
purposes of the Trade Option Exemption (17 CFR Sec. 32.13, as amended) but
each
is an eligible swap participant (or better yet, each party has $10 million in
net worth as per Sec. 32.13) can the option still be exempt from CFTC
regulation
under the Swap Policy Statement or any CFTC interpretive letters?

I have concerns about not relying fully on the Trade Option Exemption but I
also
understood that the CFTC has informally said that the Swap Policy Statement
provides a safe harbor for both swaps and options.

I am available to speak at your convenience.  Thanks.  Sara [713/853-5620]

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

This e-mail is sent by a law firm and contains information
that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us
immediately.


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Imai, Rika
Sent:	Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:11 AM
To:	Benchluch, Moises; Benjelloun, Hicham; Cline, Kevin; Gim, Steve; Gualy, Jaime; Kaniss, Jason; Mack, Iris; Makkai, Peter; Oh, Seung-Taek; Philip, Willis; Santucci, Anna; Schiavone, Paul; Soykok, Gulay; Thomas, Paul D.; Wagner, Joseph; Willis, Cory; Dickerson, Lloyd; Giron, Gustavo; Ha, Amie; Hemani, Sanjay; Jenkins IV, Daniel; Larkworthy, Carrie; Lowell, Thomas; Marquez, Mauricio; Moore, Castlen; Pan, Steve; Philippov, Maxim; Raque, Michele; Schneider, Bryce; Williams, Ryan; Young, Julie
Subject:	FW: [Fwd: Fw: Wash. Post article on power transmission]

FYI

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Steiman" <ssteiman@mpr.com>
To: "ALL HANDS" <allhands@mpra.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:32 PM
Subject: Wash. Post article on power transmission

> Interesting article about power transmission problems.
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42384-2001Aug21.html
>


Fyi
---------------------- Forwarded by David Forster/Corp/Enron on 08/30/2000
05:02 PM ---------------------------

Amita Gosalia@ECT
08/30/2000 04:11 PM
To: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Sonya
Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT, Lee Munden/LON/ECT@ECT, ECT London Credit
cc: Enron London - EOL Product Control Group/LON/ECT@ECT, David
Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron

Subject: Metals Brokers on EnronOnline

Hi Guys

As you are aware some of the metals counterparties we have heard from conduct
two types of business:

- proprietary trading for own book
- brokerage for customers

It has been decided to give such metals brokers only, access to metals
products on EnronOnline for trading purposes.

Can you please let me know whether you have any specific reasons why we
should not go ahead with this course of action.

Be aware that some of these brokers will be clearing their business through
LCH.  This would entail tagging deals with such counterparties in the back
office systems and relabelling the cpy as LCH.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Regards

Amita


Kay--

These agreements pertain to telecom deals that are currently dormant.

Stephanie

P.S. When sending email to our group, please be sure to send messages to
"Mark S. Palmer", as "the other" Mark Palmer is a VP in the PR department.
Thank you!

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Young, Kay
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 2:08 PM
To: Jones, Tana
Cc: McCullough, Travis; Segura, Stephanie; Palmer, Mark
Subject: Offline Agreements

Tana et al:  This list indicates the agreements that I have as relating to
the Offline Project.

 I thought we had come to an agreement with Sun Microsystems, Inc.
(separately from iPlanet)  Let me know if anyone has an executed version.

I'm not sure AfricaOne and Ejasent are Offline agreements.  Stephanie and
Mark , let me know.

 << File: Offline.rtf >>

Kay C. Young
Legal Specialist
Enron North America Corp.
713-853-6794 Phone
713-646-3393 Fax
kay.young@enron.com


CGoering@nyiso.com writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

The NYISO is reserving hours beginning 00:00 - 07:00 and 20:00 in the May
20, 2001 Real-Time Market as well as the following hours per ECA20001006B
to verify prices:

PJM: 0:00, 14:00 - 17:00, 19:00, 20:00
OH:  14:00 - 17:00, 19:00, 20:00
HQ:  3:00 - 4:00, 6:00 - 7:00, 14:00 - 17:00, 19:00, 20:00
NE:  14:00 - 17:00, 19:00, 20:00

Prices in the May 21, 2001 Day-Ahead Market are correct.

This e-mail information is a copy of the official posting which can be
found at the following address on our website:
http://mis.nyiso.com/public/htm/OperMessages/CurrentOperMessages.htm#mm


-----Original Message-----
From: 	"Dr. Bob Sports" <football@drbobsports.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Dr+2E+20Bob+20Sports+22+20+3Cfootball+40drbobsports+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:21 AM
To:	Wilson, Derek
Subject:	College Football Best Bets

Dear Member:

I have 6 Best Bets this week in College football after going 2-1 last week (I counted
South Carolina as a loss since 75% of the people surveyed took a loss on that game). The
Strong Opinions were 0-4 last week, but remember, I DO NOT BET THE STRONG OPINIONS.
Strong Opinions have won more than they have lost over the years (about 54% to 55%), but
play them at your own risk (I don't want to here about if they lose. Or win, for that
matter). There are 10 Strong Opinions this week, listed below the Best Bets. Good luck on
the 6 Best Bets this week.

3 Star Selection
IOWA (-14.0) 38 Miami Ohio 14
After suffering through a 7-27 record the last 3 seasons, the Hawkeyes will be in the
hunt for a bowl bid this year. Iowa returns 16 starters from a team that was hit hard by
injuries last season and they are eager to flex their muscles on lesser teams, as they
did last week in beating Kent State 51-0. Miami-Ohio is certainly a tougher test than
Kent, but the Hawkeyes should have no trouble disposing of the Redhawks. Iowa has a well
rounded offense that is anchored by a veteran offensive line and that possesses a quality
quarterback in Kyle McCann, a talented running back in Ladell Betts and a game-breaking
receiver in Kahill Hill that is due for a breakout season. Iowa ran for 331 yards at 6.8
yards per rush last week against a Kent State defensive front that I rate the same as
Miami-Ohio's, so I expect another good performance from the Iowa rush attack in this game
while McCann picks apart a sub-par Miami secondary when he needs to. Miami-Ohio possesses
a pretty solid rush attack and they ran for 127 yards at 4.4 ypr against Michigan last
week, but Iowa is solid up front on defense and the Redhawks don't have the passing
prowess to take advantage of a mediocre Hawkeyes secondary. Miami averaged just 6.2 yards
per pass last season with a seasoned quarterback and new starter, redshirt freshman Ben
Roethlisberger, averaged just 5.5 yards per pass last week against Michigan while getting
picked off 3 times. Iowa held Kent's poor pass attack to just 90 yards in 32 passes last
week (2.8 ypp), so they are capable of shutting down poor passing teams. Teams that were
3-8 or worse the previous year usually perform very well in game 2 after a victory in
their opener, so expect Iowa to be very enthusiastic for this game. The Hawkeyes also
qualify in a 31-7 ATS home favorite momentum situation as long as they remain favored by
18 points or less.

Downgrade Iowa to a 2-Star if they become a favorite of more than 14 points.
Pass if Iowa is favored by more than 18 points.

3 Star Selection
PITTSBURGH (-21.0) 35 S. Florida 3
Pittsburgh will have one of the best defenses in the nation this year as they return 10
starters from a unit that gave up just 2.6 ypr and 6.6 ypp last season. The Panthers
opened the season with a 31-0 win over Division 1AA East Tennessee State and now take on
a South Florida team that played Division 1AA last season. South Florida was a pretty
decent 7-4 in the lower division last year, but they return just 8 starters for their
move to Division 1A. The Bulls are led by talented quarterback Marquel Blackwell, who
threw for a mediocre 6.8 yards per pass last year but tossed only 4 interceptions while
running for 566 yards at 4.4 ypr. Blackwell threw for 7.0 ypp last week against a poor
Northern Illinois secondary and lost yardage on the ground. While Blackwell is a decent
Division 1AA quarterback, he will not fare so well against a tougher schedule and will be
harassed by fierce Pittsburgh pass rush that registered 7 sacks last week. Without much
time to throw, I doubt that Blackwell will be able to find open receivers against a
sticky Pitt secondary. South Florida doesn't have a rush attack and (51 yards on 30
rushes last week against Northern Illinois) Pitt only allowed 2.6 ypr, so Blackwell will
be put in some unfavorable passing situations in this game and I doubt that he'll lead
his team to more than one score (if they score at all). Pittsburgh's offense is hurt by
the absence of All-American WR Antonio Bryant, who missed last week's game and is listed
as doubtful this week. Pitt is still a better than average offense without Bryant as
quarterback David Priestly has put up solid numbers in his two years as a part-time
starter (8.2 yards per pass) and he should perform well enough in this game to put up
enough points to cover the favorable pointspread (opened at 25 and has come down). Pitt
beat East Tennessee State 31-0 last week, out-gaining them 414 yards to 180 yards. East
Tennessee was rated about 4 points worse than South Florida last season and South Florida
is not as good this year with just 8 returning starters. In other words, Pitt is laying
just 21 points against a team that is very similar talent-wise to the East Tennessee
State team that they beat by 31 points last week. Perhaps the spread dropped when it was
reported that Bryant would not play again this week. However, that news was already in
the opening line and I would have played the Panthers at that higher number. The Pitt
defense will dominate again this week and winning by 3 touchdowns or more should not be a
problem.

3 Star Selection
TEMPLE 17 Toledo (-7.5) 16
Temple returns an amazing 20 starters from a team that took major strides last season and
I expect them to make it to a bowl game this year. The Owls were 4-7 last year and lost 3
games by 7 points or less (all their wins were by comfortable margins), so they were
actually better than last year's record indicates. Toledo, meanwhile, returns 15 starters
from a team that was 10-1 last year and they destroyed Minnesota 38-7 last week at home.
That big win will give us some line value here and I have no problem taking a Temple team
that is capable of containing Toledo's Chester Taylor, who is coming off a year in which
he rushed for 1470 yards at 5.9 ypr and ran for 186 yards last week against Minnesota.
Temple has an outstanding defensive front 7 that yielded just 3.4 ypr last year and will
be even better this year with 10 starters back on defense. The Owls were dominating up
front last week, holding Navy's option rush attack to just 49 yards on 31 rushes, and
they are good enough to limit Taylor's yardage today. Toledo quarterback Tavares Bolden
averaged just 5.6 yards per pass last season and just 6.0 ypp last week against a poor
Minnesota secondary, so limiting the run ought to be enough to limit the Rockets'
offense. Last season, Toledo averaged just 19 points against the 2 good defensive teams
that they faced (Penn State and Western Michigan) and Temple should be able to hold them
in that range today. The Owls' offense will have a tough time against a very good Toledo
defense, but Temple ran for 285 yards at 5.3 ypr last week against a decent Navy run
defense and they did that without star running back Tanardo Sharps, who was nursing an
injury in order to be ready for this week's game (he's listed as probable). Sharps ran
for over 1000 yards last year at a very healthy 5.2 ypr clip and he will be eager to play
well with another top running back on the opposite sideline. Toledo allowed just 2.5 ypr
last season but they faced only one better than average rushing team last season and that
team, Northern Illinois, ran averaged 4.6 ypr and scored 24 points against the Rockets.
Last week, Toledo allowed 3.4 ypr to a mediocre Minnesota rush attack, so I expect Temple
to run the ball fairly well in this game. Temple won't have to score too many points to
cover the generous pointspread since their defense ought to keep Toledo's scoring down
and the Owls qualify in a number of great situations today. Temple qualifies in a 54-15-1
ATS home underdog momentum situation and a 33-7 ATS statistical indicator. My ratings
favor Toledo by 3 points but I'll call for the outright upset by Temple given the great
situations that they are in.

Downgrade Temple to a 2-Star Best Bet if they become an underdog of less than 7
points.

3 Star Selection
Washington St. (-4.5) 35 BOISE ST. 21
The Cougars gave us an easy 3-Star Best Bet winner last week in their 36-7 win over Idaho
and I will call on them again to deliver another winner tonight. Washington State's
balanced, potent offense should have another easy time moving the football as they face a
Boise State defense that returns just 3 starters from a unit that is just average against
the run and terrible defending the pass. Boise faced just 4 average or better passing
attacks last season and they allowed 322 passing yards per game at 7.8 ypp in those
games, including allowing Washington State to throw for 290 yards at 9.4 ypp in a 35-42
loss. Boise is even worse in the secondary this year with the loss of 3 All-Conference
defensive backs from that unit. South Carolina completed 69% of their passes against
Boise last week for 8.5 yards per pass and I expect similar results from Gesser this
week. Boise State scored 35 points in their loss to the Cougars last season, but the
Broncos are far less dangerous on offense with the departure of 4 year starting
quarterback Bart Hendricks, who averaged an incredible 9.6 yards per pass last year with
a 36-9 TD to interception ratio. New quarterback Ryan Dinwiddle averaged just 5.2 yards
per pass against South Carolina last week and this week faces another great pass defense.
The Cougars allowed 6.8 yards per pass last year against a schedule of good passing teams
that combined to average 7.3 ypp on offense for the season. With three-fourths of the
secondary returning, including 2 possible All-Pac 10 caliber players, the Cougars will be
considerably tougher to throw on this year. Last week, veteran Idaho quarterback John
Welsh, who averaged 7.9 ypp in 2000, was held to 66 passing yards in 26 attempts for 2.5
ypp! I doubt that Washington State can be that good again this week against the pass, but
I certainly don't see Dinwiddle doing much damage with his arm. The Broncos do have a
good rushing attack and they will probably pick up enough yards on the ground to score
some points. They just won't score enough to keep up with what their inexperienced
defense gives up. I am aware of Boise State's 10 straight spread wins at home, but all of
those wins were with Hendricks at quarterback and with Dirk Koetter as head coach,
neither of which is with the team anymore. Also, most of those big victories at home came
against lowly Big West teams. I am not concerned at all with Boise's home field advantage
as my ratings favor Washington State by 10 points and they also qualify in a solid 161-95-
4 ATS early season indicator that pegged them as a play last week also.

2 Star Selection
OREGON (-17.0) 24 Utah 17
The Ducks are an overrated team and I have no problem going against them with an always
competitive Utes squad that is 22-11 ATS as a road underdog under coach McBride,
including 13-1 ATS recently as a road dog of 2 points or more. Oregon, meanwhile, is now
just 8-19 ATS when favored by 9 points or more. I maintained most of last season that
quarterback Joey Harrington was overrated and I stated that again last week. The
Harrington for Heisman campaign is a joke. Harrington completed only 53% of his passes
last season for 7.3 yards per pass while tossing 14 interceptions. While those numbers
are certainly better than average (6.9 ypp is the national average), they are hardly
worthy of such praise. Last week, Harrington completed just 22 of 48 passes for only 5.8
ypp while throwing 2 interceptions. Utah loses all 4 starting defensive backs from a unit
that allowed just 6.1 ypp last season, but McBride has always fielded very good
secondaries. In fact, Utah has not allowed more than 52% completions in any of the last 7
seasons, including a few years when the secondary lost 3 or more starters. Last week,
Utah allowed just 5.4 yards per pass and intercepted 3 passes in their win over Utah
State, indicating that the Utes will be better than average defending the pass once
again. Utah is also good defending the run, as they allowed just 3.2 ypr last season and
should be just as good this year in that department. Oregon's RB Maurice Morris also gets
plenty of press, but he averaged a sub-par 4.2 ypr last season (the national average is
4.5 for running backs) and had just 18 yards on 15 rushes last week. Don't expect too
many points from the Ducks in this one. Oregon also has some trouble spots on defense
that Utah can take advantage of. While the Ducks have one of the nation's best
secondaries, the front 7 is vulnerable. Only 1 of Oregon's defensive front 7 is a
returning starter and the loss of players that accounted for 74% of the Ducks' tackles
for loss are now gone. Teams that lose such a high percentage of impact players on
defense usually struggle early in the season and Oregon qualifies in a negative 36-71 ATS
indicator based on that high percentage of sacks and tackles for loss from players that
have graduated. Wisconsin ran for a healthy 4.9 ypr against the rebuilt Ducks' front 7
last week and McBride will be smart enough to attack the Ducks on the ground with an
offensive line that did not lose a starter to graduation (although G Ta'amu is serving a
suspension). Utah ran behind that experienced line for 213 yards last week and will do a
solid job rushing again this week. I really don't expect much from the Utes' pass attack
against a very good Oregon secondary, but I am fond of defensive solid underdogs that can
run the ball and you should be too.

Pass if Utah becomes an underdog of less than 14 points.

2 Star Selection
RICE (-9.0) 31 Duke 13
The loss of starting quarterback Jeremy Hurd may actually have been a blessing for the
Owls as it allowed sophomore Kyle Herm to lead the offense in last week's 21-14 win at
Houston. Herm had limited action in his freshman campaign and proved to be a good running
quarterback for the option, gaining 136 rushing yards at 6.5 yards per rush. Herm ran for
108 yards on 18 carries last week, solidifying his spot as the starter. Herm appears to
be the best fit to run the ball with, but he has had problems throwing it and managed
only 16 yards in 8 passes last week. That should not be a problem when Rice faces teams
that can't defend the run very well. Last week, the Owls ran for 354 yards at a healthy
5.1 ypr behind an offensive line with returning starters at every position. Running for
that many yards on grass against a Houston defense that allowed only 3.4 ypr last year is
a good indication of things to come. Option teams usually perform better when playing on
the same surface that they play on at home since a different surface can affect the
timing of their offense. Rice plays on artificial turf at home and they are 21-10-1 ATS
on the fake stuff the last few years while going just 10-18 ATS on natural grass under
coach Hatfield. Now, Rice comes home to face a Duke team that surrendered 4.6 ypr last
season and gave up 200 rushing yards at 5.3 ypr to Florida State last week. While the
Blue Devils should be better defending the run this year, I still rate them as worse than
average and don't see them handling the option very well. A horrible Wake Forest offense
ran some option against Duke last season and the Blue Devils surrendered 244 rushing
yards at 5.1 ypr and 28 points to a Demon Deacons squad that averaged only 3.6 ypr and 16
points for the season. I forecast Rice to rack up over 350 rushing yards again today.
Duke's offense will be unable to keep up against a solid Rice defense that is better than
average against both the run and the pass with 8 returning starters coming back to a unit
that was solid a year ago (Rice allowed 29 points per game but faced great offensive
teams Michigan, Oklahoma, San Jose State, Fresno State, TCU and UTEP last season). Duke's
offense should be better than last year's unit that averaged just 14 points but they
still look pretty bad this year even with 8 returning starters. Rice qualifies in a 55-17-
1 ATS statistical indicator I see no reason not to ride that angle for a Best Bet since
that indicator plays on good rushing teams facing teams that statistically don't stop the
run well. That is certainly the case here.

Strong Opinion
Indiana 28 NO CAROLINA ST. (-6.5) 27
In last year's opener, the Hoosiers led the Wolfpack by 12 points with 5 minutes left but
could not hold the lead and lost by 3 points, one of 4 losses by 7 points or less during
their disappointing 3-8 season. Indiana had no trouble scoring (31 ppg), they just
couldn't stop teams from scoring more (39 ppg allowed). The big news in Bloomington is
the switch of exciting 3 year starting quarterback Antwaan Randle El to wide receiver.
Randle El ran for 1270 yards at 5.8 ypr but had a bad year throwing the football,
completing only 48% of his passes. Junior Tommy Jones steps in to play quarterback and
should do at least as well throwing the football. You might think that the running stats
would take a hit with the loss of Randle El's 1270 yards and 5.8 ypr, but a great
offensive line returns intact along with super running back Levron Williams (7.0 ypr in 2
seasons) and the running backs as a unit averaged 5.8 ypr last season. Overall, Indiana
should once again be a good offensive team. NC State put up pretty good offensive numbers
themselves last season with freshman quarterback Phillip Rivers and receiver Koren
Robinson doing most of the damage for a unit that averaged 32 points per contest.
Robinson was the #1 draft choice of the Seattle Seahawks and he will be sorely missed
after hauling in 1218 yards and scoring 14 touchdowns. Also missed will be offensive
coordinator Norm Chow, who transformed the offense in his one year here in Raleigh. While
Rivers should be better in his sophomore season, I really don't see him having much
better numbers without Robinson to throw to. Rivers was also aided last year with a
schedule of opponents that couldn't stop the pass. Rivers averaged a solid 7.0 yards per
pass, but NC State's opponents combined to allow an average of 7.6 yards per pass, so the
Wolfpack actually had a below average pass attack last year. The only team that NC State
faced that was better than average defending the pass was Florida State and Rivers threw
for only 5.5 ypp in that game. Indiana allowed a horrid 8.0 yards per pass last season
after losing 2 starters in the pre-season, but they will much improved in that area,
although still below average, this season with 3 of 4 starters returning and an upgrade
in talent. The Hoosiers will certainly improve upon the 4.7 ypr that they allowed last
season and I expect NC State to mount an average rush attack in this game after running
for only 3.3 ypr last season as they appear improved along the offensive line. While NC
State will have a decent offensive performance in this game, I will call for the Hoosiers
to control matters with their offense against a solid Wolfpack defense that will improve
on the mediocre 5.1 yards per play that they surrendered last season. NC State's strength
on that unit was defending the pass, but they were susceptible to good running teams last
year and allowed Indiana to rush for 236 yards at 5.4 ypr in last year's meeting.
Indiana's 16 returning starters have been focused on this revenge game all summer long
and teams with that many returning starters usually get their revenge in their opener. In
fact, Indiana qualifies in a 40-15 ATS game 1 revenge situation and they are capable of
the upset tonight.

Strong Opinion
TEXAS (-22.0) 35 North Carolina 7
Carolina scored on a 77 yard run early in the first quarter at Maryland last week but
gained just 276 total yards for the entire game in their 7-23 loss. The lack of offense
and a -3 in turnover margin masked another very good defensive effort by the Tarheels'
defense, who allowed just 246 total yards to the Terps after yielding just 286 yards to
Oklahoma the week before. The Tarheels have out-gained their two opponents by an average
of 283 yards to 267 yards per game, but are -7 in turnover margin. I doubt that Carolina
will even come close to out-gaining the Longhorns in this game and I see them getting
beaten soundly even if turnovers are not a problem for them (they were also -12 in
turnover margin last season). Texas didn't look too good on offense in last week's 41-7
win over New Mexico State, averaging just 4.8 yards per play, but the Longhorns have
plenty of firepower and I expect a better performance from that unit today. Texas
averaged in impressive 5.9 yards per play on offense last season and return 9 of 11
starters from that side of the ball and will be even better this year with Chris Simms as
the undisputed starting quarterback. North Carolina does have a very good defense and
they are especially tough to run on, but I don't see them keeping Texas from moving the
ball through the air. The Tarheels actually have an above average secondary, but they
allowed good passing teams Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Pittsburgh to average
10.1 yards per pass against them last season. Simms averaged 8.7 yards per pass last
season and should have a very effective outing today. North Carolina, meanwhile, will
have few chances to score against a Texas defense that rates among the best in the
nation. The 'Horns allowed just 2.7 ypr and 5.6 ypp last season and return 8 starters to
the defense and should be even better this season. North Carolina has a poor rushing
attack and throwing into the Texas secondary will only lead to trouble as Texas picked
off 18 passes last year and returned 5 of them for touchdowns. Texas has the best
secondary in the nation and Ronald Curry has not proven capable of consistently beating
any team through the air. Texas has covered 6 straight home games when not laying 27
points or more and this looks like a game that will add to that tally.

Strong Opinion
Georgia Tech (-24.0) 38 NAVY 7
Georgia Tech has whipped the Middies the last two years, 40-13 at home last year and 49-
14 here in Annapolis in '99. Navy's once great rush attack (284 yards per game at 5.2 ypr
from '96 through '99) has disappeared. Last year, the Midshipmen averaged just 178 yards
at 3.6 ypr and last week managed only 49 yards on 31 rushes in their 19 point loss at
Temple. The pre-season injury to great running quarterback Brian Madden hurt them last
year and Madden is expected to be out again this week due to a suspension. Starting
quarterback Ed Malinowski is a better throwing quarterback than Madden, but Malinowski
averaged just 2.0 ypr last year and had just 3 yards rushing last week. By contrast,
Madden ran for 961 yards at 5.3 ypr in just 5 starts in '99. Without Madden in the lineup
and with 4 new starters on the offensive line, I don't see Navy having any success
running against a very good Georgia Tech front 7 that allowed just 2.7 ypr last year and
held the Syracuse option to just 59 yards rushing on 26 carries two weeks ago (and
allowed just 70 yards on 34 rushes last week to the Citadel). Malinowski, while better
than Manning throwing the ball, is still a below average passer and I just don't think
he'll be able to beat a sound Yellow Jackets' secondary through the air. Georgia Tech has
held both of their opponents to 7 points and that's about all Navy will muster today. The
Yellow Jackets' offense struggled a bit in their first game without former offensive
coordinator Ralph Friedgen, but that was against a very good Syracuse defense. The
offense looked great in scoring 28 first half points last week and quarterback George
Godsey is now averaging 10.6 yards per pass with zero interceptions in two games and
ought to have another big day throwing into a poor Navy secondary that surrendered 8.8
yards per pass last season. The Middies are stronger in the secondary this year, but I
still rate them considerably below average and they will have no answer for Godsey. Navy
does stop the run pretty well and Georgia Tech still has not established a good rushing
attack (3.0 ypr in 2 games), but they will convert on most of their 3rd down passes and
move the ball even without the benefit of a good rush attack. Navy is just 5-18 ATS as a
home underdog of more than 3 points over the years and Georgia Tech should administer
another beating today even if they are peeking ahead towards next week's showdown with
Florida State.

Strong Opinion
Fresno St. 27 WISCONSIN (-4.0) 24
Fresno State is for real. A narrow win at Colorado and a 44-24 whipping of highly ranked
Oregon State have the Bulldogs believing in themselves and I'll call for another upset
win this week here in Madison. The Bulldogs are led by future NFL quarterback David Carr,
who has thrown for 538 yards in two games at 7.7 yards per pass with zero interceptions
against two very good defensive backfields. Wisconsin has a good secondary as well and
they held Oregon's Joey Harrington to just 5.8 yards per pass last week. However, Carr is
better than Harrington and should put up pretty decent numbers again this week after
beating one of the nation's best secondaries for 340 yards on just 34 tosses last week.
While Carr gets the press, it is the Bulldogs' defense that is the key here. Fresno State
has limited two explosive offensive teams to just 368 total yards per game at 1.5 ypr and
7.4 ypp. Leading Heisman Trophy candidate Ken Simonton from Oregon State had just 42
yards on 15 carries against the Bulldogs last week and Fresno is quite capable of
shutting down Wisconsin's rush attack as well. The 7.4 yards per pass that Fresno has
allowed is also very good when you consider that Colorado quarterback Ochs and Oregon
State quarterback Smith will both average around 8 yards per pass this season. Fresno
returned all 4 starters to a secondary that yielded just 6.2 yards per pass last year, so
there is no question that the 'Dogs can stop the pass. Wisconsin's Jim Sorgi has once
again done a good job filling in for injured starter Brooks Bollinger and Sorgi is
capable of putting up decent numbers in this game. However, the Badgers are a running
team and Fresno will not make it easy to move the ball on the ground. Fresno's offense
won't have much of a rush attack either, but Carr should move the ball through the air
well enough to get the Bulldogs into the end zone a few times. Fresno has not been a
great road team in recent years (5-17-1 ATS when not getting at least 12 points, but 1-0
this year), but the Bulldogs qualify in a 161-95-4 ATS early season indicator that has
worked well for me over the years.

Strong Opinion
MIDDLE TENN (-13.5) 41 Troy State 21
Middle Tennessee racked up 300 rushing yards and 308 passing yards in their 37-28 win at
Vanderbilt last week and they should rack up more huge chunks of yardage this week if
they can avoid the letdown after their big win over and SEC school. The Blue Raiders were
just as potent last year on offense and they should have good success against a Troy
State defense that was very good by Division 1AA standards, but will be below par in
Division 1A. The Troy State offense will be well below average in Division 1A ball and
they don't appear capable of taking full advantage of a soft Middle Tennessee defense
that allowed Vanderbilt to roll up 477 yards last week. MTS qualifies in a 55-17-1 ATS
early season momentum situation, so I will consider them a strong opinion in this game
based on that angle.

Strong Opinion
TCU (-12.0) 13 SMU 7
The Mustangs lost 6-36 at Louisiana Tech last week, but that was a VERY misleading final
and gives us plenty of line value on them this week. SMU's solid defense held Tech to
just 245 total yards, but two defensive touchdowns by the Bulldogs and a third TD set up
by another Mustangs' miscue led to 21 gift points. While the defense was as good as
expected, the offense was horrible. SMU was expected to be better offensively this year
with 8 returning starters on that side of the ball, but the Mustangs averaged a pathetic
3.3 yards per play against a soft Louisiana Tech defense. I do expect a better offensive
performance from SMU this year, but they will not be good enough to score much against a
TCU defense that is playing better than last year's outstanding unit. TCU opened the
season by limiting a powerful Nebraska offense to just 21 points on 310 total yards and
then shut down North Texas last week, holding them to just 129 yards and a lone field
goal. TCU's offense has gone from great to poor without star RB Tomlinson and the loss of
4 starting offensive lineman. The Horned Frogs were held to 186 total yards by Nebraska,
which certainly can be forgiven. But, TCU could tally just 198 total yards against a
North Texas defense that is not as good as SMU's stop unit. This ought to be a very low
scoring game and the points look worth taking.

Strong Opinion
GEORGIA 24 South Carolina (-2.0) 19
Last year, I pegged South Carolina to upset Georgia as a 10 point home underdog a week
after the Gamecocks broke a 21 game losing streak. A 21-10 win ensued and I rode the Lou
Holtz' team to a number of Best Bet wins as they remained underrated all season long.
Last week, I used South Carolina as a 2-Star Best Bet and 2 missed extra points (one
kicking and one two-pointer attempt) and a late Boise touchdown cost me the win in that
game. Now, it looks like all the value in taking South Carolina has ended as they went
from an opening 3 point underdog in this game to a 2 point favorite despite numerous
injuries. My ratings show that Georgia by 3 is exactly what the line should be and I'm
favoring Georgia to win by even more due to those Carolina injuries and a 102-42-4 ATS
home momentum situation favoring Georgia in this game. These two teams are eerily similar
on both sides of the ball, with South Carolina being a better running team and Georgia
perhaps a better passing team with young David Greene completing 21 of 29 passes for 285
yards in his debut, rewarding coach Richt's choice to start him over the more experienced
Cory Phillips. Defensively, both teams are very good defending the run and extremely good
against the pass. South Carolina is no longer a pointspread value, so I will side with a
vengeful Georgia team in a good situation. Also, the Gamecocks were 0-3 straight up on
the road against good teams last year, losing at Alabama, Florida, and Clemson. They also
barely beat a weak Kentucky team 20-17 on the road last year. The fact that Bulldogs QB
Greene is so inexperienced is the only reason I'm not taking Georgia as a Best Bet in
this game.

Strong Opinion
ARIZONA ST. (-7.0) 21 San Diego St. 20
The Sun Devils' new offense will get a stiff test against a veteran San Diego State
defense that held Arizona to just 231 total yards last week. The Aztecs are very good
defending both the run and the pass and I expect Arizona State to be just average
offensively across the board this year, at least until they get comfortable with the new
offense. San Diego State's offense had the unenviable task of dealing with a dominating
Arizona defense and they could manage just 201 yards and 10 points in their loss to the
Wildcats. San Diego State doesn't have much of a running attack, but quarterback Lon
Sheriff averaged 7.5 yards per pass last year and returns his entire offense with him
this year. Sheriff should put up pretty decent numbers against a good, but not great ASU
secondary and the running game could contribute for once since the Devils should be just
average defending the run. It's tough to know exactly how the Sun Devils will perform in
new coach Koettner's offense, but I do know that San Diego State has a great defense and
taking points with them looks like a solid play, especially after their disappointing 10-
23 loss to Arizona in which the Wildcats returned a fumble for a touchdown. San Diego
State has 20 returning starters and teams with an abundance of veteran starters usually
bounce back from a sub-par opening game performance, especially in the underdog role.

Strong Opinion
VIRGINIA TECH (-15.0) 28 Western Mich 10
The Hokies are now without their two biggest offensive weapons from a year ago, #1 draft
pick QB Michael Vick and future NFL draft pick RB Lee Suggs, who was injured last week
and is out for the season. Hokies fans need not panic. Grant Noel did an excellent job in
his first start last week, completing 16 of 20 passes for 267 yards and 3 touchdowns and
appears to be a lot more accurate than Vick was (54% last year). I also don't think the
rushing attack will drop off much with Keith Burnell getting the load of the work.
Burnell is just as fast as Suggs and has averaged nearly 7 yards per carry in his 27
carries the last two seasons, including 9 for 71 yards last week. Virginia Tech averaged
5.2 yards per rush last year with Vick and Suggs as their top two rushers. Aside from
those two, the rest of the Hokies' backs averaged 4.85 ypr, so the rush attack will still
be good this season. Western Michigan will put up some resistance as they are a very good
defensive team. The Broncos allowed just 2.7 ypr and 6.2 ypp last year and performed well
outside of the MAC, limiting Wisconsin and Iowa to an average of 20 points (they also
allowed just 14 points to Toledo). Western Michigan will be just as tough defensively
this year, although not quite as good against the rush with the loss of two outstanding
linebackers (the secondary will be better though). My ratings still forecast 28 points
for the Hokies as they should run for over 4 yards per rush and throw for close to 7
yards per pass. Western Michigan's offense returns QB Jeff Welsh (7.2 ypp last year), but
only 4 other offensive starters return and Welsh will not have a running attack to
support him in this game. Virginia Tech also has one of the nation's top secondaries and
I don't see Welsh doing too much damage in the air. The line has been adjusted down due
to the injury to Suggs, but I don't see that as being too much of a factor so I will use
the line value and lean with the Hokies, who are 18-8-1 ATS at home when not laying 30
points or more. The Under is worth a look here.

Strong Opinion
Tennessee (-13.0) 20 ARKANSAS 7
This is a lot of points to be giving in what should be a game dominated by the defenses.
The Vols looked impressive on the scoreboard in last week's 33-9 win over Syracuse but
Tennessee's offense struggled against a solid Syracuse stop unit. The Volunteers ran the
ball better than I expected last week (197 yards at 5.1 ypr), but they had trouble
throwing into a good Syracuse secondary and Clausen completed just over 50% of his passes
for an average of just 5.0 yards per pass. I expect Tennessee to be able to run the ball
pretty well again this week against a mediocre Arkansas defensive front that allowed UNLV
to rush for 258 yards at 4.8 ypr. However, Clausen's difficulties should continue as well
against a Hogs secondary that is among the very best in the nation. Arkansas allowed just
6.0 yards per pass last season against good competition and return all 4 starters to
their secondary. Last week the Razorbacks limited UNLV's star quarterback Jason Thomas to
4 of 16 passing for just 40 aerial yards with 3 interceptions (Thomas averaged 8.8 ypp
last year and over 11 yards per pass against Arkansas in Vegas Bowl last December).
Tennessee will not be able to move the ball consistently without a good pass attack and I
don't see them scoring much more than 20 points, if that. Tennessee is also very good
defensively and the defend both the run and pass equally well. Stopping the run is the
key for the Vols in this game since Arkansas only has one quarterback that can throw and
he is unable to play. Last year, Robbie Hampton got most of the playing time despite some
nagging injuries and he averaged just 5.8 yards per pass. The other quarterbacks combined
to average a pathetic 4.0 yards per pass in 91 attempts while tossing 7 interceptions.
Last week, with Hampton not available, Zak Clark and Ryan Sorahan combined to go 10 of 32
passing for just 89 yards (2.8 ypp). Without a pass attack, it will be up to talented
backs Talley and Cobbs to carry the offense. However, Tennessee allowed just 2.8 ypr last
season and appears to be even better this year, holding a pretty good Syracuse rush
attack to just 1.8 yards per rush last week. The Arkansas backs combined for just 50
yards on 22 carries last week against a UNLV defense that stacked the line to stop the
run, knowing that Arkansas could not beat them in the air. Tennessee can do the same
thing today and the Razorbacks will have trouble scoring. I'd stay away from the side in
this one, but the UNDER looks appealing.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Your subsciption to this package ends on 31-Jan-02.


Here is the EOL information

Dutch

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Arnold, John
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 5:21 PM
To:	Quigley, Dutch
Subject:	FW: Neural Networks

This guy is working on an EOL project for me right now.  Can you send him a file with our EOL trades for today or yesterday with product, price, buy/sell, and timestamp but counterparty names deleted

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thuraisingham, Ravi
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 4:26 PM
To:	Arnold, John
Subject:	RE: Neural Networks

John, just a reminder, please send a sample gapping data when you get a chance.

Ravi Thuraisingham, CFA
Director, Storage Trading
Enron Broadband Services
p  713.853.3057
c  713.516.5440
pg 877.680.4806
ravi.thuraisingham@enron.com


Ehud,

I am flying back in the evening and dinner would be difficult.
I shall be glad to join you for lunch,

Shirley, as I understand gave you my requirements for the AV.

My flight arrives at 8:30 a.m. I can meet you at your office in the morning
and
we can talk about the conference and other issues.

Vince

"Ehud I. Ronn" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu> on 10/09/2000 09:23:55 AM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Planning for Your Energy Finance Class Presentation Wed., 10/11

Vince,

Good morning.

Further to your forthcoming visit this Wed., I write to clarify last-minute
details:

1.  Your ETA/ETD.  Will you be available to join us for lunch and/or dinner?

2.  Your AV requirements, if any.  Should you need either, we have an
overhead projector as well as laptop capability (either YOUR laptop, or we
can with advance notice reserve a laptop if you bring floppies).

BTW, any developments re Jeff Skilling's 2/22 conference keynote?

Best,
Ehud

==============================================
     Ehud I. Ronn
     Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies
     Department of Finance
     McCombs School of Business
     University of Texas at Austin
     Austin, TX. 78712-1179
     Voice:  (512) 471-5853
      FAX:   (512) 471-5073
      Internet:  eronn@mail.utexas.edu
=================================================


I have a dentist appointment on Tuesday, July 11 at 4:00pm.
I will be leaving the office around 3:15pm.


---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 11/03/2000 04:57
PM ---------------------------

Kay Mann
11/03/2000 04:52 PM
To: jeff.ader@enron.com, heather.kroll@enron.com
cc:

Subject: FCEL consent to disclosure letter

As requested, I went the abbreviated route.

Kay


Return-Path: <Alex.Huang@enron.com>
Received: from  rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (rly-yc05.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.37])
by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:37:46
-0500
Received: from  postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by
rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2001 17:37:26 -0400
Received: from mailman.enron.com (mailman.enron.com [192.168.189.66]) by
postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id VAA28666 for
<vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 21:37:26 GMT
From: Alex.Huang@enron.com
Received: from nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com ([172.28.10.38]) by
mailman.enron.com (8.10.1/8.10.1/corp-1.05) with ESMTP id f36LbPL03926 for
<vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:37:25 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (unverified) by
nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP
id <Tac1c0a265a52c0dd4737@nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com> for
<vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:37:25 -0500
Subject: Free Latex
To: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com, Tom.Halliburton@enron.com
Cc: vkaminski@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:37:22 -0500
Message-ID: <OFBFC248F1.2F0D9C57-ON86256A26.00744A8B@enron.com>
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.6 |December
14, 2000) at 04/06/2001 04:33:32 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)

Go to http://www.winedt.com/, select downloads, and download  WinEdt5 to
your C drive.
On bottom of  the same page (download),  click on MiKTeX's Home Page,
click on MiKTeX 2.0, and download all the highlighted zip files.  You may
also
want to download miktex-2.0-manual.pdf.
You can then unzip all the files and follow the steps outlined in
miktex-2.0-manual.pdf to
install WinEdt and MiKTex.  However, the procedure to "Add MikTex bin
directory to PATH"
may not work. It's best to manually add the following to your path:
C:\texmf\miktex\bin;

This software is quite easy to use and very versatile. You can even include
colored picture in your tex document.

Best,
Alex


[IMAGE]
		[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]	START SHOPPING Baseball Basketball Fitness Golf Outdoor Running Soccer Equipment Fan Shop Footwear Women's Shopping Help Desk
		*Offer Details Offer expires October 12, 2001 at 3:00 PM PST.  This offer cannot be used with any other coupon/promotion. This offer does not apply to shipping, handling and tax.  Active.com reserves the right to terminate or modify the promotion at anytime.  Certain products and brands may not be eligible for this promotion, including but not limited to Nike, Jordan, Callaway, Cleveland Golf, Titleist, Columbia, Pacemaster, Cybex and Odyssey.

If, for any reason, you would prefer not to receive any future e-mail offers from Active.com,
send a blank e-mail to:leave-special-offer-588838X@mail.active.com


How about 2:30?  I'll come to you if that time is okay.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lokey, Teb
Sent:	Wednesday, January 16, 2002 10:14 AM
To:	Corman, Shelley
Subject:	RE: PGS Segmenting Alternate Pt. Priorities

How about tomorrow sometime?

 -----Original Appointment-----
From: 	Corman, Shelley
Sent:	Wednesday, January 16, 2002 10:13 AM
To:	Lokey, Teb
Subject:	Declined: PGS Segmenting Alternate Pt. Priorities
When:	Friday, January 18, 2002 9:30 AM-11:00 AM (GMT-06:00) Central Time (US & Canada).
Where:	EB39C1

Sorry Teb but I have an appointment with the Sinus Dr.  Can we visit in advance of your meeting?


John and Louise -- Nationwide RTO information is now on the East Power web site:

http://eastpower.dev.corp.enron.com/portal/
(under RTO Regulation Module (access and add through the Content page).

and on the West Power web site.

 These summaries will be updated bi-weekly and are also accessible to Rogers Herndon and Don Black's EES trading groups.


Shelley,  here is a copy of the UAF sub-committee findings and recommendations.   This is the committee I was on for a year.    I really believe this is a good document with a lot of valuable data but it is very large.   MIPS was the GMS system when this was written so many of the reports were MIPs generated.     They are working on reports for PGAS using "Business Objects" and Jodie and I will be receiving some one on one training tomorrow afternoon.

Tks - Mike W.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Baker, Robert
Sent:	Tuesday, March 05, 2002 9:39 AM
To:	Wagoner, Michael
Subject:	Measurement Continuous Improvement - UAF Report

Mike, all I have in electronic format is the UAF portion of the report. I couldn't find anything on PPA's.

Baker


<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<META NAME="ProgId" CONTENT="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<TITLE> U.S. Transmission Industry Report</TITLE>

Energy
        Info Source's U.S. Transmission Report is a 550-page, 4 part report which provides all you need to know about
        the fast ch!
anging transmission industry. The report takes a wide-ranging
        look at changes in the structure
        of the business, assesses current and projected reliability
        issues, examines how transmission is effecting bulk power markets, and analyzes the FERC-mandated RTO filings.</o:p>

        Now in its 15th year of publication,
        Wheeling & Transmission Monthly is the only source of comprehensive
        information on transmis!
sion and bulk power filings at the FERC. Every
        filing at FERC during the past month is summarized, complete with docket
        number for pulling the entire file. The most important filings are
        featured in "Bulk Power Highlights." WTM also covers the key
        decisions at FERC, and stories at the Regional Transmission
        Organizations and Independent System Operators. It is a continuing
        update to your U.S. Transmission Industry Report. Normally $345, it is
        FREE with your order of the U.S. Transmission Report. Delivered in pdf
        format by email. Published by the Power Marketing Association.

Click
        Here to Download Ordering Information, a Complete Table of Cont!
ents and
        a Free Issue of Wheeling & Transmission Monthly

The
            History of Transmission
            in the U. S.

The
            Impact of FERC Orders 888
            and 889

FERC's
            Push Toward RTOs through the Merger
            Approval Process <o:p>
            </o:p>

Discussion
            of the Creation of TransCos
            <o:p>
            </o:p>

Detailed
            Analysis of FERC Order 2000
            <o:p>
            </o:p>

D!
etailed
            Discussion, Analysis, and Comparison of October 15 RTO Filings --
            including Innovative Rate
            Treatments <o:p>
            </o:p>

Discussion
            of Current ISOs and Projections on their Jan.
            15 RTO Filings <o:p>
            </o:p>

Listing
            of FERC Dockets  and Policy
            Statements  Regarding RTOs <o:p>
            </o:p>

Maps
            of Proposed TransC0 and RT0 Territories

<o:p>
        </o:p>

Review
            of NERC's 2000 Reliability
            Assessment <o:p>
            </o:p>

Review
            of FERC Investigation of Bulk
            Power  Markets <o:p>
            </o:p>

Discussion
            of California's Wholesale
            Market Problems <o:p>
            </o:p>

Analysis
            of Pricing Trends and Price
            Caps  in ISOs <o:p>
            </o:p>

FERC
            Action On October 15th RTO
            Filings <o:p>
            </o:p>

Detailed
            Discussion, Analysis, and Comparison of January
            15 RTO Filings <o:p>
            </o:p>

Tables
            of Regional Demand and Capacity

Analysis
            of FERC Conditional Approval of GridSouth
            TransCo <o:p>
            </o:p>

GridSouth?s
            Request for Clarification on FERC Order <o:p>
            </o:p>

Analysis
            of FERC Conditional Approval of GridFlorida
            TransCo <o:p>
            </o:p>

Analysis
        !
    of FERC Rejection of Southern Company?s SeTrans
            GridCo <o:p>
            </o:p>

Analysis
            of FERC Directed Changes to Southwestern
            Power Pool/Entergy Hybrid RTO  Proposal <o:p>
            </o:p>

Update
            on Alliance and Midwest ISO Settlement <o:p>
            </o:p>

Analysis
            of FERC Conditional Approval of RTO
            West

History of
             FERC RTO
  Activities <o:p>

Analysis of
             Southeastern RTO Mediation
  Report

Analysis of
             Northeastern RTO  Mediation
  Report <o:p>
  </o:p>

Update on RTOs -
             Alliance and Midwest <o:p>
  </o:p>

Update on
             TransCos - ITC, TransLink, and
  WestConnect<o:p>

Click
        Here to Download Ordering Information, a Complete Table of Contents and
        a Free Issue of Wheeling & Transmission Monthly

  <!
/CENTER>


Betty,

Hello.  I'm fnally back in Houston for good.  I've been trying to contact you
for a while.  I hope you've gotten the e-mails that I sent.  Please call me
at home 713-528-1997, cellphone at 713-870-8211, or email me back.

Look forward to talking to you,

Errol


The following deals are being disputed by Reliant Energy Services. TAGG is
showing these deals as Gas Daily, but the counterparty states that they
should be changed to Nymex trades. They also stated that they were told by
Mike Maggi that the deals would be changed to Nymex deals:


From http://www.enerfax.com :

AGA Natural Gas Storage Report

            Week                                    Prev
           Ending    Prev                   Prev    Year
| Region | 1/11/02| Week | Diff | % Full | Year | % Full|
| Prod   |  733    |  777 | -44  |  78%   |  343 |  35%  |
| East   | 1396    | 1482 | -86  |  76%   |  880 |  46%  |
| West   |  400    |  407 |  -7  |  79%   |  236 |  47%  |

| Total  | 2529    | 2666 |-137  |  77%   | 1459 |  44%  |

From http://powermarketers.com :

FERC Gives OK to North BajaPipeline
Jan. 16 -- The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission gave final approval on Wednesday to the U.S.segment of the North Baja Pipeline project that will bring natural gas from Mexicoto fuel electric generating plants in southern Californiaand northern Mexico. The $230 million pipeline will be operated by an international subsidiary of Sempra Energy , PG&E Corp. and Mexico-based Proxima Gas S.A. de C.V. The 215-mile pipeline (346-km) would carry up to 500 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. FERC gave final approval for the project after determining the pipeline would not harm the environment.
For more details see the LA Times article at:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-000004310jan17.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dbusiness .

From the AnchorageDaily News:

Universityof HoustonStudy Favors Phased Development of Northern Frontier Gas
An energy consultant who grew up in Alaska believes the least risky way to tap the North Slope's huge natural gas reserves is to do so in stages, running multiple pipelines across the Canadian Arctic during the next 16 years.
Ron Oligney, director of engineering research development at the Universityof Houston, said Tuesday that smaller pipelines built every few years would reduce the huge costs and risks that would come with a single, larger pipeline to the Lower 48.
He and colleague Jim Longbottom of the Universityof Houstonrecently completed a study on Alaskaand northwest Canadagas development. The university and private clients paid for the study, he said. On Tuesday, Oligney presented the findings to members of the Society of Petroleum Engineers and the International Association of Energy Economics at the AtwoodBuildingin downtown Anchorage.
For the whole story go to:
http://www.adn.com/business/story/750563p-802532c.html

Bob Brooks
GPCM Natural Gas Market Forecasting Systemhttp://gpcm.rbac.com


This is what has been suggested for future brown bags:

How hedges work (physical deals)/Why we book term deals in two systems
Curve mappings
How physical deals flow through our systems
What the financial desk does
	(EFP posting, Brokered deals, etc.)
Curves, how they are set, how deals value against them (MTM)
Overview of Power/Weather/Coal      (I vote for Phillip for this one)


Marie,
	Goldman needs an updated QIB letter from ECT Investments.  We normally update every year.  They need this doc before transferring the convert book.  I left a message with Sara since I've worked with her in the past on processing this type of documentation.  Please give her a call if you have any questions regarding the QIB (qualified investor buyer) form.

Thanks,
Theresa

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Arens, Joseph" <Joseph.Arens@gs.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:23 PM
To:	Brogan, Theresa T.
Subject:

Theresa,
our legal area was able to track down the QIB "form letter" you were looking
for.
Let me know if you have any questions

Joe

 <<Qib_.dot>>

> 	Joseph Arens
> 	Goldman, Sachs & Co.
> 	1 New York Plaza
> 	New York, NY 10004
> 	Tel: (212) 357-4390
> 	Fax: (212) 428-3555
>                 Email: joseph.arens@gs.com
>

 - Qib_.dot


- PUC cover letter1.doc
 - RTP support letter.doc
 - certification of service1.doc


FYI,

Please, check with Shirley.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/20/2001
08:27 AM ---------------------------

"Connie Tadesse" <connie@fea.com> on 03/19/2001 06:20:56 PM
Please respond to <connie@fea.com>
To: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc: <accounting@fea.com>
Subject: Payment Reminder

Dear Vince,

Our record indicates that payment for invoice number 2001-M608 in the amount
of $5,700.- has not been received.  Please send your payment at your
earliest convenience.  Your timely attention to this matter will be greatly
appreciated.  If you have any questions or need further information, please
feel free to contact us.

Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,
Connie Tadesse
Accounting Manager
Financial Engineering Associates., Inc
Telephone Number 510-549-8702, ext 104
Fax Number 510-548-0332