=DJ Enron Turns Internal Credit-Risk Tool Into New Product
Dow Jones, 04/04/01

Duke, Enron Get 1st-Qtr Profit Boost From California: Outlook
Bloomberg, 04/04/01

Edison, PG&E File to End Williams's Open-Market Sales (Update1)
Bloomberg, 04/04/01

Enron Europe Pres Sees NETA Boosting Trade Volumes
Dow Jones News Service, 04/04/01

CANADA: Enron calls on Ontario to open power market quickly.
Reuters English News Service, 04/04/01

BG Group: UK Court Rules In Favor Of Co Against Enron Unit
Dow Jones International News, 04/04/01

GERMANY: Enron starts online quotes for German gas market.
Reuters English News Service, 04/04/01

BG to get back 51 mln stg as House of Lords finds against Enron's Teesside Gas
AFX News, 04/04/01

Utilities' merger faces challenge
The Oregonian, 04/04/01

Wholesale market bright for PGE
The Oregonian, 04/04/01

=DJ Enron Turns Internal Credit-Risk Tool Into New Product
2001-04-04 17:19 (New York)

   By Christina Cheddar
   Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

  NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--With the number of corporate bankruptcies on the rise,
knowing the creditworthiness of one's customers is becoming more and more
important.
  For Enron Corp. (ENE), the world's largest energy trading company, keeping
track of credit risk has always been part of doing business. That became even
more true with the company's launch of EnronOnline, its Internet-based
commodities trading network.
  In order to deal with the accelerated volume and speed of transactions on
EnronOnline, the company developed a tool to help its own commercial traders
manage the credit risk.
  Early last year, Enron rolled out this tool, Enron Credit, on a limited
basis. Gradually, the company expanded its use and scope. Last month, the
company re-launched Enron Credit in its current format.
  Enron Credit tracks more than 10,000 companies, giving each a rating known
as
the "Enron cost of credit." The rating is expressed as an interest rate.
  The Web site also provides news, a company's expected chance of bankruptcy
and other related information.
  While much of this information is free to registered users, Enron also has
turned the product into a new revenue stream.
  Users may download data into a spreadsheet and receive periodic updates for
a
fee.
  The site also can sell a user a "digital bankruptcy swap," which is a way to
hedge against credit exposure.
  The price of the swap is determined by a rating Enron's staff assigns to a
company and the amount of credit exposure a company needs to protect against.
  For a supplier, the main advantage of a swap is that if a customer is unable
to pay due to bankruptcy, the supplier will be paid immediately.
  According to Enron Europe President John Sherriff, the goal of Enron Credit
is to create a more efficient credit market by increasing trading liquidity.
  The tool is important because "in just a short amount of time, a company's
credit can go from stellar to bad literally overnight."
  At present, some analysts haven't factored in revenue from Enron Credit into
their earnings models. However, as the commodity markets Enron trades in
mature, it is possible the need for products such as Enron Credit could
increase.
  -By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166;

Duke, Enron Get 1st-Qtr Profit Boost From California: Outlook
2001-04-04 17:21 (New York)

Duke, Enron Get 1st-Qtr Profit Boost From California: Outlook

     Houston, April 4 (Bloomberg) -- Duke Energy Corp., Enron
Corp. and other power sellers continued to reap the benefits of
California's electricity shortage in the first quarter, with some
bringing in record profits, analysts said.
     Duke, which owns generation in California that can light more
than 3 million homes, had an 18 percent increase in per-share
profit, forecasters say. Earnings at Enron, which sells
electricity and natural gas in California and helps companies
protect themselves from the risks of energy price movements, rose
about 13 percent, analysts estimated.
     Jeffrey Skilling, chief executive of Houston-based Enron,
said demand is rising for the Houston-based company's business of
helping companies cut energy costs by reducing consumption and
finding lower-priced suppliers.
     ``We're seeing the positive effect of the chaos going on out
in California,'' Skilling told investors in March.
     California officials and consumers have criticized energy
suppliers for profiting from their crisis.
     Power prices in the state averaged nine times higher in the
quarter than a year earlier because a shortage of power plants
limited supplies, and generators demanded higher payments to
offset the risk of selling to the state's near-bankrupt utilities.
     Most of the big suppliers sell electricity worldwide and
insist California is a small part of total sales. Dynegy Inc.,
which for example, has said California power sales accounted for
about 15 percent of last year's profit in marketing and trading.

                           Higher Prices

     Dynegy said on Monday that first-quarter profit rose to 40
cents a share from 26 cents a year earlier because of increased
demand and higher energy prices. The Houston-based company was
expected to earn 31 cents.
     San Jose, California-based Calpine Corp. said Thursday it
earned almost twice as much as it had forecast to analysts in the
quarter, helped by sales in California. Calpine said it made 20
cents to 25 cents a share, about three times as much as it earned
a year earlier.
     Atlanta-based Mirant Corp. said March 14 it would earn 46
cents to 48 cents a share in the quarter, more than twice as much
as expected, because of gains in its natural gas and electricity
business in the U.S. West.
     Avista Corp., which also sells energy in the western U.S.,
said in March it would earn 33 cents to 35 cents a share in the
quarter, more than the 30-cent average estimate of analysts polled
by First Call/Thomson Financial.
     Enron said in March it expected to earn $1.70 to $1.75 this
year, but wouldn't break out first-quarter estimates. First Call
estimates are that Enron will make 45 cents a share, up from 40
cents a year earlier.

                         Seeking Payments

     Enron's shares fell 30 percent in the quarter, partly on
concern about debts owed by customers in California. Investors
questioned whether Enron and others would be paid for power and
gas they delivered to the utilities owned by PG&E Corp. and Edison
International.
     The utilities have more than $14 billion in debt because
regulators wouldn't allow them to pass on all of soaring power-
buying costs to consumers. Prices jumped as high as $3,000 a
megawatt-hour in December -- about 100 times normal levels --
because of the power shortage, cold weather and high natural-gas
prices.
     California regulators approved a $4.8 billion annual rate
increase on March 27 to help PG&E and Edison pay the bills. The
rise isn't expected to cover all the power-buying costs. PG&E and
Edison have delayed reporting fourth-quarter earnings because of
their financial problems and haven't said when they'll report
first-quarter results.
     Several suppliers agreed during the first quarter to sell
electricity to California, which is buying on behalf of nearly
bankrupt PG&E and Edison. The contracts' average price is less
than half the average price utilities paid last year, but more
than double the average price in 1999.
     In the fourth quarter, power suppliers, including Duke and
Reliant, set aside money for bills they might not be able to
collect from California customers. Duke offered in March to take
less money if given guarantees of payment for the power it sold.

                           Summer Boost

     California could endure blackouts this summer if more
generation isn't built quickly.  Generators may see even bigger
profits then than in the winter, analysts said.
     Harvey Padewer, president of Duke's energy-services division,
said the summer shortage could total as many as 10,000 megawatts,
enough to light 10 million homes.
     Water reservoirs in the Pacific Northwest, which fuel
hydroelectric power plants that supply California, will be at
their lowest levels in history going into the summer, Skilling
said. That's because the water was used to produce power in
January, when it's not normally needed, to avert blackouts.
     That puts the summer burden primarily on gas-fired plants.
Gas prices skyrocketed last year because of increased demand for
the power-plant fuel.
     ``If we have a warm summer this summer, I think natural gas
has a lot of escalation left to do,'' Skilling said in a recent
speech in Dallas.
     The power shortage in California, the most populous state,
may impact energy prices across the country, analysts said.
     ``There are going to be good earnings for people who have
plants across the country and for people marketing gas across the
country,'' Salomon Smith Barney analyst Raymond Niles said.

Company                  1st-Qtr        Year-ago       Number of
                         Estimate       EPS            analysts

AES Corp.                $0.43          $0.42          6
Avista Corp.+**          $0.30-$0.35    $0.20          2
Calpine Corp.**          $0.20-$0.25    $0.07
Duke Energy Corp.        $0.58          $0.49          4
Dynegy Inc.**            $0.40          $0.26
Edison International     N/A            $0.32          N/A
Enron Corp.              $0.45          $0.40          13
Mirant Corp.**           $0.46-$0.48    $0.28
PG&E Corp.               N/A            $0.78          N/A Reliant
Energy Inc.      $0.66          $0.47          1
Sempra Energy            $0.49          $0.49          3
Williams Cos.**          $0.65-$0.75    $0.30

Estimates based on surveys by First Call/Thomson Financial and
IBES International Inc. Year-ago numbers supplied by First Call.

+ Numbers from IBES.
** Estimates provided by companies, not by analysts

--Margot Habiby in Dallas, (214) 740-0873 or
mhabiby@bloomberg.net, through the Princeton newsroom (609) 279-
4000/slb/alp

Edison, PG&E File to End Williams's Open-Market Sales (Update1)
2001-04-04 17:14 (New York)

Edison, PG&E File to End Williams's Open-Market Sales (Update1)

     (Adds Williams comment in fourth paragraph. For more on the
California energy crisis, see {EXTRA <GO>}.

     Washington, April 4 (Bloomberg) -- PG&E Corp. and Edison
International, owners of California's two largest utilities, asked
federal regulators to stop Williams Cos. from selling power at
market-based rates in the state.
     PG&E's Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International's
Southern California Edison filed with the U.S. Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission to stop Williams's California power sales at
rates that aren't ``just and reasonable,'' the filing said.
     Tulsa, Oklahoma-based Williams, a natural-gas pipeline
company that's become one of the largest U.S. energy traders, was
licensed to sell power at market rates in California in March
1998. The utilities say Williams and other generators can
manipulate electricity prices.
     Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said she couldn't
comment on whether the company would continue to sell power in
California if it had to do so at prices set by federal regulators.
     The average price of electricity in the California-Oregon
border region rose ninefold last quarter from a year ago,
according to Bloomberg Energy Service statistics.
     Other companies selling power in California include Duke
Energy Corp., Enron Corp., Reliant Energy Inc., Calpine Corp., El
Paso Corp. Mirant Corp. and AES Corp.
     Edison, based in Rosemead, California, and PG&E, based in San
Francisco, have lost more than $14 billion buying power in the
open market at prices that far exceeded what they could charge
customers.
     Williams sells gas to AES Corp., the largest U.S.
power-plant developer, to fuel California generators, and also
sells the power from those plants in the open market.
     Shares of Williams rose 11 cents to $40.26. PG&E rose 12
cents to $11.65, and Edison rose 16 cents to $12.98.

--Mark Johnson in Washington, (202) 624-1849 or
mjohnson7@bloomberg.net, through the Princeton newsroom,
(609) 279-4000/slb/pjm

Enron Europe Pres Sees NETA Boosting Trade Volumes
By Christina Cheddar
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

04/04/2001
Dow Jones News Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Enron Europe President John Sheriff expects the U.K.'s
New Electricity Trading Arrangements, or NETA, to lead to "dramatically"
higher power trading volumes in the second quarter for his company.
NETA, which has been touted as the most far-reaching reform of an electricity
market in the world, went into effect last Tuesday. The system replaces the
previous wholesale power market with a physically settled, bilateral,
day-ahead market that is paired with a continuously traded balancing market.
However, in the first quarter, the flow of transactions in the U.K. was hurt
as companies operating there focused on integrating new computer systems
associated with the new standard.
Now that the system has been implemented, Sheriff told Dow Jones Newswires
that he expects to see a pickup in the flow of transactions.
Sheriff couldn't put a dollar figure on his estimate. He also didn't know
whether the total volume of transactions had risen or declined from the
fourth quarter.
NETA is aimed at creating liquidity to reduce the cost of wholesale power.
An increase in the cost of fuel in the region may place companies that
haven't hedged fuel costs in difficult positions, Sheriff said, explaining
that power prices have fallen, while the cost of fuels used to generate power
has risen.
Enron Europe, a unit of Houston-based Enron Corp. (ENE), is among the largest
buyers and sellers of gas and power in Europe.
In 2000, wholesale natural-gas trading volumes in Europe and other regions
outside North America rose 131% to 3.6 trillion British thermal units per day
from 1999, while power trading volumes jumped 372% to 55 million megawatt
hours.
-By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166;
christina.cheddar@dowjones.com

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

CANADA: Enron calls on Ontario to open power market quickly.
By Scott Anderson

04/04/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

TORONTO, April 4 (Reuters) - Enron Corp. , North America's biggest buyer and
seller of natural gas and electricity, put pressure on the Ontario government
on Wednesday to deregulate the provincial energy market, Canada's biggest, as
quickly as possible.
Ontario has already pushed back its previous deadline of November 2000 by one
year to sort out its deregulation problems and avoid the problems encountered
by California in energy deregulation.
The delays have frustrated potential corporate players.
"We think the right thing for Ontario is to move ahead with this plan, open
the markets and get them working," Kenneth Lay, Enron's chairman, said at a
breakfast speech at the Toronto Board of Trade.
"Let people start building the new power plants and, of course, providing a
lot of the types of services we provide elsewhere."
Lay warned that the longer the government drags its feet on the issue, the
more it places itself at risk of scaring off potential investors.
"The delays continue to create uncertainty and uncertainty tends to
discourage investment," Lay told reporters. "By discouraging investment, as
the market keeps growing, it could be that Ontario is going to have a tough
time keeping up with the needs of the economy."
Enron plans to build a $250-million generating plant near the southwestern
Ontario town of Sarnia, but has delayed the project until Ontario sets a firm
date for deregulation.
Lay said Enron is "committed to Ontario" even though other companies have
said they will move to other jurisdictions if the government does not open up
the market by the fall.
He said Ontario is far better prepared for deregulation than was California.
"I think what California shows is that if you're going to do it, you've got
to do it right. And California did it wrong," he told reporters.
"Increasingly politicians are understanding that. You can't deregulate half
the market, but not the other half. You can't set up a system that does not
allow price signals to be sent to consumers and even after prices go up, you
can't just keep shielding consumers from price signals and get no response."
Power demand from California's industries and 32 million residents has
increased dramatically, but the state has not seen any new generating
capacity added in about 10 years.
The crisis there has been blamed on California's own 1996 power deregulation
law, which required utilities to buy energy on the spot market, where prices
have skyrocketed, but maintained caps on the rates they could charge
consumers.
The problem was then compounded by California's own surging demand, resulting
in the rolling blackouts and voluntary power cutbacks of the past months.

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

BG Group:UK Court Rules In Favor Of Co Against Enron Unit

04/04/2001
Dow Jones International News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

LONDON -(Dow Jones)- BG Group PLC (BRG) said the U.K.'s House of Lords
Wednesday found in favor of its 51.18% owned Central Area Transmission System
(CATS) in a dispute with Teeside Gas Transportation Ltd.
The latest ruling overturns a Court of Appeal decision made in 1999 which
found in favor of Teeside Gas, a unit of Enron Corp (ENE).
The dispute between BG and Teeside Transportation involved a 25-year
capacity, transportation and reservation agreement signed in 1990. A BG
spokeswoman told Dow Jones Newswires Wednesday that Teeside ended its
payments connected to the agreement in February 1995.
The CATS pipeline and terminal system began transporting gas from the North
Sea fields of Everest and Lomond in 1993. It currently handles around 1.7
billion cubic feet a day of natural gas, which represents about 20% of U.K.
gas production, the spokeswoman said.
BG Group said Teeside is now required to repay CATS the money gained
following the 1999 ruling, plus interest. It said its share of the payment
will amount to about GBP34 million, plus interest of approximately GBP17
million.
The other shareholders in CATS are BP Amoco PLC (BP), Amerada Hess Corp.
(AHC), Phillips Petroleum Co. (P), Totalfina Elf (TOT) and Agip SPA (I.AGI).
-By Sarah Turner, Dow Jones Newswires; 44-20-7842-9299;
sarah.turner@dowjones.com -0- 04/04/01 15-16G

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

GERMANY: Enron starts online quotes for German gas market.

04/04/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

FRANKFURT, April 4 (Reuters) - Enron Energie GmbH, the German divison of the
U.S. energy giant , has started quoting German gas prices on its website, it
said on Wednesday.
"We have launched spot gas quotes for the domestic delivery point at
Lampertheim," managing director Andreas Radmacher told Reuters in an
interview.
"This is a good point to choose to generate liquidity and to create a
wholesale market inside Germany, because there is a range of suppliers."
"We hope that other traders will also get involved."
Enron on its trading platform enrononline.com currently quotes gas offers and
bids for the day ahead, the weekend and the week ahead in parcels of 20
megawatt hours in euros.
Lampertheim lies near Heidelberg in south-west Germany on the border of the
Hesse and Baden-Wuerttemberg states. So far, the market had been restricted
to border quotes in a market controlled by five incumbents involved in
importing gas, which account for 80 percent of total requirements.
Gas trading inside the country is only just beginning to start, because
distributors and customers have taken years to agree on voluntary terms for
network access and transport.
Radmacher said it was difficult to start a reliable gas business because
current transmission and supply agreements were still not clearly defined or
binding.
Supply contracts had not been standardised and shippers had to negotiate with
three or four pipeline owners per deal.
But new suppliers were ready to overcome the bureaucracy.

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

BG to get back 51 mln stg as House of Lords finds against Enron's Teesside Gas

04/04/2001
AFX News
(c) 2001 by AFP-Extel News Ltd

LONDON (AFX) - BG Group plc said it will receive some 34 mln stg and 17 mln
interest from Enron Corp unit Teesside Gas Transportation Ltd (TGTL), after
the House of Lords overturned a Court of Appeal decision on TGTL's dispute
with BG's 51.18 pct-owned Central Area Transmission System (CATS).
The other owners of the CATS pipeline and terminal system are BP Amoco PLC,
the operator, with 29.53 pct; Amerada Hess Corp with 17.72 pct; Phillips
Petroleum Co with 0.66 pct; TotalFinaElf with 0.57 pct; and ENI Spa unit Agip
with 0.34 pct.
The Court of Appeal decision in favour of TGTL was made in July 1999.
CATS began transporting gas from the Everest and Lomond fields in the Central
North Sea in 1993. It currently handles around 1.7 bln cubic feet per day of
natural gas.
The dispute involvedthe Capacity Reservation and Transportation Agreement
(CRTA) signed in 1990 between CATS' owners and TGTL for the provision of a
25-year transportation service. Under the terms of that agreement, TGTL would
pay for 300 mmscf/d of reserved capacity, whether or not it was used.
The CATS pipeline was completed in March 1993 and TGTL began making payments
the next month, even though it had no contracted field ready to use its
capacity at that time. In Feb 1995, it stopped payments and reclaimed its
previous payments, after which CATS' owners issued proceedings against TGTL
for the outstanding monies.
jsa For more information and to contact AFX: www.afxnews.com and
www.afxpress.com

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

Utilities' merger faces challenge
PGE's dance card may take awhile to fill if its deal with Sierra Pacific
fails
Wednesday, April 4, 2001
By Gail Kinsey Hill of The Oregonian staff
If Sierra Pacific Resources leaves Portland General Electric at the altar,
other suitors may cool their heels awhile before proposing.
Not only has the West's energy crisis apparently spoiled the pending marriage
of Nevada's Sierra Pacific and PGE, it has chilled a consolidation trend that
just a year ago was as hot as a starlet's love life .
"I don't see any eager buyers out there," said Justin McCann, a senior
analyst with Standard & Poor's. "Things are pretty rocky at the moment."
Still, possibilities exist. Analysts suggest that Northwest Natural Gas in
Portland, Puget Energy in Bellevue, Wash., and IdaCorp in Boise could be
interested in going after PGE if Sierra Pacific and Enron Corp., PGE's parent
company, part ways.
On May 5, either Enron or Sierra Pacific can walk away from the transaction
if closing documents aren't signed by then.
Officials from both companies have said they remain committed to the deal,
but they admit that changing regulatory and financial conditions make closure
unlikely.
Houston-based Enron said it's prepared to wait patiently for another offer.
"This is not a fire sale," said Mark Palmer, an Enron spokesman.
Enron, an energy and trading company, bought PGE in 1997, eager to benefit
from markets that were being opened to greater competition and less
government regulation. But officials grew impatient with the plodding pace of
deregulation and decided to jettison such capital-intensive, slow-growing
assets as PGE.
In November 1999, Sierra Pacific Resources announced plans to buy PGE for
$3.1 billion in cash and assumed debt, an amount similar to what Enron paid
two years earlier.
After more than a year of leaping regulatory hurdles, the deal appeared close
to completion. Then last summer, energy shortages and sky-high wholesale
electricity prices swept through California and the rest of the West.
Wholesale prices, 10 times year-ago levels, have gouged Sierra Pacific's
bottom line. The company owns generating plants that supply electricity for
some business and residential customers, but it also buys on the wholesale
market.
Sierra Pacific had intended to become increasingly reliant on the wholesale
market and to sell many of its generating facilities. The utility was to use
proceeds from the sales to buy down its debt and secure financing for the PGE
purchase.
But the Nevada Legislature is close to slapping a moratorium on the sales of
any generating plants. Lawmakers worry that divestitures could pinch energy
supplies still further and roil wholesale markets for months to come.
Sierra Pacific's weakened financial state also means that the federal
Securities and Exchange Commission likely won't approve the merger. The SEC
is the remaining regulatory body that must sanction the deal.
PGE isn't in on the negotiations, but officials agree that the sale looks
shaky.
"It's anyone's guess right now," Peggy Fowler, PGE president and chief
executive officer, recently told The Oregonian's editorial board.
So far, talk about replacement bidders is more speculation than fact.
Analysts said a utility based in the West is the most likely scenario.
"It's probably going to be somebody close by," said Doug May, a senior
portfolio manager with Wells Fargo Private Asset Management in Grand
Junction, Colo. "It's tough to come in from another part of the country."
But don't rule out foreign companies, May added. When ScottishPower bought
Portland-based PacifiCorp in December 1999, it became the first foreign
concern to buy a U.S. electric utility. The merger stirred up talk of more
international linkups.
Regionally, Northwest Natural's name comes up as a potential suitor.
The Portland-based utility already works cooperatively with PGE in a number
of business arrangements, including a joint meter-reading program.
"A lot of programs we're doing are the kinds of things other electric and gas
utilities are doing under one utility," said Mark Dodson, Northwest Natural
vice president of public affairs and general counsel. "I'm not at all
surprised people might speculate that we would acquire" PGE.
Dodson declined to comment directly on whether Northwest Natural might try to
buy PGE.
"As long as there's an agreement in place, it's inappropriate for us to talk
about it," he said.
Officials of IdaCorp, a holding company whose primary subsidiary is electric
utility Idaho Power, also declined to discuss whether they have been eyeing
PGE.
"We can't really comment on deals we might get into," said Russ Jones, an
IdaCorp spokesman.
IdaCorp made an unsuccessful bid for PGE two years ago when Enron first
solicited offers, Jones said. But, he said, "I don't know the answer to
whether we'd be interested now.
"If it becomes available," Jones added, "we'll probably investigate, as we
would with any other assets that might become available."
Puget Energy, a holding company for Puget Sound Energy, also declined to
comment.
"We never speculate on rumors," said Grant Ringel, Puget Energy's director of
corporate communications.
Puget Sound Energy serves electric and natural gas customers in Western
Washington and is the result of the 1997 merger of Puget Sound Power and
Light with Washington Energy, the parent of Washington Natural Gas.
The merged utilities, serving about 1.4 million customers, formed the largest
electric and natural gas utility in the Northwest.
In the 1990s, as federal laws began deregulating electric power markets,
utility mergers became increasingly common. Industry executives and analysts
attributed the trend to increased competition and a drive toward greater
efficiency.
"With deregulation, economies of scale are very important," said Wells
Fargo's May. "It's very difficult to do well as a small company.
The trend has taken in couplings of electric utilities and natural gas
utilities -- "convergence" in industry parlance -- as well as linkups of
electric utilities.
Yet, analysts note that the industry's consolidation has slowed of late. The
uncertain regulatory environment throughout the United States, the energy
shortage in the West and the electricity crisis in California are putting the
brakes on the trend, they say.
"This whole California thing has made everyone very cautious," said Standard
& Poor's McCann. "People want to see the situation sort itself out."
You can reach Gail Kinsey Hill by e-mail at gailhill@news.oregonian.com or by
telephone at 503-221-8590.

Wholesale market bright for PGE
The utility reports $1.17 billion in revenue in fiscal 2000 from reselling
electricity
Wednesday, April 4, 2001
By Gail Kinsey Hill of The Oregonian staff
Enron Corp. views Portland General Electric as a sluggish asset, weighted
down by regulatory laws and political uncertainties.
Maybe so. But PGE posted healthy financial gains in fiscal 2000, benefiting
from the region's energy shortage and spiking wholesale electricity prices.
Revenue from wholesale power sales jumped to a record $1.17 billion last
year, more than triple the 1999 wholesale sales figure of $355 million.
Bottom line: PGE recorded earnings of $139 million in 2000, up 10 percent
from 1999 earnings of $126 million.
"It was a banner year for us," said Jim Piro, PGE's chief financial officer.
The utility's financial strength should continue, even if a pending sale to
Sierra Pacific Resources falters, according to analysts.
"I don't think PGE will be tainted as an asset" if the utility again is put
on the block, said Doug May, senior portfolio manager for Wells Fargo Private
Asset Management in Grand Junction, Colo.
In contrast with PGE, Sierra Pacific suffered from high wholesale power
prices, reporting losses of $39.78 million in 2000, a sharp decline from 1999
earnings of $51.75 million.
Utility-owned hydroelectric and coal- and gas-fired generation plants supply
about half of the electricity that's needed to serve PGE's 725,000 business
and residential customers. The company buys the rest of its power on the
wholesale market.
Until last summer, wholesale prices remained relatively stable. Then, pushed
by electricity shortages and California's botched deregulation plan, prices
soared: from between $20 and $30 a megawatt hour to more than $200 a megawatt
hour. The market became so volatile that on some days short-term, or "spot"
prices, spiked above $600 a megawatt hour.
Soaring prices cut into the financial reserves of utilities caught short of
power and forced to the market for last-minute buys. But PGE, with
experienced wholesale traders and a conservative purchasing strategy, had
secured long-term contracts as a hedge against the market. The approach kept
spot purchases to a minimum.
In fact, PGE bought more electricity than its customers could use. The "long"
position allowed PGE to resell the electricity -- California was among its
customers -- for a tidy profit.
"We were fortunate to be in a good situation last year," Piro said.
Wholesale electricity sales accounted for 52 percent of PGE's operating
revenue last year, a turnaround from prior years when retail sales dominated
financial returns.
Wholesale sales proved so lucrative that PGE withdrew a request to raise
rates by 16.5 percent. The utility may raise rates late this year, officials
said, or if cash continues to pour in, it may issue refunds to customers.
PGE's expenses also have gone up dramatically. The utility spent $1.5 billion
on electric power and fuel purchases last year, up from $654 million in 1999.


Tana,
Just wanted to keep you in the loop.  I would be interested in your thoughts
on the separate passwords.
Regards,
Doug
---------------------- Forwarded by Doug Sewell/HOU/ECT on 03/07/2001 03:51
PM ---------------------------

SHARI STACK
03/07/2001 02:38 PM
To: Doug Sewell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Terri Clynes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward Sacks/Enron@EnronXGate
Subject: Alliant Agency Relationship

Doug -

As discussed, at the absolute minimum,  we need the following from Alliant in
order to do EOL trades as well as longer dated OTC trades:

1. Written evidence that Steve Castleburg is an authorized signatory for each
of the 3 utilities (and AECS - see below).
2. In addition, I would like for Alliant Energy Corporate Services to sign
the Consent and Acknowledgment letter as well. I am not sure why a signature
space was not provided for them on the document. Anyway - it is on our system
and easy to generate a revised letter with a signature space for AECS.

Also, as discussed, in order for us to give Alliant the best credit line
possible, here is our wish list, from most desirable downwards. What this
means is that if Alliant is willing to do #1- then they will get the best
line possible. If they do #2, then the line will be somewhat decreased, and
so on.

1. Separate EOL applications and passwords for each individual utility who is
appointing Alliant as agent (i.e. a total of 3 individual passwords). Also a
separate Consent and Acknowledgment for each will need to be signed by AECS
and the relevant utility.

2. Alliant identifies at the time of transacting which utility the
transaction is for.

3. Alliant sends us an allocation schedule at the end of each month which
shows which transaction is for which utility.

This is the procedure we follow with all utility agency relationships - we
are not singling out Alliant - I can promise you that.,

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Shari


FYI: These are the results of the soft targets for Q1.


Here they are, just in case....

Kate
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 02/28/2001 08:10 AM
---------------------------

djenergy <djenergy@dowjones.com> on 02/27/2001 01:26:12 PM
To:
cc: "Onukogu, Ernest" <Ernest.Onukogu@dowjones.com>

Subject: DJ NP 15/SP 15 Electricity Price Index

 <<NP 15 pages.xls>>  <<SP 15 pages.xls>>

 - NP 15 pages.xls
 - SP 15 pages.xls
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 02/28/2001 08:10 AM
---------------------------

djenergy <djenergy@dowjones.com> on 02/27/2001 01:25:53 PM
To:
cc: "Onukogu, Ernest" <Ernest.Onukogu@dowjones.com>

Subject: DJ COB Electricity Price Index

 - Cob.xls
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 02/28/2001 08:10 AM
---------------------------

djenergy <djenergy@dowjones.com> on 02/27/2001 01:26:00 PM
To:
cc: "Onukogu, Ernest" <Ernest.Onukogu@dowjones.com>

Subject: DJ Mid-Columbia Electricity Price Index

 - MidC.xls
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 02/28/2001 08:10 AM
---------------------------

djenergy <djenergy@dowjones.com> on 02/27/2001 01:25:56 PM
To:
cc: "Onukogu, Ernest" <Ernest.Onukogu@dowjones.com>

Subject: DJ Palo Verde Electricity Price Index

 - Palo.xls
---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Symes/PDX/ECT on 02/28/2001 08:10 AM
---------------------------

djenergy <djenergy@dowjones.com> on 02/27/2001 01:26:05 PM
To:
cc: "Onukogu, Ernest" <Ernest.Onukogu@dowjones.com>

Subject: DJ MeadMarketplace

 - MeadMktplace (2).xls


I will keep you informed !
---------------------- Forwarded by Kevin G Moore/HOU/ECT on 11/06/2000 02:45
PM ---------------------------
From: Paige Cox@ENRON on 11/06/2000 01:21 PM
To: Kevin G Moore/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ian Richardson/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Phillip Daigle/Corp/Enron@Enron, Cedric Belt/Corp/Enron@Enron,
bwood@avistar.com
Subject: Re: Avistar Training

Hi Kevin,

Brian Wood with Avistar is going to be here next Tuesday (11/14). I have
asked him to schedule some time to meet with you and Vince, and whomever else
needs to be trained. I was not aware that you would be using the media
server, so I didn't arrange to have him spend any time with you when he was
here alst. I'll let you kow what time(s) he'll be available next Tuesday.
Sorry for the delay

Ian -- please ensure that Vince Kaminski is set up to use the media server

Thanks!

Paige

	Kevin G Moore@ECT
	11/06/2000 12:43 PM

		 To: Ian Richardson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cedric Belt/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Paige Cox/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Avistar Training

We are still waiting on Avistar Training / set up.
Please inform me on the situation.

                                    Thanks
                                 Kevin Moore


The Intratex disclosure looks fine. Check with Rex Rogers about what he wants
to do about disclosing California litigation risk.

	Gary Peng/ENRON@enronXgate
	04/26/2001 10:04 AM

		 To: Charles Cheek/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert Eickenroht/ENRON@enronXgate,
Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Rex Rogers/ENRON@enronXgate
		 Subject: Litigation Disclosure

Find below the Litigation and Other Contingencies footnote from the the
December 31, 2000 Annual Report.  Please update the section of the disclosure
for which you are responsible for inclusion in the first quarter 2001 Form
10Q .  Also, please let me know if there are any new items that should be
considered.

Please respond no later than Wednesday May 2.

Gary
3-6841

14  LITIGATION AND OTHER CONTINGENCIES

   Enron is a party to various claims and litigation, the significant items
of which are discussed below.  Although no assurances can be given, Enron
believes, based on its experience to date and after considering appropriate
reserves that have been established, that the ultimate resolution of such
items, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse
impact on Enron's financial position or results of operations.

   Litigation.  In 1995, several parties (the Plaintiffs) filed suit in
Harris County District Court in Houston, Texas, against Intratex Gas Company
(Intratex), Houston Pipe Line Company and
Panhandle Gas Company (collectively, the Enron Defendants), each of which is
a wholly-owned subsidiary of Enron.  The Plaintiffs were either sellers or
royalty owners under numerous gas purchase contracts with Intratex, many of
which have terminated.  Early in 1996, the case was severed by the Court into
two matters to be tried (or otherwise resolved) separately.  In the first
matter, the Plaintiffs alleged that the Enron Defendants committed fraud and
negligent misrepresentation in connection with the "Panhandle program," a
special marketing program established in the early 1980s.  This case was
tried in October 1996 and resulted in a verdict for the Enron Defendants.  In
the second matter, the Plaintiffs allege that the Enron Defendants violated
state regulatory requirements and certain gas purchase contracts by failing
to take the Plaintiffs' gas ratably with other producers' gas at certain
times between 1978 and 1988.  The trial court certified a class action with
respect to ratability claims.  On March 9, 2000, the Texas Supreme Court
ruled that the trial court's class certification was improper and remanded
the case to the trial court.  The Enron Defendants deny the Plaintiffs'
claims and have asserted various affirmative defenses, including the statute
of limitations.  The Enron Defendants believe that they have strong legal and
factual defenses, and intend to vigorously contest the claims.  Although no
assurances can be given, Enron believes that the ultimate resolution of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on its financial position or
results of operations.

   On November 21, 1996, an explosion occurred in or around the Humberto
Vidal Building in San Juan, Puerto Rico.  The explosion resulted in
fatalities, bodily injuries and damage to the building and surrounding
property.  San Juan Gas Company, Inc. (San Juan Gas), an Enron affiliate,
operated a propane/air distribution system in the vicinity, but did not
provide service to the building. Enron, San Juan Gas, four affiliates and
their insurance carriers were named as defendants, along with several third
parties, including The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer
Authority, Puerto Rico Telephone Company, Heath Consultants Incorporated,
Humberto Vidal, Inc. and their insurance carriers, in numerous lawsuits filed
in U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico and the Superior Court
of Puerto Rico. These suits seek damages for wrongful death, personal injury,
business interruption and property damage allegedly caused by the explosion.
After nearly four years without determining the cause of the explosion, all
parties have agreed not to litigate further that issue, but to move these
suits toward settlements or trials to determine whether each plaintiff was
injured as a result of the explosion and, if so, the lawful damages
attributable to such injury. The defendants have agreed on a fund for
settlements or
final awards. Numerous claims have been settled. Although no assurances can
be given, Enron believes that the ultimate resolution of these matters will
not have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of
operations.

   Trojan Investment Recovery.  In early 1993, PGE ceased commercial
operation of the Trojan nuclear power generating facility.  The OPUC granted
PGE, through a general rate order, recovery of, and a return on, 87 percent
of its remaining investment in Trojan.

   The OPUC's general rate order related to Trojan has been subject to
litigation in various state courts, including rulings by the Oregon Court of
Appeals and petitions to the Oregon Supreme Court filed by parties opposed to
the OPUC's order, including the Utility Reform Project(URP) and the Citizens
Utility Board (CUB).

   In August 2000, PGE entered into agreements with CUB and the staff of the
OPUC to settle the litigation related to PGE's recovery of its investment in
the Trojan plant.  Under the agreements, CUB agreed to withdraw from the
litigation and to support the settlement as the means to resolve the Trojan
litigation.  The OPUC approved the accounting and ratemaking elements of the
settlement on September 29, 2000.  As a result of these approvals, PGE's
investment in Trojan is no longer included in rates charged to customers,
either through a return on or a return of that investment.  Collection of
ongoing decommissioning costs at Trojan is not affected by the settlement
agreements or the September 29, 2000 OPUC order.  With CUB's withdrawal, URP
is
the one remaining significant adverse party in the litigation. URP has
indicated that it plans to continue to challenge the OPUC order allowing PGE
recovery of its investment in Trojan.

   Enron cannot predict the outcome of these actions.  Although no assurances
can be given, Enron believes that the ultimate resolution of these matters
will not have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results
of operations.

   Environmental Matters.  Enron is subject to extensive federal, state and
local environmental laws and regulations.  These laws and regulations require
expenditures in connection with the
construction of new facilities, the operation of existing facilities and for
remediation at various operating sites.  The implementation of the Clean Air
Act Amendments is expected to result in increased operating expenses.  These
increased operating expenses are not expected to have a material impact on
Enron's financial position or results of operations.

   Enron's natural gas pipeline companies conduct soil and groundwater
remediation on a number of their facilities.  Enron does not expect to incur
material expenditures in connection with soil and groundwater remediation.


Rod-

Thanks for your assistance.  I've gotten good feedback on your inputs from
our Wessex folks.  Ultimately, I want to bill your costs into a transaction
account that we have at Wessex.  I'll check on the procedure today and let
you know asap.  Thanks.

Rod Hayslett @ ENRON

07/28/2000 07:31 AM
To: Michael Anderson/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, John Ale/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX
cc:

Subject: Trip to Wessex

I haven't heard back from Rebecca on this, but I'm sure she is busy.   Do
either of you care to answer my question below.

---------------------- Forwarded by Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron on 07/28/2000
07:30 AM ---------------------------

Rod Hayslett

07/20/2000 12:44 PM
To: rebecca mark-jusbasche/HOU/AZURIX@Azurix
cc:

Subject: Trip to Wessex

I'm not sure what you have heard back from the crew in Bristol/Bath, but I
found them to be very interested in achieving maximum success.    There was a
lot of learning on my part, but I'm now more convinced than ever that Wessex
is very much like our gas pipeline business.    Even to the fact that the
internal regulatory types don't believe the regulators will approve it.     I
have offered continuing assistance as needed (in fact have a conference call
setup for tomorrow).    I was able to give them the benefit of my experiences
and tried to create analogies to our experiences here.   In some cases I'm
sure it made a difference, in others the group may actually be in front of
some of our thinking.    I think I can see an opportunity to expand the
thinking on both sides of "the pond" in the regulated businesses  with just
some simple contacts and have promised to help them at least start
conversations with more counterparts in the pipeline group.

Let me know how you want me to charge you the travel costs.     I can submit
the claim here and bill you or I can submit the claim to you.


I just created "2000bug03.xls" and "2000tran03.xls".

Joe, we will continue to use the CES Wholesale tab in the 2000tran03
worksheet.


-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Cazalet [mailto:ed@apx.com]
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2000 9:12 AM
To: dhunter@smithandkempton.com
Cc: Robert Berry (E-mail); Edward G. Cazalet
Subject: APX Comments on Letter to the Governor.

Would you please distribute the attached APX comments on the letter to the
Governor to the AB1890 list?  The comments are attached both as a Word file
and below in the body of this e-mail.

A core purpose of restructuring through AB1890 was to decrease reliance on
regulation and increase reliance on the market to allocate resources in the
California electric power market.  However, as it is now written, the letter
to the Governor does not include any direct reference to the way forward
markets can address the problem of high and volatile prices.

Several reports have expressed serious reservations about the CalPX and
CAISO use of "call auctions".  An example of a call auction is the CalPX's
daily auction that sets a single price for electricity in each hour of the
next day.  The CAISO uses several call auctions for real-time energy and
ancillary service procurement.

A call auction provides no opportunity for market participants to react to
each other's bids.  A call auction lacks the feedback from offer to
counter-offer which is the source of efficiency in forward markets.  Because
a call auction lacks feedback and clears at a single price, it is more
likely that attempts to manipulate the single price will be more successful
and will have a greater impact because all transactions are at the same
price.

Instead, all other commodity markets rely on continuously traded forward
markets, which allow participants to use price feedback and gradually
develop their contract positions.

APX recommends that the Letter include the following:

The CAISO has recently announced its intent to acquire up to 3000 MW of
ancillary services through forward contracts of at least a year.   The CPUC
has recently granted both PGE and SCE the opportunity to make contracts
through 2005 to serve their load.  These policies represent a wise shift
from the almost exclusive reliance on short-term (day-head and hourly)
markets by both the CAISO and the UDCs.  However, adoption of such policies
will tend to create a bifurcated market with very short-term markets and
long-term contracts.

In most commodity markets, participants can trade a variety of contracts of
different duration.  Contracts are standardized so that the published prices
of these traded contracts are meaningful.  Trade occurs continuously, which
allows continuous price discovery.  The efficiency of the power market
improves considerably when such continuous forward trading occurs and the
opportunities for price manipulation are less.  And the existence of such
forward markets provide the basis to establish the prudence of both forward
and spot purchases of power by the UDCs.

As an example, encouraging loads to participate in continuous forward
markets will dampen price volatility because as the forward price rises load
will begin to reduce its demand by not contracting or by selling back
previously contracted positions.  Generators can use forward markets to
support decisions to invest in new power plants and properly time
maintenance decisions to reduce the impacts on prices.  Open, continuous
forward markets with published prices will allow all West Coast buyers and
sellers to contribute to market stability and lower prices in California.

The CAISO does not need to provide such continuous forward markets but can
encourage their development and use by encouraging inter-SC trades and
self-provision of ancillary services.

==============================
Edward G. Cazalet, Ph.D.
Chairman
Automated Power Exchange, Inc.
TechMart Building, Suite 522
5201 Great America Parkway
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Company Voice : (408) 517-2100
Voice :(408) 517-2102
Fax: :(408) 517- 2985
E-mail : ed@apx.com
Web Page: www.apx.com

 - Forward Markets.doc


---------------------- Forwarded by Thomas A Martin/HOU/ECT on 03/20/2001
03:49 PM ---------------------------

Thomas A Martin
10/11/2000 03:55 PM
To: Patrick Wade/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Guadalupe Power Partners LP

The deal is physically served at Oasis Waha or Oasis Katy and is priced at
either HSC, Waha or Katytailgate GD at buyers option three days prior to
NYMEX  close.


I received a fax in yesterday, so I'll review it.

Kay

From: Ben Jacoby/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/04/2001 12:05 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Fred Mitro/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:

Subject: FW: Midway Toll term sheet & LOI - comments

In a seperate e-mail, I sent out the LOI to TECO which incorporated most of
Fred's comments. On the tolling term sheet, I agree with Fred's comments. Kay
- where do we stand on having outside counsel review this? I have indicated
to TECO that we will have a draft tolling term sheet to them by Wednesday.
Please let me know.

Thanks,

Ben

-----Original Message-----
From: Mitro, Fred
Sent: Fri 6/1/2001 5:56 PM
To: Mann, Kay; Jacoby, Ben
Cc: Kellermeyer, Dave
Subject: Midway Toll term sheet & LOI - comments

Ben/Kay:

Attached are my comments on the Midway Tolling term sheet and LOI.

I will be out on Monday but will have my cell phone on.  My conversations
will be regularly interrupted by golf strokes, but I will do my best to be
available.

Call me if you have specific questions/issues to discuss.  I have asked Dave
Kellermeyer to call either one of you on Monday with an answer to the minimum
block size for the tolling term sheet.  I am taking the air permit home to
review and will leave you a message if I determine the answer.

Fred

 <<Kay Mann Term sheet June 1(fred's marked).doc>>

 <<Kay Mann Tolling Term sheet June 1(Fred'smarked).doc>>


pls send emma's resume to Lou Soldano.   Lou, please give me a call if you
have any questions about this lady.  Thanks.


IF YOU ARE PLANNING ON EATING BREAKFAST AND LUNCH TOMORROW PLEASE COME SEE ME WITH CASH!!!!

THANKS

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


Suzanne:
Could you please coordinate with Sara's and Richard's assistant to set up a
30 minute meeting with me, Sara and Richard Sanders to talk about the
arbitration issues that I raised in an e-mail to him last week?  thanks.
Carol


fyi.
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/17/2001 11:03
AM ---------------------------

"Campbell, Carolyn" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com> on 04/17/2001 10:34:24 AM
To: "Lang, Gregory F." <gregorylang@paulhastings.com>, "'Staikos, John P.'"
<johnstaikos@paulhastings.com>, "'PARKER, Isabel'"
<isabel.parker@freshfields.com>, "VAN DUSEN, Nicholas"
<nicholas.vandusen@freshfields.com>
cc: "'kay.mann@enron.com'" <kay.mann@enron.com>, "'carlos.sole@enron.com'"
<carlos.sole@enron.com>, "Keffer, John" <JKeffer@KSLAW.com>

Subject: Certificates and Resolutions

Gentlemen:

We have enclosed drafts of the following documents:

1.  Resolutions of sole member of Salmon Energy LLC authorizing the turbine
acquisition and related documents;
2.  Incumbency Certificate of ENA for the escrow agent; and
3.  Incumbency Certificate of PPL for the escrow agent.

The resolutions authorize the turbine contract, the loan from PPL, and the
G/E consent and agreement.  I have also drafted resolutions to be dated the
day following closing to elect as directors the persons named in the Amended
and Restated LLC Agreement (need the names of these persons - three
designees of PPL and one designee of ENA) and to replace the officers of the
LLC with persons designated by PPL.  If the lender desires Salmon
resolutions authorizing a security agreement to be signed by Salmon, we
would recommend that the new Salmon board controlled by PPL sign resolutions
ratifying and approving the security agreement, rather than have ENA approve
a security agreement that it has not negotiated and is not familiar with.

From a timing standpoint, we need to focus on the documentation required to
set up the escrow account, as I understand that the escrow may be funded on
the same day as the financial closing, namely, Thursday, April 19.  Citibank
will need (I) the escrow agreement, (ii) an incumbency certificate from each
party to the escrow agreement, (iii) a W-9 signed by each non-corporate
party to the escrow agreement, and (iv) a signed fee agreement.  The
incumbency certificates are enclosed.  Please insert names and other
information as appropriate.  We need comments to the Escrow Agreement in as
soon as possible in order that we can provide these documents to Citibank
for approval.

Thank you.

Carolyn M. Campbell
King?& Spalding
713-276-7307 (phone)
713-751-3280 (fax)
ccampbell@kslaw.com <mailto:ccampbell@kslaw.com>

Enclosures: 137061v3
  140106v1
  140109v1

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

 - Salmon - Resolutions of LLC.DOC
 - Enron Incumbency Cert for Escrow.DOC
 - Pegasus Incumbency Certif for Escrow.DOC


Cool--I'm in Monday--lets talk then.  Thanks. DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 06/01/2000
12:45 PM ---------------------------

John Dushinske
06/01/2000 08:22 AM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Flexible Services

Drew - Just wanted to follow up on our discussion on Monday about new
services, especially hourly firm.   As we discussed
our team does not see a need to create or offer this service at this time.
However, we did not get a chance to discuss the merits of going forward
anyway to act on the receptivity of FERC to these services.   Please give me
a call or let me know when we can stop by to discuss briefly.  I would like
Tim to participate in the discussion as well.  He is out today meeting w/
GRE and will be back on Friday.

Thanks.  John

PS - I could give you a quick update on Hubbard at that time also.


Please, put on my calendar

Vince
---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/15/2001
01:30 PM ---------------------------
From: Todd Kimberlain/ENRON@enronXgate on 02/15/2001 12:50 PM
To: Kyle Berryman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Bob
Beyer/ENRON@enronXgate, Reno Casimir/ENRON@enronXgate, Huy
Dinh/ENRON@enronXgate, Partho Ghosh/ENRON@enronXgate, "Gil, Eduardo"
<Eduardo.Gil@ENRON.com>@SMTP@enronXgate, D Todd Hall/ENRON@enronXgate, Joseph
Hrgovcic/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Nguyen/ENRON@enronXgate, Timothy M
Norton/ENRON@enronXgate, Sandeep Ramachandran/ENRON@enronXgate, Claudio
Ribeiro/ENRON@enronXgate, Rajib Saha/ENRON@enronXgate, Valter
Stoiani/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Tawney/ENRON@enronXgate, Gary
Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate, Yannis Tzamouranis/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven
Vu/ENRON@enronXgate, Catherine Woolgar/ENRON@enronXgate, Stephen
Bennett/NA/Enron@ENRON, Todd DeCook/Corp/Enron@Enron, Vince J
Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jose Marquez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andy
Pace/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Ryan/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: JAMES ELSNER'S VISIT:  FEBRUARY 22

Professor Jim Elsner from the Department of Meteorology/Geography at Florida
State University will be visiting the Weather Risk Management group on
Thursday, 22 February 2001.  Professor Elsner is a leading expert in
hurricane climate studies. who is currently investigating
interannual/decadal/multi-decadal hurricane variations and shifts/trends in
hurricane landfall probabilities and their relationship to climate and
climate change; he also issues seasonal predictions for number of hurricanes
and landfall probabilities along segments of the U.S. coastline.  Moreover,
he is a leading authority in non-linear dynamics and chaos theory and has
published a number of papers on these topics.

His talk will focus on a proposed research topic, which will provide Enron
with climatological instruments for use in the insurance and long-term
derivative markets.  The research involves a
Bayesian analysis of the longest available record of hurricane activity along
the U.S. coastline.  Deliverables will address the hurricane threat in the
United States, but the methodology can be applied elsewhere.  The techniques
also can be applied to climate extremes including precipitation and
temperature.

The talk is scheduled for 9 a.m. and the room assignment will be announced.

All are cordially invited to attend.

Best regards,
Todd Kimberlain


;
Today's; conference call for 2:00PM Central time is now rescheduled for
2:30PM Central instead.; Please mark your calendars accordingly.
;
Thanks,
;
Darran Binns


Tim, lets not worry about margin at this point - we are trying to get a
handle on headcount and direct expenses/capital charge first.  You will have
your day in court to discuss margin soon.

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 11/10/2000
12:46 PM ---------------------------

	From:  Tim Belden                           11/10/2000 12:32 PM

To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: 2001 Plan

---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 11/10/2000 09:34 AM
---------------------------
From: Tim Belden on 11/10/2000 10:31 AM
To: John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron, Dave Delainey
cc:
Subject: 2001 Plan

I received the 2001 plan that Dave sent up here.  Chris and I talked and are
working through all of the questions that Dave had.  I noticed that the gross
margin plan for west power trading was $170 million.  When you were here I
talked about $100 million total and then you talked me up to $120 million
total with $100 from the trading efforts and $20 from middle
market/services.  Why the change from $120 to $170?  Perhaps it was a
typo?????  While I intend to make as much money as I possibly can next year,
the $170 number seemed high.  Particularly given the regulatory freak show
that is going down in California right now.


Sorry, Pressed send too early:

John, Have had a conversation with IBJ re the CSA, and they have asked us to
consider proposing a solution that does not involve a CSA. I propose to meet
with them again to try and explore why, but I would like to be prepared to
offer them a solution whereby we don't enter into a CSA, and we would limit
the types of trades that we could enter into with IBJ. My feeling is that we
would be unlikely to enter into any long term transactions (over 2 years) at
this stage anyway, and would prefer to get the relationship going, as I am
not sure they are going to budge on this issue yet. They appear to be quite
willing to discuss all the other points. We can always press for a
renegotiation at a later stage if we do want to enter into longer term deals.
I also want to keep the loan facility completely separate.

What are your thoughts on this, and what limitations would you want to put on
trades if we do not have a CSA?

Thanks,
Jonathan

	John Viverito
	09/22/2000 12:04 PM

		 To: John Suttle/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Jane McBride/AP/Enron@Enron@ECT, John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON@ECT,
Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Morten E Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

John-

During our last meeting with IBJ, we pushed hard for the implementation of
the CSA.  I believe that they have the systems capability to handle the
requisite activities relating to the CSA, as we understand that they utilize
same with certain financial institution counterparties.  We expressed our
view on these matters and also raised other issues that we had discussed in
our recent conference call.

IBJ informed us that they have never entered into a CSA with a non-financial
institution counterparty and my response was that Enron can then be the
first.  We requested that they raise this issue with their respective
superiors.  As you know, their response to our discussions relating to this
issue was "In terms of CSA, as we are not ready for running collateral
operations, we still do not prefer to use the CSA."  The legitimacy of this
statement is certainly debatable and the underlying reason may actually be
something entirely different, including the possibility that they merely do
not want to enter into a CSA with a non-financial institution.

We will continue to attempt to persuade IBJ to enter into the CSA with Enron,
however it is uncertain if this is achievable.

	John Suttle@ECT
	09/21/2000 08:52 AM

		 To: John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Jane McBride/AP/Enron@Enron, Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com@ENRON, Kevin
Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Morten E
Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron, Steven Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom
Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

To clarify, and also getting back to Mark Taylor's argument that IBJ is one
of the more sophisticated financial enterprises on the planet, and
considering the fact that they have agreed to Enron being the Calculation
Agent, is their argument that they are incapable of mark to market
verification?  We calculate - we call for margin - they verify.

I am certain that they calculate mark to market positions with their other
trading entities, and their argument that they can't do so for Enron is
weak.  If they simply refuse a CSA, then we can deal with this as discussed
in our phone conversation last week, but this argument of theirs should be
something we can get around don't you think?

From: John Viverito@ENRON on 09/21/2000 04:21 AM
To: John Suttle/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jane McBride/AP/Enron@Enron@ECT, John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON@ECT,
Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Morten E Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

John-

You are correct that Enron is the "Calculation Agent", however I believe that
IBJ would also be making their own calculations as well, to monitor/double
check our calculations.

John

	John Suttle@ECT
	09/20/2000 01:53 PM

		 To: John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com@ENRON, Kevin
Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom
Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT, Morten E Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron, Jane
McBride/AP/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Isn't Enron the "Calculation Agent" - leaving IBJ only to confirm our marks
if we are to make a margin call?

From: John Viverito@ENRON on 09/19/2000 04:40 AM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT, Morten E
Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron, Jane McBride/AP/Enron@Enron, John
Suttle/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Mark-

Today, we received IBJ's responsive comments to the points that have been
raised, which are set forth below for your review.

IBJ has stated "In terms of CSA, as we are not ready for running collateral
operations, we still do not prefer to use the CSA."  During our recent
meeting they did not deny that IBJ had entered into CSAs with financial
institutions.  I note that IBJ also raised the point that Enron had a loan
from IBJ of roughly US$ 100,000,000.
Jonathan Whitehead has raised this issue with John Suttle to receive his
input.

IBJ's specific responses are quoted below as follows:-

"Part 1

(a)  Agreed not include Affiliates of PartyA.

(g)  We prefer to terminate the Transactions when as a result of merger as
for a party, a surviving party of such becomes materially weaker than before.

Part 3

We usually accept to deliver a copy the list of authorized signatures only.

Part 4

(f)Even though deleting the word "not" in this provision, we can net the
payments with respect to the same Transaction.   Due to our system
incapability, we are not able to net the payments with respect to two or more
Transactions in the same currency.

(h) Agreed.

Part 5

(a)  If your suggested language is included, a Non-defaulting Party has to
continue to make payment to a Defaulting Party with no payment obligation,
which does not seem realistic.  We prefer to terminate Transactions when an
Event of Default occurs.  We do not like to include the provision which
releases a technical error.

(c)  Agreed.

(e)  We propose 5 business days instead.

(g)  We do not think the definition of the Affiliate includes a party's
branch offices. If our branch have a deal with Enron Japan, we will amend
this Master Agreement to include such branch as Multibranch Office.  We heard
that in most jurisdictions of the world,  it is not effective to set-off the
obligations between a party and the other party's Affiliate.

(i)  Agreed to include this provision.

(j)  We do not prefer that a party could transfer its rights and obligations
without the other party's consent to even its Affiliates. We might not get
approval of the transfer from our Credit Department or such transfer might
cause an additional payment of tax or other cost.

(k)  We will revert to you later.

(m)  Agreed.

(n)  Agreed to include this provision.

Part 6

We still prefer to include the provisions relating to the Commodity
Transactions in the respective Confirmations."

I look forward to receiving your input.  I note that Jane McBride has started
here at Enron Japan, therefore I have copied her on this correspondence.
Looking forward to seeing you in Houston soon.

Best regards,

John
----- Forwarded by John Viverito/Corp/Enron on 09/19/2000 04:15 AM -----

	John Viverito
	09/07/2000 04:54 AM

		 To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Mark-

Thanks for your input.  I agree with all of the comments you have raised.  As
to Part 5 (n), the use of the English language is not uncommon in Japan with
regard to these types of arrangements and should be insisted upon for
transactions under the ISDA documentation.

I think that it will be useful to better understand Japanese market practice
relating to the use of the Credit Support Annex. Therefore, I have asked
Baker & McKenzie to provide a clear picture as to the situation in Japan and
will provide this information upon receipt.

Following receipt of John Suttle's comments, I will prepare the response to
IBJ based on the points that have been raised by both you and John.

Thanks,

John

	Mark Taylor@ECT
	09/06/2000 09:00 PM

		 To: John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

 I had a brief conversation this morning with John Suttle (Credit) and it
looks like he's going to insist on the CSA.  We are going to talk tomorrow
and go through the whole agreement to get the rest of his comments.  While we
have documentation for transactions entered into prior to execution of a
master agreement, the extent of their revisions makes me very uneasy.  Many
of these points are very serious and if they can not agree we will have
trouble coming to agreement even on the short form documents.  It would be
helpful if they could explain the changes rather than just sending us a
mark-up.

Following are my points responsive to their revisions:

Part 1 (a)  The addition of our affiliates has the affect of expanding the
possible defaults too broadly and we cannot agree to these changes (for
example, this would mean that if any Enron affiliate went into bankruptcy
this agreement would be in default).

(g)  This provision provides additional flexibility without any credit risk
to the other party.  It should remain in place unless IBJ can articulate a
reason to remove it.

Part 3 The language inserted is much to vague.  Our original version spells
out exactly what is expected of the parties.  If the documents we listed are
not acceptable, IBJ should tell us now what would be acceptable and if we
agree we will put it in the agreement.

Part 4 (f)  By deleting the word "not" in this provision, IBJ is saying that
payments due to each other with respect to the same transaction will not net
(i.e. if we are paying fixed and they are paying floating, we each have to
make the full payment to the other rather than netting the two amounts to one
payment).  This is not acceptable.

(h) If IBJ will use their NY branch as agent, we should use Enron Corp or ENA.

Part 5 (a) Our suggested language allows the purchaser of an option to
receive payments due even though technically in default under another
provision of the agreement.  Our position is that if there are no other
possible payment requirements due from the purchaser, the option should be
honored.

(c)  The section we delete requires that the market makers be in the same
city.  For many markets in which we participate, it is very difficult, if not
impossible, to find multiple market makers in the same city.

(e)  The change to 10 business days is much too long.  This means we can not
have certainty as to the terms of the transaction for two weeks!  We can go
as high as three days if necessary but even that is beyond common market
practice.

(g)  Their changes remove the ability to set off against obligations owed to
multiple Enron companies if they default and only allows set-off with each
IBJ branch as a separate entity.  This may not be an issue if we will never
trade or otherwise transact with them in any other Enron company and if we
will never do business with any other branch of IBJ.  We usually don't like
to restrict ourselves that way.

(i)  We absolutely insist on the confidentiality of our transactions.  If
there is some revision to this section they would like we can discuss it but
wholesale deletion is out of the question.

(j)  As with Part 1 (g) this section adds flexibility to both parties while
maintaining flexibility within the corporate family.  Given the frequency
with which Enron moves businesses around within the family, this section is
important to us.

(k)  This section results from an experience we had with a counterparty that
went into bankruptcy (and therefore default) while they were in the money.
We disputed the amount owed and under the terms of the agreement (without our
revision) we would have owed them interest at their cost of funds - a rather
high rate given their status as a bankrupt.  We feel the non-default rate is
more appropriate.

(m)  I can't imagine why they wouldn't want this section included - it
protects us both.

(n)  You know more about this than I.

Part 6  These are all important issues for us and we can discuss them
individually if they object for some articulated reason.  If these provisions
are not included here they will need to be included in each confirmation (a
significant burden for our back office systems which are not set up for it)
and we need to know now if they object to any of them.

Other revisions that they have made are acceptable unless Credit objects.  I
hope this is helpful and sorry to have run on so long.  I'm happy to discuss
any of these issues at greater length if you want.  It sounds to me like
IBJ's expectations regarding execution of documents are a bit high given the
volume and nature of their comments.

	John Viverito@ENRON
	09/05/2000 09:06 PM

		 To: Tom Bruce-Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com@ECT, Kevin Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Tom-

As far as the progress on the ISDA documentation, I am awaiting feedback from
both legal and credit in Houston.

Could you provide me with the details of the proposed transaction(s).  I note
that I have copied Mark Taylor on this correspondence, as I will need to get
his input regarding our most efficient going forward strategy.

Thanks,

John

	Tom Bruce-Jones@ECT
	09/05/2000 09:36 AM

		 To: John Viverito/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com, Steven Kleege/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin
Cordesman/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

John
I have just had IBJ on the phone again asking for a progress report on the
ISDA docs.  Have we managed to move this forward, bearing in mind Labour Day,
since he is very keen to commence trading on Monday next.  He suggested that
he would be comfortable in trading prior to the implementation of the docs
for these initial trades as per Jonathon's previous comments in past mails.
Are we comfortable doing this if we cannot resolve the issues on the docs?

They are also very keen to see the draft confirms for the proposed trade
(Steve, I have just heard from Rob in the vid conf that the proposed volumes
may prove difficult to take on the books??).  Please advise as to our
capability so that I can convey this to him in the morning.

Best regards
Tom

From: John Viverito@ENRON on 01/09/2000 02:48 CDT
To: "Yamato Konishi" <yamato.konishi@ibjbank.co.jp>
cc: hirohide.yabuki@ibjbank.co.jp, Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com,
kazunobu.maeda@ibjbank.co.jp, teruyo.suzuki@ibjbank.co.jp,
Tom.Bruce-Jones@enron.com

Subject: Re: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Dear Mr. Konishi-

Thank you for your comments.  We will attempt to respond to you prior to the
holiday in the US, but if we are unable to do so, we will respond shortly
thereafter.

Best regards,

John Viverito

	"Yamato Konishi" <yamato.konishi@ibjbank.co.jp>
	09/01/2000 02:31 AM

		 To: <John.Viverito@enron.com>
		 cc: <Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com>, "Tom Bruce-Jones"
<Tom.Bruce-Jones@enron.com>, "teruyo.suzuki" <teruyo.suzuki@ibjbank.co.jp>,
"Maeda san" <kazunobu.maeda@ibjbank.co.jp>, "hirohide.yabuki"
<hirohide.yabuki@ibjbank.co.jp>
		 Subject: Fw: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

Dear Mr.Viverito

Attached Word file is ISDA draft amended by our legal desk.
(please take the amended points as our comment on your draft)
Please check it all and kindly reply ASAP.
(CSA is not acceptable as I mentioned you before, and we'll check your
LETTER OF CREDIT after
the schedule is almost agreed)

In your draft, we cannot understand the meaning of "EDGAR" on page4,
so please show us what it is.

We are very hoping to conclude this process rapidly.
So, I very much appreciate it if you could send back your comment before
Holiday in U.S.(4th Sep)
(it's ok if only the rough prospects of concluding ISDA)

Best regards,
Konishi IBJ Tokyo
81-3-3214-1008
----- Original Message -----
From: "Teruyo Suzuki" <teruyo.suzuki@ibjbank.co.jp>
To: "Yamato Konishi" <yamato.konishi@ibjbank.co.jp>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 3:58 PM
Subject: Re: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT

> ISDA DraftI_X"?,d`-t,?,?,?,?,?_B-?-O
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yamato Konishi" <yamato.konishi@ibjbank.co.jp>
> To: <John.Viverito@enron.com>
> Cc: <Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com>; "Tom Bruce-Jones"
> <Tom.Bruce-Jones@enron.com>; "teruyo.suzuki"
<teruyo.suzuki@ibjbank.co.jp>;
> "Maeda san" <kazunobu.maeda@ibjbank.co.jp>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 9:59 PM
> Subject: Re: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT
>
>
> > Dear Mr.Viverito
> >
> > Thank you very much.
> > Now we start checking your draft and maybe we can return comment on this
> > Friday.
> >
> > Please be advised following points at this time.
> > 1)Part 6 on the schedule is needed to be deleted.
> >   We think that it's enough if the terms in Part 6 are referred in the
> > individual confirmation.
> > 2)ISDA Credit support annex is not acceptable
> >   Unfortunately, we don't have internal system for concluding CSA with
> > non-financial entity.
> >
> > Please keep support us for concluding ISDA ASAP for our business in near
> > future.
> > If any question, please feel free to contact me.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Konishi /IBJ Tokyo 81-3-3214-1008
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <John.Viverito@enron.com>
> > To: <yamato.konishi@ibjbank.co.jp>
> > Cc: <Jonathan.Whitehead@enron.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 5:31 PM
> > Subject: IBJ ISDA MASTER AGREEMENT
> >
> >
> > > Dear Mr. Konishi,
> > >
> > > Attached hereto, is the draft ISDA documentation, for your review.
> > > Included are the Schedule, the Credit Support Annex and the Enron
Corp.
> > > Guaranty.
> > >
> > > I apologize for the delay in the preparation and distribution of these
> > > documents.
> > >
> > > We look forward to receiving your comments.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > John Viverito
> > >
> > >
> > > (See attached file: IBJ Schedule 30.08.00.doc)(See attached file: IBJ
> CSA
> > > 30.08.00.doc)(See attached file: IBJ EC guarantee 30.08.00.doc)
> >
> >
>

 - IBJ Schedule 31.08.00.doc


Dick, I don't know if we answered this for you or not, but I'm sure it will
be fine for you to draft a letter for Ken's signature.

Rosie

Richard Leibert@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
05/01/2000 09:10 AM
To: Kenneth Lay@ENRON
cc: Rosalee Fleming@ENRON
Subject: Indian Prime Minister visit to Houston

Ken,

Received communications from the Texas Department of Economic Development and
the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce.  Both would like to invite PM Vajpayee
to Houston during his U.S. visit in September.  The last time that we had a
PM here was in '94 with PM Rao.  I would like to support this action and
would recommend that we draft a letter for your signature.  Have discussed
same with Joe Sutton and have his support.

Dick


I will be attending.

DS

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Garcia, Ava
Sent:	Monday, September 17, 2001 5:16 PM
To:	Adele Zuroff; Amy Gold; Becky Wells; Beth Dahncke; Bill Lyons; Bob Mattice; Bob Woody; Brad Brigham; Candace Karpakis; Carla Johnson; Cathy Bulf; Charles Hough; Cheri Weyman; Chris Kim; Chuck Thompson; Cindy Doeschot; Cindy White; Corky Briscoe; Corny Boersma; Craig Carley; Craig Lipke; Dabid Taylor; Darla Hogan; Darren Brown; David Lanning; Dawnell Pace; Debbie Fortman; Dennis Boucher; Diana Dechilly; Diane Dluhos; Doug Allen; Ed Meaders; Elsa Johnson; Elsa Johnston; Evans, Ted; Gary Raines; Gina Schwartz; Grace Elkassed; Henry Robledo; J.H. Cathey; Jaime Ford; James Tabacco; Jan Joniker; Janette Arreguin; Jason Kelm; Jay Glaubitz; Jeff Goforth; Jeramy Gaskins; Jill Roberson; Jim Vallillo; Jim Wade; Jody Oberman; Joe Cammarano; John cogan; John Lopez; Jorge Rojas; Josh Chapa; Julia Clevenger; Julie Burton; Julie Reames; Karen Dopson; Karen Swett; Kathy Royal; Kenny Holdridge; Kevin Foley; Kirk Ketcherside; Kristi Birdsall; Lad Lorenz; Larry Black; Larry Kelly; Leane Catron; Linda Miller; Lindsay McMurray; Mark Fenton; Mark Harmon; Mark Kraus; Maryanne Schneider; MaryKay Olson; Mat Martindale; Mike Davis; Mike Keen; Mike Odonnell; Miller, Stephanie; Natalie Curtis; Nick Thomas; Pam Steigerwald; Pat Davidson; Patrick Abercrombie; Sullivan, Patti; Pauline Wah; Penny Barry; Phil Richarson; Rex Bigler; Rich Hall; Richard Moore; Rick Monccleg; Rick Wadle; Rob Cooper; Ron Youell; Russ Boone; Sally Prentice; Sandy Hawk; Sara Davis; Scott Harrison; Scott Walker; Sean Breen; Sharon Park; Sheryl Moronas; Sissy Jenkins; Stacey Pogue; Stepanie Katz; Susan Coppock; Susan Jones; Suzie Horton; Teresa Murray; Terri Dickers; Terry Reyna; Theresa Cline; Thompson; Tim Wickersham; Tom Carlson; Tom Simpson; Tommy Thompson; Van Johnson; Veronica Esparza; Waymon Pon; Wayne Hawkins; Will Van Der Boom; Williams
Cc:	Blair, Lynn; Scott, Donna; Corman, Shelley; Donoho, Lindy; Watson, Kimberly; Lindberg, Lorraine; Lohman, TK; Lokay, Michelle; Schoolcraft, Darrell; Buchanan, John; Kowalke, Terry; Dietz, Rick; Giambrone, Laura; Hernandez, Bert; McEvoy, Christine; Miller, Chris L; Minter, Tracy; Mulligan, Amy; Ward, Linda
Subject:	November 2001 Transwestern Customer Meeting.

You have been selected to attend the Transwestern customer meeting in November.  Review the attachment below for details.  Please indicate whether you will attend or will not attend in a email to ava.garcia@enron.com or phone at 713-853-5842.

Hope to see you in November.

Thanks,
Ava Garcia

 << File: TW2001Customer2.pps >>

 << File: 2001TWCustomermtg..pps >>
 << File: TW2001CustomerInvitation.ppt >>


Jeff,

Congratulations on your promotion; it was certainly well deserved.  As a
happy, very minor, Enron shareholder I'm delighted.

Regards,

Brad
 - Farnsworth, Brad (E-mail).vcf


Elena,

Can you, please, help with these prices?
Very urgent.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 08/21/2000
12:18 PM ---------------------------

Margaret Carson@ENRON
08/18/2000 05:22 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: AVG. MONTHLY ELECTRICITY PRICES FOR THE PAST 13 MONTHS

Vince   Do you have  a dataset  that  can give me monthly prices  in  $MW
for these
markets from July   1999  through July   2000  ?//   Thank you.   Marg.

Palo Verde
ERCOT
Cinergy
Entergy
PJM  (or  a proxy  for any of these)


That's too bad.  i am sure you learned a lot from the experience which will
serve you well on the next one.  Keep plugging.

Pablo Acevedo @ ENRON   08/01/2000 12:39 PM

To: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Bunge Energy Analysis

This is how far we got with these guys.

We did our best, believe me.

Pablo-
---------------------- Forwarded by Pablo Acevedo/SA/Enron on 08/01/2000
08:41 AM ---------------------------
From: Gary Mirich@EES on 07/26/2000 12:54 PM CDT
To: rfarmer@bunge.com
cc: Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Pablo Acevedo/SA/Enron@Enron, Lamar
Frazier/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Bunge Energy Analysis

Dick,
As we discussed today, Enron's analysis of Bunge's energy information
indicates
inadequate regulatory and pricing opportunity for Enron to create additional
value for Bunge.

Electricity:
The predominance of electricity usage occurs in states that are either
several years
away from enacting deregulation or where the rules are insufficiently
determined at this
time to even estimate an opening date.  When opening dates are more clearly
defined
and we have confidence in energy curves for those markets, then we could
revisit this
area of your energy profile.

Natural Gas:
Bunge has taken the initiative to engage in several longer term supply and
transporation
agreements which have effectively managed your price/therm.  For those
reasons, the
opportunities are very limited for Enron to apply a consolidation approach
and provide
compelling additional value for Bunge.

As we agreed in January, the first objective was to define the potential for
mutual value
and then decide what, if any next steps were appropriate.  I regret we will
not be able to
help Bunge at this time, but know that Enron will remain interested in
assisting your
company in the future if and when market conditions afford us that
opportunity.

Please feel free to contact me at any time in the future if I can help answer
further questions
for you or others who have been involved in this process.  Dick, thank you
again for
providing your time and attention to this inquiry process.

Sincerely,

Gary Mirich


DENIED!!!!!!!!!

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Staab, Theresa
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 11:12 AM
To:	Whitt, Mark
Cc:	Felling, Amy; Lucci, Paul T.
Subject:	vacation

Mark,
I'd like to request vacation for the following dates:
Tuesday, November 20th
Wednesday, November 21st
Monday, Novmeber 26 the
Tuesday, November 27th.

We got our tickets for San Francisco to go to my parents house for Thanksgiving.

Amy will be here to cover.

Thanks,
Theresa


Executive Summary
Marion Horna and Kurt Anderson requested an explanation of how the EW 1.5
Availability was computed.  In addition,  Barry Riffe and Jeff Duff have
expressed concerns that there is confusion between the EW 750 owners, I.E.,
and EWC on how to categorize (OOH, UAH, or other) the direction curtailment &
windshear curtailment for availability computations.   The attached memo is
the result of a throrough review of the Exhibits in the 1.5 contracts that
define availability and the UAH & OOH clauses which are similar between 1.5
and 750 project contracts.  This memo doesn't include a thorough review of
the Technical Specs or Germainisher Lloyd design recommendations for 1.5
projects.  This draft memo proposes that:

 1)  EWC should not be penalized for direction curtailment and windshear
curtailment losses to availability IF that curtailment is in accordance with
 the Tech Spec of Germanischer Lloyd recommendations or requirements.
Neither the UAH term or the OOH term in the contract apply.
 The corrections applied to correct for windshear in previous EW 750 reports
were made to compensate for the limitations of controller counters.

 2) Only those Offline Hrs ordered  by the organizations specifically
mentioned in the OOH clause in the contract should be included in the OOH
term in
 the contract.  For example, if the owner is not specifically mentioned in
the OOH clause then their orders for offline turbine should not be included in
 OOH.

The availability resulting from this computation will not penalize
availability for all reasons that the turbine didn't produce power in good
winds.  There will be events that prevent turbine production but do not lower
availability, ie.  high winds, direction curtailment.


Hey Robert,,

Sorry I was out on vacation, and I did not think to ask Todd the name of his
headhunter, but I will and try to get back to you with some names this week.

Take care!


I do plan on accompanying Steve.  Steve, you want me to bring the copies.  Be
glad to.  What time does the party start?

Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON
09/08/2000 12:38 PM

To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Steve's testimony

Jeff:  will you accompany Steve?  If so, the Committee needs you to bring at
least 75 copies of the attached testimony with you to give to the Committee
Clerk to "satisfy the anticipatied public interest."  I would suggest you
bring more.....
---------------------- Forwarded by Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron on 09/08/2000
01:45 PM ---------------------------

Elizabeth Linnell
09/08/2000 12:44 PM
Sent by: Elizabeth Linnell
To: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Steve's testimony

Attached is the final version.


Lady with python on one side , Star wars on the other...

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Rob Laird <RLaird@natsource.ca>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Rob+20Laird+20+3CRLaird+40natsource+2Eca+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:25 PM
To:	Dorland, Chris
Subject:	RE:

I would go with the star wars painting on the side myself...

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris.Dorland@enron.com [mailto:Chris.Dorland@enron.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:23 AM
To: RLaird@natsource.ca
Subject: RE:

Don't forget pink fuzzy dice and chain steering wheel and red interior
lights. Chicks are going to love it. I'm going to get a chick with a python
wrapped around her painted on the side and get those tires that stick out 6
inches from the wheel wells with gold plated rims. SWEET! The funny thing
is that in some neighborhoods in Houston (predominately latin) that would
be a killer ride.

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   Rob Laird <RLaird@natsource.ca>@ENRON

[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Rob+20Laird+20+3CRLaird+40natsource+2Eca+3E+40ENRON@ENRON
.com]

   Sent:   Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:17 PM
   To:     Dorland, Chris
   Subject:  RE:

   Sweet, purple, lowered, black windows, zz top playing, glow kit, sweet
   ride.........

   -----Original Message-----
   From: Chris.Dorland@enron.com [mailto:Chris.Dorland@enron.com]
   Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:16 AM
   To: RLaird@natsource.ca
   Subject: RE:

   We were talking about getting matching PT cruisers with CRUISR1 and
   CRUISR2
   personalized plates.

       -----Original Message-----
      From:   Rob Laird <RLaird@natsource.ca>@ENRON

[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Rob+20Laird+20+3CRLaird+40natsource+2Eca+3E+40ENRON@ENRON
   .com]

      Sent:   Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:09 PM
      To:     Dorland, Chris
      Subject:  RE:

      Why don't you get cowan to get you a deal on a PT cruiser, I heard he
      loves
      those things....

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Chris.Dorland@enron.com [mailto:Chris.Dorland@enron.com]
      Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 10:35 AM
      To: RLaird@natsource.ca
      Subject: RE:

      Listen to this shit. If I want to move my car back to Canada I
   (Enron)
      would have to pay $2000 USD to move it plus 6.1% of KBB value in
   import
      duty plus 7% GST plus $200 excise tax plus about $400 in permits.
   Looks
      like I am looking for a new car as well.

          -----Original Message-----
         From:   Rob Laird <RLaird@natsource.ca>@ENRON

[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Rob+20Laird+20+3CRLaird+40natsource+2Eca+3E+40ENRON@ENRON
      .com]

         Sent:   Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:02 AM
         To:     Dorland, Chris
         Subject:

         Whoops I did it again,......I'm not that innocent...

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

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


Herman has approved the revised Memorandum of Option.  I will incorporate it
into our form, okay?
K-

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Manis, Herman
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:55 AM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Cc: Mann, Kay; Sole, Carlos
Subject: RE: Revised form of Memorandum of Option

ok

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Carnahan, Kathleen
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 10:55 AM
To: Manis, Herman
Cc: Mann, Kay; Sole, Carlos
Subject: Revised form of Memorandum of Option

Herman,

Attached is a revised form of Memorandum of Option for your review.  We have
revised it to be consistent with our form of Option to Purchase.

Please advise if these revisions are acceptable.

Thanks

 << File: FORM of Memorandum of Option (2001) Rev 2.doc >>

Kathleen Carnahan
Enron North  America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3146d
Houston, TX 77002
Phone - (713) 345-3386
Fax - (713) 646-3037


Your review and approval of the following two product type in the EOL
Datamanager is urgently needed (for directions on approval , please see steps
for approval at the bottom of this e-mail).

Trader :  John Suarez

Note:  THESE BANDWIDTH IP TRANSPORT PRODUCT TYPES HAVE BEEN CREATED FOR THE
ANDERSEN CONSULTING ANALYST DEMONSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY.   THE  PRODUCT TYPES
WILL BE ARCHIVED ONCE THE DEMO IS COMPLETE.

Example:

US WTI Basis  Platts LLS            Jan01      USD/bbl

Physical Description :

Product Type:   US Bandwidth Premium Service IP Transport Phy Fwd
Commodity: Bandwidth - Premium Service IP Transport
Currency:     USD
Default UOM:   Mbps
Country:   USA

Physical Description (e.g):
A US Bandwidth Transaction with Enron Broadband Services, L.P. ("EBS")
pursuant to which the Seller shall sell and the Buyer shall buy the quantity
of Bandwidth Units for Premium Service IP Transport submitted by Counterparty
via the Website. The Performance Metrics for Premium Service IP Transport
shall be as follows:  Jitter shall be 16 milliseconds One Way; Latency shall
be 80 milliseconds or less; Packet Loss shall be less than 1% per month;
Availability shall be 99.99% of available hours. The price shall be as
submitted by the Counterparty via the Website.  The quantity of Bandwidth
Units for Premium Service IP Transport transacted via the website shall
represent the reservation on capacity and the actual usage shall represent
the volume actually sold by the Seller and purchased by the Buyer.   Any
party entering into a Transaction to buy or sell Bandwidth Premium Service
Units from or to EBS shall be responsible for connecting to the Demarcation
Point located at each applicable Point of Presence. In order to achieve such
connectivity, a party may incur costs and expenses and may additionally be
required to execute certain documentation.

The Term of the Transaction shall correspond to the date(s) set forth in the
product short description on the website; the first such date shall be the
Effective Date and the last such date shall be the Termination Date.  The
Term of the Transaction shall begin at 12:00 a.m. (prevailing local time at
the EBS Point of Presence) on the Effective Date and continue to 11:59:59
p.m. (prevailing local time at the EBS Point of Presence) on the Termination
Date. Each applicable calendar month during the Term of the Transaction shall
be considered a Period.  The transaction shall be for IP Transport at the EBS
Point of Presence in Seattle (2001 6th Ave., Eleventh Floor, Suite 1150,
Seattle, WA 98121, NPA-NXX:  206-770, CLLI:  STTLWAWBH78).

The price is quoted in US Dollars per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency.

The unit of volume against which the Unit Price is quoted is the Megabits per
second for a Period and the quantity shown on the website shall be the
available number of Megabits per second for a Period.

==============================================================================
=====
STEPS FOR APPROVAL:

click the  START button
select  PROGRAMS
select  TEST APPLICATIONS
select ENRONONLINE CLUSTER(PROD)
 PROCEED WITH USUAL LOGIN/PASSWORD
click the Enron Online Production Cluster "START" button
select EnronOnLine (this is the EOL Datamanager)
 PROCEED WITH EOL LOGIN/PASSWORD
click on the "+" for EnronOnLine
click on the "+" for Product Types
click on the "+" for "Awaiting Approval" (OR  "Partially Approved")
select the product requiring review as stated in e-mail above
Right "mouse" click on "properties" to view product set-up
TO APPROVE:  Right mouse click on "Approved"

Thanks - Rob Cass  -  Melba Lozano
x35491   x58986


I am confirming.  Mark


Neil,

I would like to apologize for the confusion regarding Anshuman.
We have floated a number of possible scenarios regarding his
trip to Houston and there was a lot of confusion
regarding the terms (given that I was talking to Sandeep
every few days).

Currently, we expect Anshuman to come   to Houston for one month
to work on the DPC  project (at Jeff Shankman's request). The lawyers advised
me that we need an L1  visa  for him, irrespective of the duration
of  his stay.

Sorry for the confusion.

Vincent Kaminski
Managing Director - Research
Enron Corp.
1400 Smith Street
Room EB1962
Houston, TX 77002-7361
Phone: (713) 853 3848
Fax  :  (713) 646 2503
E-mail: vkamins@enron.com