---------------------- Forwarded by Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT on
08/10/99 10:38 AM ---------------------------

Mary Weatherstone on 08/06/99 03:58:19 PM
To: David G Mally/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H
Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary
Solmonson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul H Racicot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Kevin Sweeney/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/LON/ECT@ECT, Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT@EC
cc: Arshak Sarkissian/HOU/ECT@ECT, Keith Dziadek/HOU/EES@EES, Anthony B
Dayao/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jodi Dziadek/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Online North America Expense Work Order

Per my conversation with Trisha Hughes the following is the proper coding for
the Enron OnLine Project (EOL).

Company: 460
RC:  1491
W.O.:  E14911

Please use the rest of the proper coding all all other categories such as
detail class, etc.

If you have any questions, please contact Trisha Hughes or myself.

Thanks,
Mary
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Weatherstone/HOU/ECT on 08/06/99
03:46 PM ---------------------------

Jodi Dziadek
08/02/99 03:02 PM
To: Mary Weatherstone/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Online North America Expense Work Order

---------------------- Forwarded by Jodi Dziadek/HOU/ECT on 08/02/99 03:02 PM
---------------------------

Anthony B Dayao
07/27/99 04:32 PM
To: Jodi Dziadek/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Online North America Expense Work Order

---------------------- Forwarded by Anthony B Dayao/HOU/ECT on 07/27/99 04:31
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Veronda Willis                           07/22/99 10:21 AM

To: Anthony B Dayao/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: David G Mally/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Online North America Expense Work Order

---------------------- Forwarded by Veronda Willis/HOU/ECT on 07/22/99 10:20
AM ---------------------------
From: Veronda Willis on 07/13/99 08:56 AM
To: David G Mally/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H
Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary
Solmonson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul H Racicot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Kevin Sweeney/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/LON/ECT@ECT, Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Sue Foust/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Online North America Expense Work Order

The original W.O. # assigned E14911 on Co. 460 is the correct work order to
use.   Please let me know if you have any questions.

Veronda Willis
853-7994

David G Mally
07/12/99 12:30 PM
To: Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ted
Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Solmonson/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul H Racicot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin
Sweeney/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/LON/ECT@ECT, Fernley
Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Online North America Expense Work Order

Please use your normal coding for account major, account sub, detail class.

Please add OEXP in the cost catalog description:  OEXP covers all expenses
except for payroll including meals, travel, and hotel (for your expense
reports).

This work order is being set up in the ATES payroll system.  It will be
available for this pay period.

I hope this change has not inconvenienced anyone.

Regards,

Dave

---------------------- Forwarded by David G Mally/HOU/ECT on 07/09/99 12:42
PM ---------------------------

	From:  David G Mally                           06/30/99 07:17 PM

To: Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ted
Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Grant Masson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Solmonson/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul H Racicot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin
Sweeney/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Louise Kitchen/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/LON/ECT@ECT, Fernley
Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Online North America Expense Work Order

The following work order has been set-up to track expenses related to the
on-line project.  Travel expenses, other expenses, timesheets need to be
coded to the appropriate cost category within this work order.

  Company # 460
  W.O. # E14911

Regards,
Dave


Dudes like Chics with horns!

"Veselack, Joni" <joni.veselack@neg.pge.com> on 03/16/2001 07:51:23 AM
To: "'Chris.Germany@enron.com'" <Chris.Germany@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: RE: Happy St Paddy's Day

Now... what would I use those horns for you???

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris.Germany@enron.com [mailto:Chris.Germany@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 8:49 AM
To: joni.veselack@neg.pge.com
Subject: Re: Happy St Paddy's Day

Better polish those horns :o)

"Veselack, Joni" <joni.veselack@neg.pge.com> on 03/16/2001 07:47:43 AM

To:   "'Chris Germany'" <chris.germany@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:  Happy St Paddy's Day

My weekend delima

Devil says = Party DC

Angel says = unpack/organize townhome

Devil appears to be winning the battle.

PG&E National Energy Group and any other
company referenced herein that uses the PG&E name or
logo are not the same company as Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, the regulated California utility.  Neither
PG&E National Energy Group nor these other
referenced companies are regulated by the California Public
Utilities Commission.  Customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Company
do not have to buy products from these companies in order
to continue to receive quality regulated services from the utility.


This has sound to it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Panus, Stephanie
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 11:26 AM
To: Heard, Marie
Subject: FW: For hours of endless revenge..........

-----Original Message-----
From: Sayre, Frank
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 11:05 AM
To: Panus, Stephanie
Subject: FW: For hours of endless revenge..........

-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Wandrag [mailto:wandrag@kernelgroup.com]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 8:13 AM
To: Henrik Karlberg; Ian Gadd; Paddy Hodson; Jonathan Foster; Keiran
Hale; Stephen Terry; Bob Smillie; Darryl Baldwin; Dave Knight; Dave
Knight; Sayre, Frank; James Galowski; Marc Murph Morrison
Subject: For hours of endless revenge..........

http://www.fieler.com/terror/


Mike-

As we discussed, the timing of the Gaza Transfer Agreement has once again
become critical.  This e-mail will give you some background as to the
situation.

We financially closed the $90MM loan for the Gaza project last June. There
was a CP from the banks that the remaining $20MM of equity would not need to
be in the Project company until a date in the future.  This was done because
the project was placing a $20MM IPO locally and it was not possible to
complete the IPO before the debt financing.  The IPO has been successfully
subscribed; however, Enron has been blocking the transfer of the IPO funds
into the project company as we must have certain minor share transfers
completed prior to the transfer of the IPO funds in order to solidify our
U.S. tax deferral structure.

One of the covenants of the debt financing is that we must maintain a certain
debt to equity ratio in order to be able to draw more debt.  The project has
now reached the point in which it can no longer draw debt proceeds until the
remaining $20MM of equity (the IPO funds) are transferred into the project
account as these equity funds are required in order to allow for our
debt/equity ratio to be preserved.  The timing of this issue is being driven
by the fact that the project has to pay interest and commitment fees to the
bank on the 3rd of January.  The only source of these payments are the IPO
funds that must be transferred.

As mentioned above, Enron requires several minor share transfers in order to
preserve the U.S. tax deferral structure (5 or 10 shares need to be exchanged
in several companies in the chain).  These transfers must take place before
the IPO funds are put into the Project Company.  The language of these minor
transfers have been agreed among the partnership.  However, the partners are
refusing to execute these minor transfers until Enron executes the Transfer
Agreement.

When the Gaza project was being conceived, the former CALME management agreed
to the Transfer Agreement and this agreement was memorialized in detail in
the Joint Venture Agreement among the parties.  The Transfer Agreement
provides no party may have a change in control of their ownership in the
project without the consent of the other parties.  The JVA expressly states
that this transfer restriction is to be entered into by Enron Corp. and that
the restrictions on change of control apply all the way up the ownership
chain to Enron Corp. as well as to the other partners ultimate parent
entities.

A draft of this Transfer Agreement has been previously reviewed by Mark
Metts.  Mark indicated that he was not comfortable with the nature of the
agreement; however, this was last summer when Enron was re-evaluating its
position with respect to its international assets and it was thought that the
Gaza project may have soon not been part of Enron.

The Gaza team has spent a great deal of time over the past six months trying
to either soften the nature of the Transfer Agreement or to make the
restriction apply to some entity lower in the ownership chain than Enron
Corp.  These efforts have been unsuccessful as the partners claim that the
Transfer Agreement was a "pillar" of the deal that we had and furthermore
that this deal had been agreed directly with very senior Enron personnel.

Therefore, it appears that we must deal with the Transfer Agreement now in
order to allow Enron to preserve its tax deferral position, transfer the IPO
funds and ultimately allow the project to meet its debt service obligations
to the bank on January 3rd.  We have tried to bring this issue to a close
sooner, but the parnters have delayed resolution until now.  The timing of
this is unfortunate, but probably not accidental from our partners position.

You may reach me at any time at 502.458.4985 (through Thursday afternoon) or
at 713.522.4802 (home) or 713.818.9019 (mobile) beginning Thursday evening.
I appreciate your giving this attention during the holidays.

Andrew


I'm doing my best to be out by 6.


CALENDAR ENTRY:	APPOINTMENT

Description:
	Dashboard Demo - 4102 (Janousek)

Date:		8/9/2000
Time:		8:30 AM - 10:00 AM (Central Standard Time)

Detailed Description:


COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION
                        NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
                                NOVEMBER 19, 2001

Notice ID: 3281
5 - NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

SUBJECT: CAPACITY ALLOCATION-TIMELY NOMINATION CYCLE FOR NOVEMBER 20, 2001

PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL ALLOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON THE RECEIPT OF
ANY NEW NOMINATIONS OR INTRADAY NOMINATIONS.

RECEIPTS:

ALLOCATIONS DUE TO LONG WALL MINING OF LINE SM-123:  For the following MLI
points: There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There is no capacity for ITS
customers.  There is no capacity for secondary firm customers.  There is no
capacity for overruns.

        Equitable Hi Hat       MLI F3
        KYWV Beaver Creek      MLI H1
        CNR Boldman            MLI CNR02
        CNR Conoway            MLI CNR03
        CNR Johns Creek        MLI CNR08
        CNR Canada             MLI CNR09, CNR10
        CNR Stafford           MLI CNR11
        CNR Thacker/Majestic   MLI CNR12
        CNR Briar Mtn.         MLI CNR13
        CNR Huff Creek         MLI CNR14
        Conoco Grant           MLI P1

KA-1 LINE (819288 AND 827280):  There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There
is no capacity for ITS customers.  There is no capacity for secondary firm
customers.

DELIVERIES:

Market Area 21:  New secondary firm customers received equal shares of
available capacity.

INTERNAL CONSTRAINT:

LANHAM:  There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There is no capacity for ITS
customers.  There is no capacity for secondary firm customers.

Excess MDWQ               Available +
ISS Withdrawals           Available
SIT Withdrawals           Available
Imbalance Drawdowns       Available

Excess MDIQ               NOT Available +
ISS Injections            NOT Available
SIT Injections            NOT Available
Imbalance Paybacks        NOT Available

PAL Lends/Unparks         Available
PAL Parks/Loan Paybacks   NOT Available

+ Call Gas Control 24 hours in advance at (304) 357-2606 to request approval.

Columbia Gas Transmission has completed allocating all of its receipt and
delivery points for the gas day of November 20, 2001.  You may now view the
quantities you are authorized to flow on November 20, 2001.  On the Internet
NAVIGATOR, view Nominations, Scheduled Quantity, Scheduled Quantity for Service
Requestor-Summary, Nominations to be Viewed, and select Reduced Nominations.
The quantities confirmed to flow for your account are available on the Internet
NAVIGATOR after 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 19, 2001.

If you have any questions, please contact your Account Representative.


Hey Kate,

For 4/15 and 4/16, our schedules that we sent you show a Riverside
Generatioin component of 0.8 every hour (SP15).  This is not reflected in
your current April update.  The EnPower columns for these days should be
increased by 0.8 for every hour.  Right?

Also, The generation component that I sent you for Wednesday and Thursday
(which I sent Monday morning) had a generation component of 0.8.  In reality,
it was actually 0.55.  I didn't have the generation schedule from Riverside
and had to assume a value so I assumed it would be 0.8 because that's where
it had been for a while.  In your current file, you have the correct value of
0.55.  How did you know this?  Did Riverside call you to tell you they were
at 0.55 instead of 0.8?  Let me know.  Thanks.

Dan


Jeff is correct that AB 1890 said NOTHING about direct access credits, said
nothing about whether such credits were to be market based, or whether
direct access customers were to be indifferent to their choice of power
providers.  All of the direct access credit rules were developed by the CPUC
in their approval of the direct access tariff rules (Rule 22) and in their
implementation of the utility cost recovery plans (the calculation of CTC).
Therefore, we cannot protest the PE advice letter on that basis.  We can
still argue for the DJ indexes as a more appropriate substitute for a PE
credit based just on Edison's cost of generation (retained generation plus
QFs plus DWR purchases) but we have to recognize that it the number is
higher than the PE credit, we will be effectively asking for a subsidy to
direct access providers from the utility's bundled customers.  I do not
expect us to succeed in obtaining that subsidy.  The bottom up tariff
structure is a much more likely result at this point.  Mike Day

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 2:26 PM
To: sstoness@enron.com
Cc: Harry.Kingerski@enron.com; JBennett; Leslie.Lawner@enron.com;
tjohnso8@enron.com; Susan.J.Mara@enron.com; MDay@GMSSR.com
Subject: Re: SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest

Looks good, Scott.  One thing:  I admit I'm not a lawyer, so someone needs
to show me the precise language in AB 1890 that 1) requires the credit
(which, I believe was created by the PUC, not the legislature) to be based
on market and 2) requires DA customers to be indifferent to be from DA
suppliers.

Mike Day:  Do you concur with Scott's interpretation in AB 1890?

Like your arguments, Scott.  Just want to clarify that we're on solid legal
ground before putting the arguments foreward in a brief and/or protest.

Best,
Jeff

Scott

Stoness@EES          To:     JBennett
<JBennett@GMSSR.com> @ ENRON
cc:     Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Tamara
04/20/2001           Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Leslie
Lawner/HOU/EES@EES,
10:46 AM             Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject:     Re: SCE Advice Filing
on PX Credit
-- Protest(Document link: Jeff
Dasovich)

We should protest this issue and argue that nothing should change but that
the Px credit should be based on DJ-NP15 and DJ-SP15 rather than the
defunct Px because AB1890 requires it to be based on market (not costs).
Changing to procured energy is inconsistent with the law AB1890 which
requires DA customers to be indifferent to buying from DA suppliers.
And since DA suppliers face costs close to DJ-NP15/SP15, that is the
only appropriate available method.

Further, the issue of how to calculate Px is interrelated to whether DA
customers should be charged the generation surcharges ($10 +$30).  DA
customers should be given market based Px credits (based on DJNP15/SP15)
because its the law.  There are 2 possible interpretations resulting from
the combination of AB1890 and the new law.
The DA customers should get a market based Px credit and not pay any
surcharge.
The DA customers should get a market based Px credit and pay the $30 +
$10 surcharges
Interpretation 1 results in DA customers getting lower rates than all other
customers.  It seems unlikely that the legislation would have this intent.
Interpretation 2 results in DA customers getting the same rate as all other
customers until the end of AB1890.  This seems like the likely
interpretation since otherwise the new legislation would have repealled
AB1890.  Thus given that the DA customers are being held indifferent to
frozen rates plus $40, they should get a Px market based credit plus pay
the surcharge until the rate freeze ends.

Once the Px credit ends (Mar 2002), the surcharge should end because the
law (AB1890) no longer requires them to be held at frozen rates and
because:
Any customer that is being served by a supplier other than DWR and the
utility is not causing any costs for DWR or the utility therefore they
should not be charged for them.

In the event that Px credit is not set based on market value (if the courts
interpret the law differently than Enron) then there should be no
generation surcharge for DA customers.

This is the same argument we should make in our brief on rate setting

Scott

JBennett <JBennett@GMSSR.com> on 04/20/2001 09:03:06 AM

To:   "Harry Kingerski (E-mail)" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, "Robert
Neustaedter (E-mail)" <Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com>, "Scott Stoness
(E-mail)" <sstoness@enron.com>, "Tamara Johnson (Business Fax)"
<IMCEAFAX-Tamara+20Johnson+40+2B1+20+28713+29+20345-7374@GMSSR.com>
cc:   "Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)" <jdasovic@enron.com>, "Sue Mara (E-mail)"
<smara@enron.com>
Subject:  SCE Advice Filing on PX Credit -- Protest

As you are aware, SCE made an advice filing on April 5th to eradicate the
PX
Rate Schedule and Replace it with Schedule PE --Procured Energy.  As part
of
the filing, SCE proposes to set "on an interim basis" the cost of energy
procurement, for bundled service customers for billing purposes and in the
calculation of the energy credit for direct access customers equal to the
Generation rate component of the Customer's otherwise applicable tariff.

Two primary issues arise from SCE's statement. First what does "interim
basis" mean -- how long will this be in effect.  In starts on January 19th,
but it is unclear as to when it would end. Second, and most important. is
what is meant by the Generation rate component.  While there is not much
explanation in the April 5 advice letter, in a subsequent advice letter
filed on April 11 (1533-E), SCE set forth "Rate Schedule Specific
Generation
Related Rates" which range between five and nine cents.

I have forwarded both the referenced advice letters to you earlier.  We
need
to protest the change in the PX credit by Wednesday, April 25th.  All
thoughts on the matter are welcome.

Jeanne


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

F O R

May 11, 2001 5:00pm through May 14, 2001 12:00am
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SCHEDULED SYSTEM OUTAGES:

ARDMORE DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

AZURIX: No Scheduled Outages.

EB34 DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

EDI SERVER: No Scheduled Outages.

ENRON CENTER SOUTH DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages

ENRON NORTH AMERICAN LANS:      AlSO SEE ORIGINAL REPORT
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Fri 5/11/2001 at  6:15:00 PM CT thru Fri 5/11/2001 at  7:00:00 PM CT
	Fri 5/11/2001 at  4:15:00 PM PT thru Fri 5/11/2001 at  5:00:00 PM PT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at  12:15:00 AM London thru Sat 5/12/2001 at 1:00:00 AM London
Outage:  Trader DFS Re-Configuration
Environments Impacted:  Corp
Purpose: Data access
Backout: Continue to use ENEHOU
Contact(s): 	Frank Coles    (713)406-0470
		John Cheng     (713)853-1672

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET: No Scheduled Outages.

MESSAGING: No Scheduled Outages.

MARKET DATA: No Scheduled Outages.

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS:         ALSO SEE ORIGINAL REPORT
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Sat 5/12/2001 at  10:00:00 AM CT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  5:00:00 PM CT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at    8:00:00 AM PT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  3:00:00 PM PT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at  4:00:00 PM London thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  11:00:00 PM London
Outage:  Disk upgrade for dual boot on server gfp1.
Environments Impacted:  Infinity development
Purpose: Disk upgrade needed to establish dual boot redundancy.
Backout: reinstall old configuration
Contact(s): 	Malcolm Wells    713-345-3716

Impact:  CORP NFS
Time:  Fri 5/11/2001 at  8:00:00 PM CT  thru Fri 5/11/2001 at  10:00:00 PM CT
	Fri 5/11/2001 at  6:00:00 PM PT thru Fri 5/11/2001 at   8:00:00 PM PT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at  2:00:00 AM London thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  4:00:00 AM London
Outage:  OS upgrade on NFS servers calvin and hobbes.
Environments Impacted:  Sitara, Weather App. Infifity NFS
Purpose: The upgrade is needed for added SIFS functionality and support.  SIFs is the component that allows NT/UNIX access.
Backout: We can revert to one of several previous OS version stored on disks.
Contact(s): 	Malcolm Wells    713-345-3716

Impact:  Unix
Time:  Sat 5/12/2001 at  2:00:00 PM CT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  4:00:00 PM CT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at  12:00:00 PM PT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  2:00:00 PM PT
	Sat 5/12/2001 at  8:00:00 PM London thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  10:00:00 PM London
Outage:  Neutron - Add a CPU boardd
Environments Impacted:  UniX Users
Purpose: increase cpus
Backout: Remove / replace board.
Contact(s): 	Adam DeRidder    713-853-1428
		Michael Barber      713-853-5530
		Wilford Stevens     713-853-7564

SITARA:    See above

SUN/OSS SYSTEM: No Scheduled Outages.

TELEPHONY:       SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

TERMINAL SERVER:  No Scheduled Outages.

UNIFY:   ALSO SEE ORIGINAL REPORT
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Fri 5/11/2001 at  4:00:00 PM CT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  3:30:00 PM CT
	Fri 5/11/2001 at  2:00:00 PM PT thru Sat 5/12/2001 at  1:30:00 PM PT
	Fri 5/11/2001 at 10:00:00 PM London thru Sat 5/12/2001 at 9:30:00 PM London
Outage:  Configure new hard disk and install all necessary OS and software.
Environments Impacted:  Power Settlements users
Purpose: Upgrade server
Backout: Re-install old hard disk, fall back to stand-by server as last resort.
Contact(s): 	Michael Cuccia    713-853-6629
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
								FOR ASSISTANCE

(713) 853-1411   Enron Resolution Center

Specific Help:
Information Risk Management			(713) 853-5536
SAP/ISC                                                                               (713) 345-4727
Unify On-Call 					(713) 284-3757  [Pager]
Sitara On-Call					(713) 288-0101  [Pager]
RUS/GOPS/GeoTools/APRS			(713) 639-9726  [Pager]
OSS/UA4/TARP				(713) 285-3165  [Pager]
CPR						(713) 284-4175  [Pager]
EDI Support 					(713) 327-3893  [Pager]
EES Help Desk					(713)853-9797 OR (888)853-9797


In anticipation of your meeting tomorrow, I have attached a summary of
Enron's credit exposure to PG&E Corp and its affiliates as of Friday, January
5th.  I will be happy to provide you updated numbers if necessary in the AM.

Please call if you have any questions.

Bill


Susan, looks great. I have a few suggestions ; simple words and
format. We can review tommorrow. The only area I saw that we did
not address, I think we should is the Item 7 (secondary transmission)
market. The Commission is focused on this area of in state develop
ment, we should take advantage.  I will be faxing copies of
previow testimony for your background and use in our testimony.

Thx, Mark IGS

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Susan.Scott@enron.com [mailto:Susan.Scott@enron.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 4:02 PM
> To: mbaldwin@igservice.com
> Cc: Jeffery.Fawcett@enron.com
> Subject: revised testimony
>
>
> OK, this is starting to take shape.  I handed off a copy to Jeff today;
> he'll review it this evening.  Your comments are welcome at any
> time.  I'll
> be in all day tomorrow; I am planning to be out of the office Friday but
> may need to come in early a.m. to put the finishing touches on the 1st
> draft we send to the group.  To the extent you can provide testimony
> references before that time, that would be great.
>
> (See attached file: JCF direct testimony.doc)
>
> Re. today's e-mails from the other parties:  We're OK with PG&E's addition
> to the settlement.  I am not wild about it since it isn't exactly
> consistent with how other points are treated.  But, this is a settlement
> after all.  And I think it is better to do what we can to get PG&E on
> board.  I'll send an e-mail out tomorrow once we see who else is on the
> bandwagon.
>
> On Kern's proposal:  Subject to seeing something in writing, Transwestern
> will agree to the proposal I believe you and Jeff discussed yesterday.  We
> will at least agree not to oppose Kern, or to support them on a limited
> basis.  Give me a call tomorrow (713-853-0596) and let's make sure we're
> all on the same page (Dasovich is going to call you also).
>
> Muchas gracias y hasta manana.
>
> S.


Here are some of the agenda items we want to talk about this year at the Links meeting. If you have anything that you would like to add to the list please send them to me or give me a call.
Thank you

1.	Hugoton, Holcomb, Sublette, ESD's as well as the field station ESD's.
2.	Mullinville ESD or maintenance.
3.	Bushton Plant maintenance
4.	Bushton Plant (Oneok) maintenance
5.	Beaver Plant, and also field station ESD's
6.	Pipeline outages & Projects
7.	Oneok field outages
8.	Mobil well test schedule
9.	Oxy well test schedule
10. Duke field outages, tests.
11. Operations, and Gas Control (Questions)

Jerry Graves
713-345-8923

When: February 20
Time: 8:00 to 3:00
Where: Holiday Inn Express
           Liberal, Kansas
           620-624-9700


http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4687034&tid=ntap&sid=46870
34&mid=40327


fyi
---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000
08:01 AM ---------------------------
From: Mark E Haedicke@ECT on 08/15/2000 01:37 PM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject:

Per our conversation on coordination of our efforts on California and other
jurisdictions, we have developed the following training program:

1.    Anti-trust -- we have completed anti-trust training in Houston for
traders and have scheduled it in Portland and Calgary.

2.    Sales Practices -- this training has been completed in Portland and is
being scheduled in Houston and Calgary.

3.    Anti-manipulation -- this training has been completed in Portland, but
needs to be expanded to cover local law manipulation issues.  It also needs
to be scheduled in Houston and Calgary.

Also, the above training needs to be supplemented with training on local
power pool rules.  There is a similar program being prepared in London.  A
meeting is being scheduled so we can discuss these matters further.

Mark Haedicke


Hi everyone,
The new SBA season is upon us and we have some new SBA providers.  The new season will start November 1, 2001 and go through October 31, 2002.

Attached is the list we use when we need to contact the providers when we are requesting either a Pack, Peak, or Draft.  It includes the provider's name, contract numbers and the person to contact regarding nominations.

If anyone has any questions regarding this service, don't hesitate to ask.  Thanks for your help.

Reyna Cabrera
(713) 853-3072


I thought you might enjoy this.

You should have seen Michael's eyes while he was riding in that Mercedes
convertible yesterday.  He was speechless, and you know how rare that is!  I
suspect we will be hearing about it now...

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 02/14/2001 09:34
AM ---------------------------

"Ron & Sharon Seals" <rseals@pdq.net> on 02/13/2001 10:41:21 PM
Please respond to "Ron & Sharon Seals" <rseals@pdq.net>
To: <Kay.Mann@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Michael

Kay,

I am so glad to hear that Michael is doing great at school.  Neil has told
me he loves Marilou's reports that he is attending so well without meds.

He really is a precious boy!  Yesterday you would have thought that "having
poop on one's shoe" was the greatest thing on earth.  He absolutely
delighted in telling ALL of us WHY he was wearing only one shoe!  He was
giggling the whole time!  At the conclusion of the session when he walked
out to Neil, I heard him ask, "Well, how's my shoe doing?"  How do you two
keep from laughing the whole time with him?  Just writing this is making me
laugh!

Have a great time together at the rodeo.   He'll love spending the time with
you!

Sharon


---------------------- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 12/17/99
09:50 AM ---------------------------

Elizabeth Sager
12/16/99 05:50 PM
To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Fax Machine on 31

Richard
Here is where Genia got on fax room search.  Lets's talk tommorrow about
where to go from here.
Thanks
---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT on 12/16/99 05:48
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Genia FitzGerald                           12/15/99 12:30 PM

To: Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Fax Machine on 31

Elizabeth,

We have seemed to hit a brick wall in finding out who has monitored the fax
machine we have discussed on the 31st Floor.  Don Black's assistant,
Claudette Harvey said no one really collects the faxes and it is used by two
groups.  Kay Chapman another assistant on the floor said it used to be
monitored by Hub Gavela (sp?) but he is no longer here.  We called the
service number on the fax to see if we could get a "poll" report listing all
the faxes that have come in and found out this particular machine only has
memory for the last 10 faxes.  I have called Lucent (the telephone people)
and with approval from my manager they can give me a phone report of all the
incoming phone numbers to that machine since September 1st.  Please advise.

Thanks,
Genia


Trade counts, by 3:30 pm, since October 1:

TRADE DATE	TRADE CNT
11/7/2001	6034
11/6/2001	6223
11/5/2001	6450
11/4/2001	36
11/3/2001	58
11/2/2001	5841
11/1/2001	6539
10/31/2001	7093
10/30/2001	5713
10/29/2001	7060
10/28/2001	7
10/27/2001	11
10/26/2001	6776
10/25/2001	8359
10/24/2001	7906
10/23/2001	8500
10/22/2001	7883
10/21/2001	34
10/20/2001	4
10/19/2001	7978
10/18/2001	7610
10/17/2001	7405
10/16/2001	7086
10/15/2001	5386
10/14/2001	19
10/13/2001	16
10/12/2001	6095
10/11/2001	5922
10/10/2001	6200
10/9/2001	5252
10/8/2001	5092
10/7/2001	52
10/6/2001	17
10/5/2001	5846
10/4/2001	6455
10/3/2001	5930
10/2/2001	5354
10/1/2001	5207

Counterparty data is in the enclosed spreadsheet.


Sitara 147092 is tiered pricing. If you want, you can nom whatever volume is
on the deal ticket and the economics will work out correctly. It will keep
things in balance a bit better, but you can go either way. For Feb there is a
base deal for 5000/day and a term deal for 20,000/day. Only 15,000 of the
20000 is pathed.


Dutch - please send me the numbers.  Sarah


POSSIBLE DRAFT LETTER TO ROD EDDINGTON at BA FROM KEN LAY
Dear Rod:
Irwin Stelzer says that he has mentioned to you that the next meeting of
Enron's advisory council is scheduled for London on October 30 and 31. The
council includes several prominent permanent members drawn from the  business
and academic communities, to which we add distinguished guests with expertise
in areas of interest to us on an ad hoc basis. Several of our top executives
attend these meetings.
I am hoping that you might help us in two ways. Irwin tells me that your
headquarters building is innovative and has many features that it would be
well worth our while to know about and to study. Would it be possible for you
to arrange a tour for a few of our executives, both from the US and the UK,
say on the morning of October 30?
Second, we understand from Irwin and from the press that you have done
wonders in reinvigorating and revitalizing the BA staff. I am hoping that you
might be willing to share some of the secrets of your success with us,
perhaps at an informal buffet lunch at our new London headquarters on October
31, or at some other time on that day that might be more convenient for you.
Let me take this opportunity to congratulate you on what you have
achieved at BA, in a short time and in a tough market.
Sincerely,


Attached are our comments to the Assignment and Assumption and the Bill of
Sale as noted earlier.? I look forward to seeing revised drafts and forms for
the purchase by CAED II.

Regards, Karl

 <<enxt cmnts .PDF>>

-----Original Message----- From:?? Kay.Mann@enron.com
[SMTP:Kay.Mann@enron.com] Sent:?? Friday, January 05, 2001 5:39 PM To:????
Lisa.Bills@enron.com; Roseann.Engeldorf@enron.com; Catherine.Clark@enron.com;
john.cody@csfb.com; kwiemer@milbank.com; Roger.Ondreko@enron.com

Subject:??????? CA Development

(See attached file: Purchase Option Notice(CAED I)rev1.doc)(See attached
file: Assumption with GE ack(CAEDI)rev1.DOC)(See attached file: Bill of
salerev1.DOC)

Attached are drafts of the documents to effect the transfer of two GE
turbines and one ABB transformer to CAED I and CAED II.? The dates and
amounts are bracketed, as pending the determination of the closing date. We
will need sets for both CAED I and CAED II, with II receiving the
transformer.? These will be prepared with the forms are agreed.

These documents are subject to internal Enron review, but in the interest of
time I am sending the documents to everyone.

Thank you,

Kay ?<< File: Purchase Option Notice(CAED I)rev1.doc >>? << File: Assumption
with GE ack(CAEDI)rev1.DOC >>? << File: Bill of salerev1.DOC >>

This e-mail message may contain legally privileged and/or confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee or
agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s),
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message
from your computer.

 - enxt cmnts .PDF


Here's my suggestion:

27.3   Consequential Losses.  The Parties have agreed to liquidate certain
direct damages and have provided for these damages as Liquidated Damages and
Cancellation Fees.  For purposes of this Section, Liquidated Damages and
Cancellation Fees shall not be deemed consequential losses.  In no event,
whether as a result of breach of contract, breach of warranty, indemnity,
tort liability (including negligence or strict liability without regard to
fault) or otherwise, and whether arising before or after completion of the
Scope of Work, shall either Party be liable to the other Party for special,
indirect, exemplary or consequential losses of any nature whatsoever,
including losses or damages caused by reason of unavailability of the
Equipment, shutdowns or service interruptions, loss of use, loss of profits
or revenue, inventory or use charges, cost of purchased or replacement power,
interest charges or cost of capital or claims of a Party,s customers.  For
the avoidance of doubt, the foregoing limitation of liability in this Section
shall in no case not limit Seller,s obligation to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless Purchaser Indemnified Parties in accordance with Article XX for any
claims Third Party Claim, including Claims involving the Third Party's
consequential losses, losses or damages occasioned by third parties. in
accordance with Article XX,

Scott Dieball@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
09/20/2000 08:27 AM
To: Kay Mann@ENRON
cc: Sheila Tweed@ECT, Roseann Engeldorf/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Martin W
Penkwitz/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: GE - Indemnity and LOL Language

Per our discussion yesterday, attached is a copy of the Indemnity and LOL
contract language redlined to reflect those GE comments which we could
probably accept.  Kay please review and see if I missed anything or whether
we need to discuss further.  Otherwise, please forward this markup to Rob
Taylor for inclusion in the next draft of the Purchase Agreement.

Regards,

Scott


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
?	Several procedural scenarios that might play out regarding the Edison MOU.
?      A snapshot analysis of the political dynamics that affect the outcome.

Procedural Scenarios

Assembly
The Assembly Appropriations Committee's plan to take up SB 78XX today will likely be a pro forma hearing moving the bill forward to the full Assembly on a party line vote.  While the controversial land easements amendments had been removed as of Friday's draft bill, it is rumored that the amendments may have returned over the weekend.  If the problematic "Shaver Lake" provisions are removed from the bill, Assembly members may not hear much vocal public opposition from their constituents about rejecting the bill (although consumer groups are opposed and are trying to generate grass roots opposition).  If the Shaver Lake amendments remain, several Central Valley legislators may oppose the plan in committee.

Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg supports this Edison deal, and the business community supports some recent amendments. This likely mitigates concerns from other pro-business Democrats.  With or without the Shaver Lake provisions, Hertzberg should get at least 41 Democratic members (and probably a few more), but no more than 2 Republicans (if any) to vote Aye on the bill.  Hertzberg has more than enough votes to spare from his caucus - he needs 41 votes for the bill to pass, and there are 50 Democrats in his caucus.  If the vote is close, a personal plea from him and/or the Governor should enable him to get to 41.

Senate
The bill would next move to the Senate for approval of the Assembly's amendments. This is where the prognosticating gets difficult.  Senate President pro Tem John Burton has said he does not support any amendments to SB 78xx.  Gov. Davis and Speaker Hertzberg will likely meet several times with Burton to try to cut a deal, but relations between Davis and Burton are currently frayed (due to a variety of factors), and Burton is not one to back down from a position unless there is something in it for him to change his position.
This would lead to one of four scenarios:
?	Burton refuses to have the bill heard in the Senate, and no Edison MOU bill is approved before Sept. 15th,
?	Burton agrees to let the bill be heard despite his opposition (this option is unlikely),
?	Burton comes to a deal with Davis and Hertzberg and brings the bill (as it is passed by the Assembly) for a         vote in the full Senate with his support,
?	Burton comes to a deal with Davis and Hertzberg, but as part of the deal, he insists on changes in the bill - thereby sending it back to the Assembly for more amendments, and another vote in the Assembly - before a vote in the Senate.

John Burton is considered one of the smartest, and certainly the cleverest politician in California state government today, so it is problematic to guess his next move.  Additionally, external factors play into the determination of which of these options will result.  For instance, the Governor may be willing to cut a deal with Burton on an unrelated issue that Burton cares more about resolving his way (e.g. workers compensation benefits, drug courts, reapportionment).  Foretelling what will happen in the Senate is extremely difficult.  But Davis and Hertzberg will try to cut a deal with him, and given Burton's past actions, he may string them along, holding out for several days (maybe even until Sept. 14th) before he agrees to anything.

Governor
Assuming the bill escapes the Senate (and more deals may need to be cut to get enough votes) the Governor will almost certainly sign it, regardless of Edison's public position.  The bill will go into effect 90 days after the Governor signs it.
Consumer groups have vowed to undo any "Edison bailout" enacted into law by way of the ballot box.  That could be either (1) an initiative to pass another bill overturning SB 78xx and replacing it with other provisions, or (2) a referendum to repeal SB 78xx, making it as if the bill was never passed at all.

Initiative
Once drafted and submitted to the Attorney General, it takes 15 days to receive an official title and summary, and another 25 days if the AG determines that a fiscal estimate is necessary. After either the 15 or 40 days, the Attorney General sends it to the proponents, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Secretary of State. The day it is mailed is called the Summary Date.  That is the day upon which all calculations are made.

The proponents are allowed a maximum of 150 days to circulate petitions and collect signatures. However, the initiative measure must qualify at least 131 days before the statewide election in which it is to be submitted to the voters.  Therefore it is past the deadline to qualify for the next statewide election, on March 5, 2002 (statewide primaries), and so, could not qualify until the statewide general election on November 5, 2002.  However the window is tight for that election, as well, and a proposal would need to be submitted to the Attorney General by the end of September 2001 to qualify for November 2002.

The legislature may conduct public hearings on the proposed initiative, but cannot amend it.  So whatever is submitted is what goes on the ballot.  An initiative requires the gathering of signatures equal to five percent of the total votes cast for Governor in the preceding gubernatorial election (419,260 signatures).  The ability to collect signature is heavily dependent on the amount of money the proponents have to pay signature gatherers. It seems unlikely that the consumer groups will be able to raise that kind of money quickly, but Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights has been successful at placing pro-consumer initiatives on the ballot before, including Prop. 9 in 1998, which sought to undo AB 1890 before the public understood its ramifications.

Referendum
Referenda on the ballot are fairly rare in comparison to initiatives, although a successful referendum was on the March 7, 2000 ballot.  Prior to that, the last four questions placed before the voters appeared on the June 1982 primary election ballot. All four were defeated. Since 1912, there have been approximately 50 attempts to qualify referenda for the ballot. Of the 50 attempts, 39 qualified for the ballot, 26 of which prevented legislative statutes from taking effect.  The circulation calendar, verification, timing, and the form of petition have different requirements than initiatives.  For example, the California Constitution requires that the process must be completed within ninety days of the enactment of the bill that is being referred. The signature requirements are the same for a referendum as an initiative statute, though.

Political Dynamics
Notwithstanding the Governor's and Assembly Speaker's desire to enact an Edison rescue package, Senate President pro tem John Burton is in the driver's seat. In fact, as noted above, there is a perception among some that it is the Governor who needs Burton and not the other way around.  One business source close to the negotiations believes Burton is not inclined to ask his members to make a second vote for an Edison bailout. In fact, members of both houses are worried about being perceived as bailing out the hobbled utility, their reluctance fed by generators' lobbyists who are sharing survey data that indicates voters blame the utilities for the energy mess and oppose any bailout.

Currently, due largely to this dynamic and others such as the Shaver Lake issue, there are not 41 votes for an Edison rescue in the Assembly. We believe this will change as the Governor and the Speaker exert their influence, and the bill will pass the Assembly.  As difficult as it is to make predictions regarding the Assembly, the state Senate presents an even larger challenge. However, at this point it is our opinion that the odds of an Edison rescue package being approved by the state Senate are less than 50 percent.


Hi everybody,
I happened on an addition to my search for info while doing a little research last night. There just might not be anything on this out there yet, but I was at Asus' website last night and it seems they have a new dual-processer motherboard out called a CUV266-DLS and I can't find anything about it anywhere. Maybe it's too new or too expensive for anyone to have bothered with up to this point but I'm snooping around so if you've heard anything...
Avram


Please follow-up with Jeff as soon as possible.  Let me know when someone has
contacted Jeff.  Thanks
---------------------- Forwarded by Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron on 05/21/2001
07:55 AM ---------------------------
From: Jeffrey A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/18/2001 01:29 PM
To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: RE: RFP for coal bid

As of yet, I have not heard anything.  I'll look for her call by Tuesday May
22.  Thanks.  Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Horton, Stanley
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 1:24 PM
To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ENRON
Subject: RFP for coal bid

Peggy Fowler should have someone from PGE calling you.  If they don't please
let me know.


You have probably seen the notice already.  I expect some sort of industry response.

GAC

-----Original Message-----
From: Katie Kaplan [mailto:kaplan@iepa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 6:00 PM
To: Alan Comnes (E-mail); Bill Woods (E-mail); Bob Ellery (E-mail);
Brian T. Cragg (E-mail); Carolyn A Baker (E-mail); Curtis Hatton
(E-mail); Curtis Kebler (E-mail); Parquet, David; 'Dean Nistetter';
Douglas Kerner (E-mail); Duane Nelsen (E-mail); Eric Eisenman (E-mail);
George Vaughn (E-mail); Greg Blue (E-mail); Jack Pigott (E-mail); 'JoAnn
Van Buren'; Joe Ronan (E-mail); John G. Larrea (E-mail); Ken Hoffman
(E-mail); Kent Palmerton (E-mail); Fillinger, Mark; Mark J. Smith
(E-mail); Marty McFadden (E-mail); Nam Nguyen (E-mail); 'Rachel King';
Randall J. Hickok (E-mail); Roger Pelote (E-mail); Ross Ain (E-mail);
Scott Sadler (E-mail); Steve Ponder (E-mail); Steve Schleimer (E-mail);
Susan J Mara (E-mail); Tom Hartman (E-mail); Ward Scobee (E-mail);
William Hall (E-mail)
Cc: Carol Hudson (E-mail); Jan Smutny-Jones (E-mail); Katie Kaplan
(E-mail); Sandra Moseley (E-mail); Steven Kelly (E-mail); Andy Brown
(E-mail); Jean Munoz (E-mail); Thomas R. McMorrow (E-mail)
Subject: FW: CAISO Notice - New Requirements Regarding Scheduling And
Dispatch Instructions
Importance: High

Greetings:

The ISO just released new requirements for scheduling and dispatch
instructions for generators. I have attached these requirements for your
convenience.

They claim that they had put these requirements in place, which are in
effect immediately, because people were continually out of compliance with
their (and FERC's) orders.  All of the requirements are extremely
concerning- and we should discuss further.  One note of interest (but not
surprise) is that the ISO is inflicting these requirements (such as failure
to submit feasible schedules) on the generators only, claiming their actions
are causing grid instability, when in fact failure of the load to properly
schedule and procure for their customers is of graver concern.

Other requirements will cause the units to be run harder that needed,
further jeopardizing reliability and supporting our arguments made in the
protest.

If you think we should discuss further please e-mail me and I will set up a
call.

Katie Kaplan
Manager of State Policy Affairs
Independent Energy Producers Association
(916) 448-9499

-----Original Message-----
From: CRCommunications [mailto:CRCommunications@caiso.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 5:10 PM
To: ISO Market Participants
Subject: CAISO Notice - New Requirements Regarding Scheduling And Dispatch
Instructions

ISO Market Participants:
in light of a growing pattern among Market Participants of failure to submit
feasible Schedules, failure to comply with the must-offer obligation,
failure to comply with Dispatch Instructions and the recent untenable acts
by certain Market Participants that resulted in serious threats to WSCC-wide
reliability, the ISO is compelled to immediately impose new requirements to
prevent reoccurrence of such events.  Please see the Market Notice posted at
http://www.caiso.com/docs/2000/06/01/2000060109560313721.html
<http://www.caiso.com/docs/2000/06/01/2000060109560313721.html>  for a
complete discussion of the new requirements.

CR Communications


Jeff,

I spoke with Steve Semlitz this afternoon.  He basically wants to bi-laterally take our thresholds to zero on the ENA-Master with HETCO.  I informed Steve that I would run the concept by Bill Bradford.  Bill owns this issue and has spoken to Hess several times today (Grim Trevino/John Butala).

Regards,
tm

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shankman, Jeffrey A.
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 12:41 PM
To:	Buy, Rick; Bradford, William S.
Cc:	Moran, Tom
Subject:

I phoned Steve Semlitz at Hess (Hetco)  He thinks we owe them 13.9, and told him we were addressing all issues, and I (or Tom Moran) would get back with him today.  They are still trading with us, but want to take margin threshold to $0.


Diana and Sean:

Attached please find the latest prior month adjuments to be entered in your P&L for 11/30/01.  The total amount will be
-$1,616.76.  The biggest negative item (-$162,309.44) is explained by Settlements as due to "multiple deals DJ index settling" as you can see in the attached detail sheet.  I have asked Settlements to provide more details (deal numbers) so it might better help us understand where this negative adjustment is from.  I will send you the deal numbers as soon as I found out.

Please also note the attached file is preliminary.  There could be more to come from Settlements between now and month-end.  I'll update you if that happens.  Please take a look at the items listed now and let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Fran


---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/19/2001 09:24
AM ---------------------------

"O'BRIEN, Lisa" <lisa.obrien@freshfields.com> on 04/18/2001 03:40:34 PM
To: "'ccampbell@kslaw.com'" <ccampbell@kslaw.com>, "'kay.mann@enron.com'"
<kay.mann@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: FW: Salmon Energy:  Escrow Agreement

This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you
have received it in error, you are on notice of its status.  Please notify us
immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system.
Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to
any other person:  to do so could be a breach of confidence.  Thank you for
your co-operation.  Please contact our
IT Helpdesk on +44 (0) 20 7936 4000 Ext.2000 or email ITHelp@freshfields.com
if you need assistance.

(Resending)
Attached please find comments to the Escrow Agreement.  Please do not
hesitate to call me or Gregg to discuss these comments.

 - Scanned_.pdf


Rajesh,

Have you been able to get a draft COU agreement from Clay?

How is your move coming?

Paul


El Paso and Reliant don't have time to talk about right now but I'm also having a problem telling them about the deal because there are too many unknowns.  It's not the same as selling parked gas on Sonat.

Still working it though.

-----Original Message-----
From: Concannon, Ruth
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:54 AM
To: Schneider, Chip; Gray, Barbara N.; Kelly, Neil; Bartlett, Jeff;
Sharp, Greg
Cc: Coffey Jr., Jim; Thompkins, Jason; Ellenberg, Mark; McMichael Jr.,
Ed; Germany, Chris; Garza, Maria
Subject: RE: Bridgeline Storage Company, LLC

Chip,

This e-mail confirms the info that we talked about this morning:

1)  We found the old interruptible transport contract that is referenced in the firm storage agreement.  It is a maximum rate transport contract that allows discounting of transport rates.  I do not know what the maximum transport rate is for Bridgeline, but it is probably one rate for the entire pipeline.  No active discounts were found in ENA's records.  With the pipeline's cooperation, however, new discounts can be negotiated.
2)  Under ENA's firm storage agreement, you must withdraw it from storage at the Storage Delivery/Redelivery Point which is defined as the interconnect between the storage field and Bridgeline Pipeline System.  This means that some sort of transportation agreement on Bridgeline must be used if ENA does not sell the inventory in place.
3)  Chris is making some preliminary calls to gauge the market interest for purchasing ENA's storage inventory.  So far he has not received much positive feedback.  As we discussed before, using an interruptible transport contract puts the shipper at risk that the gas will show up everyday and be available for sale to third parties.  The price ENA receives from purchasers will most likely be discounted for this IT transport risk.

Good luck with the meeting,
Ruth

-----Original Message-----
From: Schneider, Chip
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 2:41 PM
To: Gray, Barbara N.; Kelly, Neil; Bartlett, Jeff; Sharp, Greg
Cc: Concannon, Ruth; Coffey Jr., Jim; Thompkins, Jason; Ellenberg, Mark
Subject: Bridgeline Storage Company, LLC

I've made a few changes.  I've heard from Greg and OpCo is on-board.

One remaining question is whether we go in offering to pay demand charges for the total 2.5Bcf or only the 1.9+Bcf actually used during this period, given that the gas was trapped.  The ratable amount is approximately $100k lower than the $575k in the letter.  If for no other reason, from a negotiating perspective I believe we should go in with the lower number.  Mark, do you have a view on this?  If our legal analysis is clearly based on demand charges at the maximum volume, we probably should stay with the $575k.


The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete.  Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein.  Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author.  As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates.  , 2000 Carr Futures

The charts are now available on the web by clicking on the hot link(s)
contained in this email. If for any reason you are unable to receive the
charts via the web, please contact me via email and I will email the charts
to you as attachments.

Crude Spread     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/crudespread33.pdf
Heat Spread     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatspread33.pdf
Unleaded Spread
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/unleadspread33.pdf

Heat Crack     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatcrack33.pdf
Gas Crack     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/gascrack33.pdf

Carr Futures
150 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 1500
Chicago, IL 60606  USA
Tel:  312-368-6149
Fax:  312-368-2281
soblander@carrfut.com
http://www.carrfut.com


?

Rushing Game Matchups???  Here's how I see  the matchups this week.? Please
note, see the cheatsheet online  http://www.cheatsheets.net/week12sheet.htm?
for exactly where I rank players  and to determine who to start.? Just
because one matchup may be more favorable than another, that doesn't
necessarily  mean I'd start the player with the best matchup.? The matchup
info is meant to be just one  more tool in your box when it comes to deciding
between players.??

?

Locks:? These games heavily favor the  Offense

Tennessee,s Eddie George vs Brown  Defense?? Assuming Eddie George can get
his  injured toe healthy (and I think he can) he could have a monster game
against a  Brown Defense that,s been terrible against the rush.? For the
year, they rank # 26 in Fantasy  Points allowed to the opposing RB and they
rank # 27 in rushing yards allowed  per game over the last four weeks.?  The
Titans will likely be fired up after a stinging loss at home to the  Ravens
and I expect George to take out some frustrations on the  Browns.

Miami,s Lamar Smith vs Jets  Defense?? You,ll have to look awfully hard  to
find a hotter RB than Lamar Smith.?  In their week?8 matchup, he ran for 2
TDs and 155 yards.? At the time, it seemed like a fluke but  Smith has
maintained almost that pace since then.? Jay Fiedler and the passing game
provide  just enough threat to keep the defenses semi honest and Smith does
the  rest.? Over the last four weeks, the  Jets rank # 26 in rushing yards
allowed per  game.

New York Giant,s Ron Dayne / Tiki  Barber vs Lion Defense?? As you know by
now, the Giants  running game is governed by how close they keep the game.?
Coach Jim Fassell abandons the ground  game (especially Ron Dayne,s role)
when the Giants start to trail.? Against a less than explosive Lions  team,
the Giants ought to be able to keep this very close if not lead most of  the
way.? Detroit,s been weak  defending the run over the last four weeks where
they rank # 25 in rushing yards  allowed per game.?

Indianapolis, Edgerrin James vs Packer  Defense?? Green Bay,s allowing 135
yards  rushing per game over the last four week which ranks them # 22.? James
should continue to roll this week  against a Packer Defense that,s missing LB
Brian Williams who,s out with a knee  injury.? DE Vonnie Holiday may be
limited but he looks like he,ll play and that,s some concern but I still
look  for James to romp.

Baltimore,s Jamal Lewis vs Cowboy  Defense?? The Cowboys gave up their 200
yard  rushing days to quick slasher RBs Charlie Garner and Duce Staley but I,
m  guessing power running Jamal Lewis (who,s almost as quick as those guys)
will be  a great play against Dallas.? For  the season, Dallas ranks # 28 in
Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.? Look for him to catch the ball
out of  the backfield as well.

?

Prime Matchups:?  These games favor the Offense?

San Diego,s  Terrell Fletcher / Jermaine Fazande vs Bronco Defense??  Over
the last four week, Denver ranks # 31 in rushing yards allowed per  game.??
This  game smells a lot like the Denver / Bengal game to me.? Winless team
comes into town with a big  power back and nothing to lose.? We  all remember
Corey Dillon,s record setting day and many remember Jermaine  Fazande,s big
day rushing in the last game of 1999 against the Broncos.? Terrell Fletcher
is working his way into  the mix and that,s really muddying the waters.? Keep
an eye on this one and if it looks  like one of these guys will garner the
bulk of the carries, he could be worth a  flyer.?

Philadelphia,s Stanley Pritchett / Darnell Autry vs  Cardinal Defense? The
Arizona defense remains pretty weak  against the rush.? They rank # 29  in
rushing yards allowed  per game over the last four weeks.? For the year, they
rank # 31  in Fantasy Points  allowed to the opposing RB.? The trick is
determining which Eagle RB  will get the carries.? I like  Pritchett because
he,s bigger and can bull doze his way through the Cards.? I,ve been down on
Autry as I believe  you,re supposed to have the acting career?after the
football career, not  the other way around(?

Arizona,s  Michael Pittman vs Eagle Defense??  Watch this one closely as
Pittman is struggling to get healthy with  bruised ribs.? If he can go, I
like  the matchup this week.? Philadelphia  ranks # 30 in rushing  yards
allowed per game over the last four weeks.? They,re stronger over the year
where  they rank # 18 in  Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.? Thomas
Jones is in worse shape with  pneumonia so Pittman has incentive to get out
there.?

Buffalo,s  Sammy Morris / Shawn Bryson vs Chief Defense??  Morris battling a
bad ankle and looks to be a game time decision.? Bryson is plenty capable if
he can,t  go.? The Chiefs are an attractive  matchup as they rank # 28 in
rushing yards allowed per  game over the last four weeks.? They rank # 27 in
Fantasy Points allowed to the  opposing RB for the year.?  Watch this one
closely to see if the Bills offer hints to who,ll they,ll  go with.?

Green Bay,s  Ahman Green vs Colt Defense?? With Dorsey Levens out again,
Green will be asked to carry the load?  The Colts are vulnerable to the rush
ranking # 24 in rushing yards allowed per  game over the last four weeks.? If
Brett Favre can play, that,ll be a  nice boost for Green as the defense won,t
be able to key on stopping the ground  game.?

Cincinnati,s  Corey Dillon vs Patriot Defense?? How much would you rely on
Scot  Mitchell if you were Dick LeBeau??  Me neither.? Whether it,s  Akili
Smith or Scott Mitchell under center, it,s still the Corey Dillon  Show.? New
England has shown itself  to vulnerable against the rush ranking # 23 in
rushing yards allowed per  game over the last four weeks.? Dillon knows he
needs to carry the team  and he,ll do his best.? His success  will depend on
how effect Mitchell can be in drawing the defense,s attention  toward the
passing game.

??

Even Matchups:? These games  feature no real advantage either way

San Francisco,s Charlie Garner vs  Falcon Defense??  Charlie Garner
continues his great season against a Falcon team that,s playing better rush
defense than it had been.? For the  year, Atlanta ranks # 30 in Fantasy
Points allowed to the opposing RB but over  the last four weeks, they rate #
19 in rushing yards allowed per game.? If they,re without WR Terrell Owens
again, Garner will be asked to carry a little more of the load, something he,
s  gladly done all year.

Pittsburgh,s Jerome Bettis vs Jaguar  Defense?? With the WR shuffling going
on in  Pittsburgh, I think Bettis is really the only Steeler worthy of
starting in most  leagues.? He,s a solid performer  though that should have
another good day grinding the ball out.? Jacksonville ranks # 18 over the
last  four weeks in rushing yards allowed per game.? For the year, they rank
# 20 in Fantasy  Points allowed to the opposing RB.?  It,ll be power football
as the Steeler just line up and try to run over  the Jaguars.?

New England,s J.R. Redmond / Kevin  Faulk vs Bengal Defense?? The Bengals are
tough to  predict.? For the last four weeks,  they rank # 17 in rushing yards
allowed per game and for the year they come in  at # 14 in Fantasy Points
allowed to the opposing RB.? But they absolutely shut down RB Emmitt  Smith
last week.? I look for Redmond  and Faulk to have moderate success against
this improving unit.? Redmond is questionable with ribs so  keep an eye on
this one.?

Chicago,s James Allen vs Buccaneer  Defense?? As with the pass defense,
Tampa  Bay is good but not quite as dominant as their reputation.? For the
last four weeks, they rank # 16  in rushing yards allowed per game allowing
106 per game.? For the year, they rate # 9 in Fantasy  Points allowed to the
opposing RBs so it,s not like they,re invincible.? With Shane Matthews behind
center and  scaring no one though, it could be a long  day.?

Washington,s Stephen Davis vs Ram  Defense?? As is so often the case, the
Redskins could be forced to abandon their running game if the Rams jump out
early.? Washington would dearly love  to establish Stephen Davis on the
ground but they may not be able to if they,re  forced to play catchup.? The
Rams  rate # 15 over the last four weeks in rushing yards allowed per game.?
For the year, they check in at # 23 in  Fantasy Points allowed to the
opposing RB.?  Even with Bud Carson helping coach the defense, they can be
run  upon.?

Atlanta,s Jamal Anderson vs 49er  Defense?? Jamal Anderson continues to make
solid improvement and he seems close to his 1998 form to me.? He,ll face a
49er Defense that can  definitely be run on.? Over the last  four weeks, they
rate # 14 in rushing yards allowed per game but for the year,  they rank # 29
in Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.? Not unlike the situation with
Washington, the running back,s success largely hinges on the ability of the
defense to hang tough.? Anderson can  be taken out of the game if the Falcons
can,t hold Jeff Garcia and company down  in the passing game.???

Minnesota,s Robert Smith vs Panther  Defense? I,ve said for years I,d love to
see  Robert Smith play a full season and now we,re seeing that could look
like.? He,s having a great year and I think  he,ll continue to have success
against Carolina.? They,ve been pretty strong lately  against the rush
ranking # 11 in rushing yards allowed per game over the last  four weeks but
for the year, they rank # 24 in Fantasy Points allowed to the  opposing RB.?
If the Vikings can  control Carolina,s Steve Beuerlein (no small feat), it,ll
help Smith,s chances  immensely.

??

Downside Matchups:? These games favor the  Defense

Jacksonville,s  Fred Taylor vs Steeler Defense?? Fred Taylor is beginning to
work  his way out most Fantasy GM,s dog house as he continues to be a bright
spot on a  team without many bright spots.?  He,s been running hard but this
will be a real gut check for him as he  squares off against a very tough
Steeler rush defense that,s only allowed 2 TDs  over the last four games.?
Pittsburgh ranks # 3 for the year in Fantasy Points allowed to the  opposing
RB and Taylor will have his hands  full.

Carolina,s  Tshimanga Biakubutuka vs Viking Defense?? Biakabutuka remains
very  questionable with a bad toe and the Panthers don,t sound very
optimistic about  him playing Sunday.? Keep an eye on  it as he was able to
play through the pain last week.? Although it seems to be worse this week
than last.? If he can,t go, you,ll  see undrafted rookie FB Brad Hoover get
the start.? Don,t ask me how that happens.? Minnesota is decent against the
run  ranking # 12 over the last four games in rushing yards allowed per game
and # 17  for the year in Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing  RB.

Tampa Bay,s  Warrick Dunn / Mike Alstott vs Bear Defense?? Most people
including myself  thought new offensive coordinator Les Steckel would involve
Mike Alstott more in  Frank Wycheck type roles.? Hasn,t  happened yet but it,
ll be interesting to see if they start getting the big guy  the balls in
creative ways.? I,m  sure his fumbling problems are still a huge concern but
of course that,s not  something a guy like Tony Dungy talks very publicly
about.? The Bears are decent against the run  ranking # 9 over the last four
weeks in rushing yards allowed per game but for  the year, they check in at #
21 in Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing  RB.?

Denver,s  Terrell Davis vs Charger Defense??  Davis scared everyone this week
when it was reported he had a problem  with his calf.? He says it,s
overblown and was calling it just &tightness8 below the knee. ?He,ll need to
be as healthy as possible  this week as the Chargers have been playing strong
rush defense of late ranking  # 2 in rushing yards  allowed per game over the
last four weeks.? For the year, they,re still ranked # 15  in Fantasy Points
allowed to the opposing RB reflecting some of their earlier  struggles.? The
Broncos desperately  need Davis to shoulder the load with Brian Griese out
and it,ll be interesting  to see how he responds.? It,s a  tough matchup, but
I bet he does well.

St. Louis, Justin  Watson vs Redskin Defense?? The good news for Watson is
that  he doesn,t have to worry about Trung Canidate.? The bad news is Robert
Holcomb saw a  good bit of work at tailback this week and Marshall Faulk is
even making noise  about playing Monday.? Faulk did  practice some Thursday
but coach Mike Martz still remains pessimistic about him  seeing much action
this week.? Keep  an eye on it as I,m sure it,ll be a top story but right
now, he doesn,t look to  be a big factor.? The Redskin rush  defense is solid
ranking # 8 over the last four weeks in rushing yards allowed  per game and #
6 for the year in Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing  RB.

??

Defensive Slam Dunks:? These  games heavily favor the Defense?

Cleveland,s Travis Prentice / Jamel  White vs Titan Defense?  ?The Browns
catch Tennessee at an awful  time as the Titans are coming off a frustrating
loss at home to Baltimore and  will likely be looking to vent some
frustrations this week.? Cleveland looks to bear the brunt of  that
situation.? Prentice and White  have been unexceptional lately and I don,t
see them improving against a tough  Titan Defense.? Over the last four
weeks, Tennessee ranks # 7 in rushing yards allowed per game.? They also rank
# 7 for the year in  Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.?  These guys
may do in a pinch on other weeks but I don,t see it this  Sunday.?

Detroit,s James Stewart vs Giant  Defense?? Stewart is still a starter in
many  leagues but I don,t like his matchup here.?  (Although you can,t
discount the time he ran wild on Tampa Bay with an  awful matchup too)? The
Giants rank  # 1 for the year in Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.?
For the last four weeks, they rank # 6  in rushing yards allowed per game.?
That,s strong.? Having a  healthy Jason Sehorn back will help the entire
defense as it allows more safety  help to commit to the run.?

Oakland,s Napoleon Kaufman vs Saints  Defense?? Keep an eye on it, but at
this  point Tyrone Wheatley is looking very questionable with not one but two
bad  ankle sprains.? His most recent  sprain is thought to be worse than the
first sprain on the other ankle that was  limiting him already.? Kaufman
struggles a bit as the sole RB and Saints are RB Killers.? For the year, they
rank # 4 in Fantasy  Points allowed to the opposing RB and over the last four
games, they check in at  # 5 in rushing yards allowed per game.?  One ray of
hope for Oakland is that DT Norman Hand is questionable with  bone chips in
his ankle although they believe he can play even though he hasn,t  practiced
this week.?

Kansas  City,s RB committee vs Bills Defense??  By now you probably know
better than to risk starting any RB wearing a  Chief uniform.? This week,s a
good  week to follow that rule as the Bills are playing excellent rush
defense.? They rank # 4 over the last four weeks  in rushing yards allowed
per game and the rate # 5 for the year in Fantasy Points allowed to the
opposing RB.? I shy  away from Chief RBs against any team but especially a
defense this tough.? If you don,t have any choice, Kimble  Anders will get
the &start8 but expect to see plenty of Tony Richardson and  Frank Moreau.?
Richardson in  particular does a nice job receiving the ball.?

Dallas,  Emmitt Smith vs Raven Defense?? Let,s put it this way:? Smith was
shut down by Cincinnati last  week.? And the Ravens are a just a  tad bit
better than the Bengals when it comes to run defense.? If anyone can bounce
back, it,s Smith  but last Sunday was very worrisome.?  The Ravens are flying
high after a huge road win at Tennessee.? He,s still a solid RB but Smith
will  have his hands more than full Sunday.?  The Ravens rank # 3 in rushing
yards allowed per  game over the last four weeks and for the year they rate #
2  in Fantasy Points  allowed to the opposing RB.?

New York  Jets, Curtis Martin vs Dolphin Defense? I don,t  see a repeat of
the week 8 meltdown from Miami on defense.? Martin will have a tough day
ahead of  him against the Dolphin defense that ranks # 10 over the last four
weeks  in rushing yards allowed  per game.? Over the  season, they rank # 8
in  Fantasy Points allowed to the opposing RB.? The Dolphins were hopeful LB
Zach Thomas  could return but that,s not looking too likely now.? It,ll be
even tougher for Martin if he  does.?

New Orleans  Jerald Moore / Chad Morton vs Raider Defense??  New Orleans
catches a tough break as the new RBs are forced to make their  first start
facing the # 1 rush defense in rushing yards allowed per  game over the last
four weeks.? For the year, they,re not quite as tough  ranking # 12 in
Fantasy  Points allowed to the opposing RB.? It,s tough to call right now how
the  carries will be distributed as the Saints are understandably being
tight  lipped.? I expect Moore to carry  most of the load to begin with.?
He,s the more physical back and much more like Williams than is Morton  who
falls closer to the scat back / 3rd down guy mold.? I can envision something
similar to the  rotation New England is using with J.R. Redmond and Kevin
Faulk.? For FF purposes, you,d of course like to  see one guy take over but I
don,t see that now.? The other wild card is newly signed  Terry Allen who
sounds excited about football again.? We,ll see how quickly he can get
comfortable.?

?

?

?

?

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


no

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Allen, Phillip K.
Sent:	Monday, December 17, 2001 4:58 PM
To:	Lavorato, John
Subject:	FW: Chase Backtest

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hayden, Frank
Sent:	Monday, December 17, 2001 4:54 PM
To:	Allen, Phillip K.
Cc:	Gossett, Jeffrey C.; White, Stacey W.
Subject:	FW: Chase Backtest

Attached is the file I'm proposing to send to Chase with suggested wording.  To eliminate "Chase"  from using data to "back-in" to pnl, we deleted all up days, and forwarded out corrected data, per files received from Jeff and Stacey.

Please review and provide feedback.  Additionally, if you are comfortable with data, please authorize its release.

Thanks
Frank

 << File: EnronVaRCurveShiftRevised.12.17.01.xls >>

"Steve

Following on from our discussion concerning the back testing data, we have re-checked the underlying data with our middle office. There were some errors in your file which we have now corrected, and for clarity, included losses in the backtest file, since these are what we consider in the backtest process.

I trust this helps - let us know if you need anything further

Regards"


------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following message was sent to you as an opt-in subscriber to
The eDirect Network. We will continue to bring you valuable offers on
the products and services that interest you most. If you wish to
unsubscribe please copy and paste the following link into your web
browser or click here:
http://mx01.opt-in-net.net/cgi-bin/optout2.cgi?email=PMIMS@ENRON.COM&eid=17-2-3de-bhrQ
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Get the best deals on the hottest music.  The Columbia House
Music Club is the best way to build your CD collection.
Choose from your favorite artists like Linking Park, Enya,
Ja Rule and many more!  Join now and you can...

Get 3 Free CDs with Free Shipping and Handling!
This offer will be gone in no time.  Act now!

Check out the details at:
http://mx01.opt-in-net.net/fcgi-bin/eclick.cgi?cm=7683&link=37261&em=2111010&eid=17-2-3de-bhrQ
.......................................................................

FREE music to choose from @ chcd.com!

-Train
Drops Of Jupiter

-Destiny's Child
Survivor

-Enya
A Day Without Rain

-Madonna
Music

-Linkin Park
Hybrid Theory

-Maxwell
Now

http://mx01.opt-in-net.net/fcgi-bin/eclick.cgi?cm=7683&link=37261&em=2111010&eid=17-2-3de-bhrQ
.......................................................................

Brought to you by Columbia House

Copyright ?? 2002 Columbiahouse.com. All rights reserved.

AOL Members
Click Here

This email message may be a recurring mailing.
Ref# 17-2-3de-bhrQ


FYI.

You've already seen these comments.  Limitrader requested that insert our
comments into the document.  They had trouble reviewing our fax.  Let me know
if I can throw you a life preserver - I've got some extra time if you need
help on anything.

Jason
Received: from nahou-ln9.corp.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9])
by tfsgateway.andrews-kurth.com; Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:14:18 -0500
Subject: Blackline 577751.2 vs. .1 LIMITrader Securities, Inc. Subscriber
Agreement.
To: jkopley@limitrader.com, dford@limitrader.com
Cc: PETEJ@andrews-kurth.com
Bcc:
From: Mike.Fowler@enron.com
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:09:56 -0500
Message-ID: <OF4E3E6748.15B89A56-ON86256967.00585C6B@corp.enron.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NAHOU-LN9/Enron(Release 5.0.1 (Intl)|16
July 1999) at 09/27/2000 11:10:02 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
Boundary="0__=anECLTO867T9GpCT7cJForOgl7I4uwjrUXrgSU0wbVP1ONLSOcg05op4"
Content-Disposition: inline

Attached is the LIMITrader agreement with our proposed changes.  We may
also have comments regarding the OMNI Letter with Documents form and the
QIB letter.

Thanks.

Mike

---------------------- Forwarded by Mike Fowler/Corp/Enron on 09/27/2000
11:03 AM ---------------------------

"JASON PETERS" <PETEJ@andrews-kurth.com> on 09/27/2000 11:03:17 AM

To:   <Mike.Fowler@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  Blackline 577751.2 vs. .1 LIMITrader Securities, Inc. Subscriber
      Agreement.

  Per our conversation.

(See attached file: Blacklin.DOC)

 - Blacklin.DOC


Will do right now.

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin.Rogers@enron.com [mailto:Benjamin.Rogers@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 4:04 PM
To: mcyrus@cinergy.com
Subject:

Michael:
Just wanted to let you know that I just talked to Don Miller, the lead guy
from our side, regarding a different matter, but he mentioned to me that
things seemed to be not going so well in the PSA discussions.  I didn't
have time to see what the issues were, but I will when he calls back.  As
you already know, these assets are yours to lose and I would hate to see
you guys lose these assets to legal issues.  I know we both can come to
some middle ground before people lose their patience.  My only advice, for
what its worth, is to keep talking with Delainey and to make sure the
lawyers don't run away with the issues and forget whats at stake on the
commercial side.  Hope this helps.
Ben


---------------------- Forwarded by Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT on 04/27/2000
08:08 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Donna Greif                           04/26/2000 05:37 PM

To: Edward Terry/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine L Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT, George
Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Randall L Gay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: CES deals

FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Donna Greif/HOU/ECT on 04/26/2000 05:36
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Dana Daigle @ ENRON                           04/25/2000 03:46 PM

To: David Oliver/HOU/ECT@ECT, William Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna
Greif/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brenda F Herod/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kam Keiser/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Kathryn Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: CES deals

Here are the deal that I have completed today.  The numbers in bold are
hedged and need to be split.

Old Deal #  New Deal #  Desk
142002  251833  East
145075  251851  East
144936  250498  Texas
226138  250600  East
226763  250668  East
135842   250703   East
164669   250751   East
227727  250893  East
168454  250932  East
136933  251129  East
136880  251212  East
143673  251257  East
163815   251280   East
136286  251357  East
136287   251394   East
219685  251410  East
158625   251864   East
135895  251619  East
135958  251624  East
164708   251631   East
226538  251641  East
134755  251650  Central
144917  251659  Texas

Thanks for you help!
D


Mahesh:

I have a question that needs to be answered on Wednesday morning:

 What company actually employs John Greene?

I am now being told by Instinet that the company employing the trader must
sign a new confidentiality agreement for the UK terminal (for trading by ECT
Investments, Inc. through its arranger Enron Investment Services Limited).
Please advise by email or voice mail

Thanks  Sara

	Mahesh Lakhani
	10/31/2000 03:47 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Cindy Buckley/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, John
Greene/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

Sara
Apologies - I have been out of the office for the past 10 days.

I had asked Cindy in legal to provide you with signature blocks when you
first asked for it - I will chase her again today.
I will call you this afternoon to discuss the status of the agency agreement
and any other requirement that you may have - let me know when you are
available.

Regards
Mahesh

From: Sara Shackleton on 24/10/2000 08:42 CDT
To: Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT, Cindy Buckley/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine
Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

I am still waiting for a copy of the services agreement and the form of
signature.  Instinet is proceeding but will still require this information.
Thanks.  Sara

	Sara Shackleton
	10/16/2000 03:14 PM

		 To: Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT, Cindy Buckley/LON/ECT
		 cc: Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

I have not received a response from anyone.  Sara

	Mahesh Lakhani
	10/06/2000 03:22 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Buckley/LON/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

Cindy
Can you provide this to Sara please
Thx
Mahesh

From: Sara Shackleton on 04/10/2000 14:11 CDT
To: Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

thanks.  Can you provide me with the appropriate signature block for ENA/ECT
Investments Inc. through the agent?

	Mahesh Lakhani
	10/04/2000 10:01 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine
Juggins/LON/ECT, Cindy Buckley/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

Sara.   It has been formed.  Enron Investment Services Ltd was set up on
3/10/00

Regards
Mahesh

Janine Juggins
04/10/2000 15:10
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: U.K. arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

Mahesh, please can you update Sara on the status (I think it has been formed,
but Mahesh will confirm)
Regards
Janine

From: Sara Shackleton on 04/10/2000 08:19 CDT
To: Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: U.K.  arranger for ENA and ECT Investments, Inc.

Any word yet on creation of the new entity?  Sara


Kurt,
We changed from the Feb. curtailment format to the new format because
curtailments are being recorded more accurately now.  Take this example of a
typical curtailment: CPS requests that we keep each line at 30MW.  With the
old format, we would enter one line of information that contained all of the
turbines that were shut down.  This would work IF the same exact turbines
were shut down for the duration of the curtailment.  This is never the case.
To maintain a specific output (which is always what CPS requests) we are
constantly shutting down and starting turbines due to windspeed fluctuation.
Using the old format, there would be a new line entered every time another
turbine was shut down or restarted.  This would also imply (inaccurately)
that all the turbines affected by the curtailment were stopped and started
each time a new turbine was added.

With the new format, when we start or stop a turbine we just add another
line.  This is the better method of the two to accurately record the down
time, because it is itemized.  If the operators follow the procedure that has
been given to them, this will be very accurate.  I apologize for the
confusion over some of the information on the first March Log.  We have gone
over the procedure again with all onsite personnel so we should not see the
discrepancies again that we saw in March.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please give me a call.  Also, if
you give me your fax#, I can fax you an original copy of the curtailment form
so you can see first hand how the information is recorded.

Thank you
Matt

---------------------- Forwarded by Matt Allsup/EWC/Enron on 04/10/2002 01:57
PM ---------------------------

Kurt Anderson
04/10/2002 10:57 AM
To: Bo Thisted/EWC/Enron@Enron, George Griese/EWC/Enron@Enron, Mike
Abbott/EWC/Enron@ENRON
cc: Danielle Lewis/EWC/Enron@Enron, Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron, Mark V
Walker/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Matt Allsup/EWC/Enron@Enron, Bryan
Gregory/EWC/Enron@Enron

Subject: Monthly Reports

Hey guys, the attached is the curtailment page from the Feb. Clear Sky
monthly report. This format is one that I would like to stick with but if it
not practical to provide the information in this format it is acceptable to
alter or change it as long as we provide the information in one form or
another. I am not sure what drove the change in format but we need to decide
how this information will be provided and stick with it on a consistent
basis. With the coming changes in the Asset Management group it behooves us
to standardize each portion of the monthly report. The person responsible for
compiling the information contained in the report as well as preparing the
monthly reports is going to change very soon.

Lets discuss this soon as the March reports are due next week.

Thanks

KA


Please find attached referenced lists.  It is not clear to me yet how we are
going to deal with Australian approvals, so I think at this point you need to
look to Australia for approval of their counterparties.  Also, there were no
counterparties to approve on 3/16/00 so that list is not attached.

I haven't said it in a while...but no European power for US counterparties...


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/17/2000
01:26 PM ---------------------------

Anjam Ahmad
02/17/2000 12:03 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Dale Surbey/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Your Trip

Hi Vince,

The following has been organised for you:

Sunday
6.45pm  Dinner at Diverso restaurant 85 Piccadilly 0207 491 2222 with Ben,
Steve, Anjam

Monday
Clear until Noon
12pm  Lunch with Dale Surbey at Olivetto or Olivo
2.30pm  Interviews start
6.30pm
or 7pm  Approximate time for end of interviews

Tuesday
Clear until 10am
10am to 12pm  Energydesk.com meeting with Mikael Nordstrum
Afternoon clear

Wednesday
9am to 10.30am  RiskCare meeting in NE1002 with Michael Curran, Anjam and Dale
11.30am to 12pm  Meeting with John Sherriff

Regards,

Anjam
x35383


Swaps Legal Team:

Please prepare an amendment to the existing ISDA Master Agreement between Merced Irrigation District and ENA dated 3/25/99.  Please note the changes to the agreement are in 'red' in the attached credit worksheet.

Note:  Carol St. Clair has worked on municipal ISDA's in the past [ie Benton and Franklin] that contain a 'regulatory out' clause that can also be applied in this ISDA.

Please call with any questions.

Regards,
Tracy
503-464-8755


JP:
Hope things are going well.
I'm trying to get the email address of your new partner, Tracy.
If you have, can you forward?
Thx,
John


Greg

Don't forget to ask some option questions.
---------------------- Forwarded by John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron on 01/04/2001 10:45 PM ---------------------------

	  From:  Kimberly Hillis @ ECT                           01/03/2001 10:53 AM

To:	Rogers Herndon/HOU/ECT@ect, Fletcher J Sturm/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sherry H Hunter/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Maggi/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:	Tamara Jae Black/HOU/ECT@ECT, Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Airam Arteaga/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ina Rangel/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron

Subject:	Interview on 1/8/01 - Manu Asthana

Thank you for agreeing to interview Manu Asthana Monday, January 8, 2000.

The schedule is as follows and Manu's resume is attached below:

09:00 - 09:45	Rogers Herndon
09:45 - 10:30	Fletch Sturm
10:30 - 11:15	Dana Davis
11:15 - 12:00	Kevin Presto
12:00 - 01:30	Lunch with John Lavorato
01:30 - 02:00	Greg Whalley
02:15 - 02:45	Hunter Shively
02:45 - 03:30	John Arnold
03:30 - 04:15	Mike Maggi

Please plan to meet with Manu in EB3316.  This is the conference room next to Dave Delainey's office.

 - Manu Asthana.doc


The draft language on SB 27X appears to be consistent with ideas offered by
Bowen's staffer Lingbloom and TURN.  It makes the following changes in the
language the direct access coalition proposed:

1. It reinserts the provision allowing a customer to select direct
access for that portion of its load not served by DWR.  Neither the
utilities nor customers nor ESPs like this.  It should be deleted.

2. It provides for an open season to switch to DA until June 1 instead
of Oct 1 as the DA coalition proposed.  We believe customers will need more
time to choose what they want to do.

3. It omits the language in (d) of the DA coalition draft which ensures
all customers pay for unrecovered bond costs.  This can be covered by the
other language in the bill but it could leave some gaps.

4. Residential and small commercial DA is unrestricted only to the
extent of load growth on the entire utility system.  This may be too
restrictive to implement AB 48X easily.  It is also somewhat unfair to
allocate all load growth to the residential class.

5.  The language about large customers switching is ok, but fails to
clarify that the standard is limited to the long term contracts of DWR (> 1
yr.) so that we are not squeezed by their short term purchases, too.

6. It omits our language that customers can select DA on an first come
first served basis for each of  these "open enrollement" options.  This is
an important clarification.

7. It omits the required notices that DWR and large customers must give
each other that they are about to switch or have power contracts commence or
terminate.  This is important for large customers in particular so that they
know when they will have chances to elect DA as the DWR sheds contracts over
time.

8. It omits the section requring for public access to the exit fees or
their calculation in advance, so customers know what their choices are.
This is very important.

Bottom Line:  All the provisions they deleted from our proposal are
worthwhile and we would like to reinsert them.  They do not alter tha basic
framework of this amendment, they just make it work better.


Here are your latest rosters. Let me know if you would like the spreadsheet
with their e-mail addresses as well! - Pam (6223)
 - 656.doc


are you gonna play or just tell us to hustle from the bench?


Alex,

Can you set up a meeting to review this product. They have an office in
Houston.

Please, invite people on the distribution list.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 10/30/2000
10:26 AM ---------------------------

Denton Mike <Michael.Denton@caminus.com> on 10/24/2000 10:14:04 AM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: PoweRisk 2000 followup in re WeatherDelta

Mr.  Kaminski,
?
Nick Perry and I  were recently discussing the conference in Paris, and we
gathered that you had  some interest in exploring possible uses of our new
WeatherDelta tool-kit.?  It is the only application that we know of, that
can?model temperature,  loads, and power prices in several locations
simultaneously: thus allowing the  user to measure the value an risk in a
variety of financial instruments,  physical obligations and assets.? I have
attached the product overview  sheet, and would be happy to discuss its
capabilities with you at your  convenience.??
?
Nick and I send our  regards,
?

Vice President
NA Strategic  Consulting
CAMINUS
747 Third  Avenue, 18th Floor
New York, New York 10017
(212) 515-3667

?

?

 - weatherdelta.pdf


thanks.  will pass it on

Best regards,

Russell L. Sherrill
office:  713.759.6994
russell.sherrill@ubsw.com

UBS Warburg
1000 Louisiana, Suite 4940
Houston, TX  77002
fax:  713.759.0709

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin.M.Presto@enron.com [mailto:Kevin.M.Presto@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 12:39 PM
To: Sherrill, Russell+
Subject: RE: UBS/Enron trading group

Gas or Power?    Gas is Scott Neal and Power is Doug Gilbert-Smith for
ERCOT (TX) and Fletch Sturm for LA/AL (Gulf Coast).

The Williams energy traders know these folks so these questions must be
coming from non-commodity people at Williams.

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   "Sherrill, Russell+" <Russell.Sherrill@ubsw.com>@ENRON
   Sent:   Friday, February 01, 2002 11:52 AM
   To:     Presto, Kevin M.
   Subject:  FW: UBS/Enron trading group

   > kevin,
   >
   > Called you on another topic so please still call this afternoon.  Do
   you have an answer to the following?
   >
   > Best regards,
   >
   > Russell L. Sherrill
   > office:  713.759.6994
   > russell.sherrill@ubsw.com
   >
   > UBS Warburg
   > 1000 Louisiana, Suite 4940
   > Houston, TX  77002
   > fax:  713.759.0709
   >
   >  -----Original Message-----
   > From:      Baker, James+
   > Sent:      Friday, February 01, 2002 10:39 AM
   > To:   Sherrill, Russell+
   > Subject:   UBS/Enron trading group
   >
   > One of our research analysts just called me and wanted to know if we
   had a contact at UBS Warburg/Enron for Gulf Coast
   > Trading (one of their clients, Williams Energy Partners would like to
   know).  They, to my knowledge, did not specify a
   > certain commodity.  Please let me know if you have a name(s) that will
   point them in the correct direction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


U.S. Utility and Non-Utility Power Directories

Click Here To Download Order Form and Additional Information

http://www.pmaconference.com/powerdirectories.pdf

SPECIAL PACKAGE PRICE:  Normally $895 each, get BOTH Directories AND a full year of Merchant Power Monthly (normally $295) for only $1090!    Act Now!

2000 US ELECTRIC UTILITY INDUSTRY DIRECTORY ON CD-ROM

More than 8,000 listings including: name, address, phone, fax, email, website address, key personnel, brief company synopsis, financial and operating information, generating stations, services provided, sales and usage, plant details, key articles, and much more!

Listed by: Holding companies, investor-owned electric utilities, Municipal and other publicly owned utilities, rural electric cooperatives, Federal, state and district systems, associations, councils and power pools, Canadian utilities, regulatory agencies, Indexes (company, geographic, personnel)

CD-ROM Features: Generate reports, pull mailing lists, analyze data, and produce queries.

2001 U.S. Non-Utility Power Directory on CD-ROM

This revised and updated directory includes more than 2700 non-utility plant listings, including owners and operators. Detailed information (where available) of each plant includes contacts, address, phone and fax numbers, installed capacity, year installed, number of employees, net generation, number of units, prime mover, fuel type and detailed hydro attributes.

Company information includes company name, contact, address, phone and fax numbers, website and revenues (if available).

This directory is fully exportable. Each CD includes the following formats: MSAccess, MSExcel, Dbase and DOS-Text.

Click Here To Download Order Form and Additional Information

http://www.pmaconference.com/powerdirectories.pdf

This email has been sent to michelle.lokay@enron.com,
 by PowerMarketers.com.

Visit our Subscription Center to edit your interests or unsubscribe.
http://ccprod.roving.com/roving/d.jsp?p=oo&m=1000838503237&ea=michelle.lokay@enron.com

View our privacy policy: http://ccprod.roving.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp

Powered by
Constant Contact(R)
www.constantcontact.com