Joan Kiley
3792 Harrison St 32
Oakland, CA 94611
jlkiley@pacbell.net

To Mr. Ken Lay,

I'm writing to urge you to donate the millions of dollars you made from selling Enron stock before the company declared bankruptcy to funds, such as Enron Employee Transition Fund and REACH, that benefit the company's employees, who lost their retirement savings, and provide relief to low-income consumers in California, who can't afford to pay their energy bills.  Enron and you made millions out of the pocketbooks of California consumers and from the efforts of your employees.

Indeed, while you netted well over a $100 million, many of Enron's employees were financially devastated when the company declared bankruptcy and their retirement plans were wiped out.  And Enron made an astronomical profit during the California energy crisis last year.  As a result, there are thousands of consumers who are unable to pay their basic energy bills and the largest utility in the state is bankrupt.

The New York Times reported that you sold $101 million worth of Enron stock while aggressively urging the company's employees to keep buying it.  Please donate this money to the funds set up to help repair the lives of those Americans hurt by Enron's underhanded dealings.

Sincerely,

Joan Kiley


Bob, Thanks for attending the conference.   I totally agree with your
recommendation that we should lay low for a while.    As you point out, our
model will likely evolve over time.      -- Lisa

	Robert Frank
	05/16/2001 11:54 AM

		 To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject:

Attached is a 2-page memo regarding the B2B workshop I attended at the FTC.
I will continue to work with Legal to identity our interests and (eventually)
develop positions.


I would like to play.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"j byrd" <jbyrd@byrdinterior.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:10 PM
To:	andrewd@tex-trude. com (E-mail); Bret. Bayley (E-mail); Dale_Griffin (E-mail); Glover David B. (E-mail); J. K. McAndrews (E-mail); jeparker1@duke-energy. com (E-mail); Paul Bredthauer (E-mail) (E-mail); scarter@evsi. net (E-mail); Scott Neal (E-mail); tlathrop@pcenergy. com (E-mail); Tom Fish (E-mail); Wade Jones (E-mail)
Subject:	Golf Friday 7:48

I am looking to fill 2 spots for golf on Friday morning at 7:48 to play with me and John Lynch. Let me know if you are interested.

Thanks,

John Byrd
President

Byrd Interior Construction, Inc.
1726 Augusta, Suite 120
Houston, Texas 77057
Office  (713)688-8850
Fax      (713)688-7779


Your approval is needed for the following 3 product types in Datamanager:

US HeatingOil2 Fin Opt
US HeatingOil2 Fin Opt Call
US HeatingOil2 Fin Opt Put

Please do not approve between the hours of 6 am and 11 am.

US HtOil Fin Opt Nymex HO   AP 85.00           Dec01          c/GL-L

A financial Option Transaction with Enron North America Corp., under which
the Seller receives the Premium and the Buyer receives the Cash Settlement
Amount. Each calendar month during the Term of the Transaction will be a
Determination Period, provided that if the Term of the Transaction is less
than one calendar month the Determination Period shall be the Term of the
Transaction. The Notional Quantity per Determination Period shall be
calculated from the volume submitted by Counterparty on the Website in
accordance with the unit of measure. The Premium shall equal the product of
(i) the price submitted by Counterparty via the Website, multiplied by (ii)
the Notional Quantity per Determination Period, multiplied by (iii) the
number of Determination Periods during the Term of the Transaction. The
Payment Date for the Premium shall be 2 business days after the Trade Date of
the Transaction. The Payment Date(s) for the Cash Settlement Amount shall be
5 business days after the Cash Settlement Amount is determinable.  Where this
Transaction is a Call Option, the Cash Settlement Amount shall be the greater
of (i) zero, or (ii) the product of (a) the Notional Quantity per
Determination Period, multiplied by (b) the Index minus the Strike Price.
Where this Transaction is a Put Option, the Cash Settlement Amount shall be
the greater of (i) zero, or (ii) the product of (a) the Notional Quantity per
Determination Period, multiplied by (b) the Strike Price minus the Index.
The term of the Transaction shall be from the Effective Date of 01 Dec 2001
to the Termination Date of 31 Dec 2001.
The Exercise Period(s) shall be the last Trading Day of the NYMEX Heating Oil
Contract during the applicable Determination Period. The Index for a
Determination Period shall be the simple arithmetic average of the daily
settlement prices of the prompt month NYMEX Heating Oil Futures Contract for
each Trading Day during such Determination Period.
The price is quoted in cents (US) per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency.
The unit of measure against which the volume is shown shall be 42,000 gallons
per month.
The Option style and type shall be an Asian Put/Call. Automatic Exercise is
Applicable.
The Strike Price for the Transaction shall be as set forth on the Website.

US HeatOil2 Opt Nymex HO   EP 85.00           Dec01          c/GL-L

A financial Option Transaction with Enron North America Corp., under which
the Seller receives the Premium and the Buyer receives the Cash Settlement
Amount. Each calendar month during the Term of the Transaction will be a
Determination Period, provided that if the Term of the Transaction is less
than one calendar month the Determination Period shall be the Term of the
Transaction. The Notional Quantity per Determination Period shall be
calculated from the volume submitted by Counterparty on the Website in
accordance with the unit of measure. The Premium shall equal the product of
(i) the price submitted by Counterparty via the Website, multiplied by (ii)
the Notional Quantity per Determination Period, multiplied by (iii) the
number of Determination Periods during the Term of the Transaction. The
Payment Date for the Premium shall be 2 business days after the Trade Date of
the Transaction. The Payment Date(s) for the Cash Settlement Amount shall be
5 business days after the Cash Settlement Amount is determinable. The Cash
Settlement Amount shall be the greater of (i) zero, or (ii) the product of
(a) the Notional Quantity per Determination Period, multiplied by (b) the
Strike Price minus the Index
The term of the Transaction shall be from the Effective Date of 01 Dec  2001
to the Termination Date of 31 Dec 2001.
The Exercise Period(s) shall be the last Trading Day of the NYMEX Heating Oil
Options Contract for the applicable Determination Period. The Index for a
Determination Period shall be the settlement price for the NYMEX Heating Oil
Futures Contract for the applicable Determination Period on the expiration
day of the NYMEX Heating Oil Options Contract for such Determination Period.
The price is quoted in cents (US) per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency.
The unit of measure against which the volume is shown shall be 42,000 gallons
per month.
The Option style and type shall be a European Put ("EP"). Automatic Exercise
is Applicable.
The Strike Price for the Transaction shall be as set forth on the Website.

US HeatOil2 Opt Nymex HO   EC 85.00           Dec01          c/GL-L

A financial Option Transaction with Enron North America Corp., under which
the Seller receives the Premium and the Buyer receives the Cash Settlement
Amount. Each calendar month during the Term of the Transaction will be a
Determination Period, provided that if the Term of the Transaction is less
than one calendar month the Determination Period shall be the Term of the
Transaction. The Notional Quantity per Determination Period shall be
calculated from the volume submitted by Counterparty on the Website in
accordance with the unit of measure. The Premium shall equal the product of
(i) the price submitted by Counterparty via the Website, multiplied by (ii)
the Notional Quantity per Determination Period, multiplied by (iii) the
number of Determination Periods during the Term of the Transaction. The
Payment Date for the Premium shall be 2 business days after the Trade Date of
the Transaction. The Payment Date(s) for the Cash Settlement Amount shall be
5 business days after the Cash Settlement Amount is determinable. The Cash
Settlement Amount shall be the greater of (i) zero, or (ii) the product of
(a) the Notional Quantity per Determination Period, multiplied by (b) the
Index minus the Strike Price.
The term of the Transaction shall be from the Effective Date of 01 Dec  2001
to the Termination Date of 31 Dec 2001.
The Exercise Period(s) shall be the last Trading Day of the NYMEX Heating Oil
Options Contract for the applicable Determination Period. The Index for a
Determination Period shall be the settlement price for the NYMEX Heating Oil
Futures Contract for the applicable Determination Period on the expiration
day of the NYMEX Heating Oil Options Contract for such Determination Period.
The price is quoted in cents (US) per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency.
The unit of measure against which the volume is shown shall be 42,000 gallons
per month.
The Option style and type shall be a European Call ("EC"). Automatic Exercise
is Applicable.
The Strike Price for the Transaction shall be as set forth on the Website.

STEPS FOR APPROVAL:

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


I have the following comments:
Credit Data
I believe the write-up is accurate, but I have cc'd Paul on this memo to confirm.

Financial Trading Risk Data
We provide aggregate position data for ETS not aggregate VAR, e.g.  ETS is long 10 MMCFD natural gas at Ventura for January 2002, etc. vs. ETS has $1.5 million total VAR.  This is necessary for two reasons: 1.) Enron's VAR does not necessarily equal the sum of its subsidiaries VAR since there may be offsetting positions  throughout the business units.  2.)  Our trading books software (Caminus) does not have the capability to compute VAR in accordance with the specific methodology required (Monte Carlo simulation) in the Enron policy.

Project Analysis Data
I think this write-up is accurate, but I have cc'd Lisa and Cheryl to confirm.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hayslett, Rod
Sent:	Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:44 AM
To:	Peters, Jerry
Subject:	FW: RAC Procedures

What do you think of this?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	King Jr., Frazier
Sent:	Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:25 AM
To:	Hayslett, Rod; Hartsoe, Joe
Subject:	RAC Procedures

Rod and Joe,

Here is a proposed write up of the procedures we use to protect the data that we send to RAC.
Please take a look and give me your comments.
Thanks!

Frazier

 << File: PROCEDURES FOR CREDIT AND RISK DATA.doc >>


Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	01/04/2001 04:39 PM

		 To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, MDay
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least
Thus Far)

	Vicki Sharp@EES
	01/04/2001 04:32 PM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least
Thus Far)

what is his email?

From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 01/04/2001 04:22 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Re: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least Thus
Far)

Yes, I'll get to Mike Day.


Some of you may have seen the article in the WSJ already, but for those of us
in Omaha (who don't typically get the Texas Edition) it was news to us.  Not
only is the article relevant because it apparently caused the stock to dip by
$10, but the article elaborates on concerns that apply to a form of
accounting that some of our commercial people would like to have apply to our
business.  I'm not sure the accounting rules would permit mark to market
treatment for transport or storage contracts, but it may be appropriate for
financial or commodity deals.  DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 09/25/2000
09:57 AM ---------------------------
ET & S Business Intelligence Department
From: Lorna Brennan on 09/22/2000 09:56 AM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: The Press Behind the Stock Dip?

TEXAS JOURNAL

Energy Traders Cite Gains, But Some Math Is Missing
By Jonathan Weil
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

09/20/2000
The Wall Street Journal
Texas Journal
T1
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Volatile prices for natural gas and electricity are creating high-voltage
earnings growth at some companies with large energy-trading units. But
investors counting on these gains could be in for a jolt down the road.

Shares of these companies have been on a tear lately. And some of the biggest
players are in Houston, the center of the energy-trading industry. Dynegy
Inc.'s stock is up more than fourfold so far this year at $53.438, and now
trades for 41 times what analysts project the company's 2000 earnings will
be, according to First Call/Thomson Financial. Shares of Enron Corp., the
largest trader of gas and electricity in North America, have nearly doubled
this year to $84.875, or 60 times earnings. Meanwhile, El Paso Energy Corp.'s
stock has jumped 61% this year to $62.375, or 24 times earnings.

Traders at these and other companies are capitalizing on the wild price
swings and supply fluctuations that have accompanied deregulation in some
regional markets. Natural-gas prices have more than doubled in the past year,
while supplies have tightened. And the rapid price fluctuations for
electricity have prompted many large businesses to seek price protection
through hedging or fixed-price contracts, generating large premiums for
traders.

But what many investors may not realize is that much of these companies'
recent profits constitute unrealized, noncash gains. Frequently, these
profits depend on assumptions and estimates about future market factors, the
details of which the companies do not provide, and which time may prove
wrong. And because of minimal disclosure standards in these kinds of cases,
it's difficult for investors to assess whose assumptions might be too
aggressive, or what market changes might invalidate the assumptions -- and
force earnings revisions.

"There could be a quality-of-earnings issue," says Tom Linsmeier, an
associate professor of accounting at Michigan State University, who
co-authored the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's rules on
market-risk disclosures for financial instruments. "There certainly might be
great volatility that could cause what now looks like a winning, locked-in
gain to not arise sometime in the future."

The companies reject any suggestion that there may be quality problems with
their earnings.

But at the heart of the situation is an accounting technique that allows
companies to include as current earnings those profits they expect to realize
from energy-related contracts and other derivative instruments in future
periods, sometimes stretching over more than 20 years.

So-called mark-to-market accounting is mandated by accounting-rule makers
when companies have outstanding energy-related contracts on their books at
the end of a quarter, such as agreements to sell electricity or buy natural
gas over a period of time at certain prices. Under those rules, companies
estimate the fair market values of those contracts on their balance sheets
each quarter as assets or liabilities. Changes in the value of a contract
from quarter to quarter then are either added to or subtracted from net
earnings.

If, for instance, the market price for natural gas rises above the price
specified in a company's contract to buy gas, generally the company will
record an unrealized gain. That gain is recognized as income and recorded as
an asset on the company's balance sheet. At the end of each quarter, the
contract is revalued. The value of the previously recorded asset is
increased, and any increase in unrealized gain is recorded as additional
income. Conversely, if the market value for gas falls, and the value of the
contract has declined, any change in the contract's value is recorded on the
company's balance sheet, and a loss is recorded on its income statement. e

Yet in their financial reports, the companies only vaguely describe the
methods they use to come up with fair-value estimates on the contracts.
Increasingly, quoted market prices offering independent guidance are becoming
readily available for several years into the future. However, with some
long-term derivative instruments, particularly electricity contracts, future
market prices don't extend far enough to cover the full life of those
contracts. And in those cases, companies are allowed to base valuations on
their own undisclosed estimates, assumptions and pricing models.

"Ultimately they're telling you what they think the answer is, but they're
not telling you how they got to that answer," says Stephen Campbell, an
analyst at Business Valuation Services in Dallas. "That is essentially saying
`trust me.'"

Accounting-rule makers at the Financial Accounting Standards Board have
debated the subject of how to value energy-related contracts extensively in
recent months. "Two companies in similar circumstances might apply different
methods to estimate the fair value of their energy-related contracts and may
arrive at widely different values," an FASB task force studying the issue
wrote in a June report. "Those differences lead to the question of whether
some of the methods in practice yield estimated amounts that are not
representative of fair value."

Despite this concern, FASB isn't inclined to offer any explicit guidance for
how such contracts should be valued. "There are just too many models and too
many different types of instruments for us to have a one-size-fits-all type
of model," explains Timothy Lucas, FASB's director of research in Norwalk,
Conn.

One way to determine the size of a company's unrealized gains is to compare
the change in the values of net assets from risk-management activities from
quarter to quarter. Some companies also disclose how much they're adjusting
their cash-flow statements to reflect unrealized gains that have been booked
as earnings. That's how one can determine the size of the unrealized gains at
Dynegy and Enron, for example, the two companies confirm.

A reporter's examination of Dynegy's financial filings shows the company's
earnings are highly dependent on unrealized gains from risk-management
activities. For its most recent quarter, ended June 30, Dynegy reported
earnings of 38 cents a diluted share -- 71% of which came from unrealized
gains, the company confirms. (The company's per-share earnings would have
been 20 cents higher if not for a one-time stock dividend.) For all of 1999,
Dynegy recorded $115 million in unrealized gains, accounting for 51% of its
earnings.

Enron confirms it booked $747 million in unrealized gains from
risk-management activities during the second quarter, more than the company's
total $609 million in earnings before interest and taxes. Absent unrealized
gains, the company would have reported a quarterly loss. For the quarter, the
company reported earnings of 34 cents a diluted share, up 26% from a year
earlier.

But not all companies disclose enough information for investors to calculate
how large their unrealized gains are. El Paso says that's the case with its
own quarterly reports, which disclose short-term assets and liabilities from
risk-management activities -- but not long-term risk-management assets and
liabilities.

For the second quarter, El Paso reported that its energy marketing and
trading unit earned $152 million before interest and taxes, 24 times what it
earned a year earlier. In an interview, El Paso's chief financial officer,
Brent Austin, says unrealized gains represented about a third of that total.
He says most of the cash from those gains will materialize within a year.

In its financial reports, Dynegy highlights the uncertainties with some
contract valuations. It explains that with some long-term contracts for which
market-price quotes aren't available, "the lack of long-term pricing
liquidity requires the use of mathematical models to value these commitments
. . . [using] historical market data to forecast future elongated pricing
curves." Dynegy cautions that actual cash returns may "vary, either
positively or negatively, from the results estimated."

But like Enron, El Paso and others, Dynegy provides scant details about its
mathematical models -- such as the assumptions they use for market volatility
and long-term price forecasts for natural gas and electricity. Nor is the
company required to disclose more.

"The disclosure mentions risks," says John Cassidy, an analyst who tracks
Dynegy for Moody's Investors Service in New York. "But I don't know that the
disclosure offers enough detail for you to be able to quantify how much risk
there is."

El Paso's filings warn that "because the valuation of these financial
instruments can involve estimates, changes in the assumptions underlying
these estimates can occur, changing our valuation and potentially resulting
in financial losses." Enron cautions that the values it assigns to various
transactions are based on "management's best estimate."

The companies are required to disclose what they think their maximum
potential single-day risk-management losses might be, figures that also are
based on various undisclosed market assumptions. But energy traders cite
competitive reasons for not disclosing more.

"You don't necessarily want to tip off everyone to what you're doing," says
John Harrison, chief financial officer for El Paso's merchant-energy unit.

Echoing remarks by executives at other energy traders, Enron's executive vice
president and chief accounting officer, Richard Causey, says Enron runs a
relatively balanced portfolio and that the estimates factored into his
company's valuations are conservative. In large part, he says, those
estimates are based on quoted market prices where available. Where they're
not available, Mr. Causey says Enron bases its estimates in part on long-term
pricing trends, as well as the company's own trading experience, which dates
to 1990.

Further, Mr. Causey says, Enron's unrealized gains don't depend heavily on
gains from long-term contracts that extend beyond the periods for which
market quotes are available, reducing the potential for significant earnings
revisions. The average length of Enron's risk-management contracts is just
two years, he says. To be sure, though, some of Enron's electricity contracts
extend for 25 years.

"We're getting the cash in quicker than you might think," Mr. Causey says.
"They don't stay unrealized very long."

El Paso says its contracts have an average life of six years, with some
running as long as 20 years. Dynegy says the longest risk-management
contracts for which it uses mark-to-market accounting are 10 years, though it
doesn't disclose an average length. Dynegy's chief financial officer, Robert
Doty, says 96% of the company's gas contracts close out by 2002, while 75% of
its power contracts expire by 2003. "The cash will come in," he says.

As for why the company doesn't disclose the extent of any bias, bullish or
bearish, it has in the market, Dynegy executives say that information, like
the estimates behind its mathematical models, is proprietary. Such
disclosures may be outdated anyway by the time they could be included in
public financial filings, says Michael Mott, a Dynegy vice president. Mr.
Mott further explains that Dynegy could be realizing more cash earnings now
if it wanted to. But "we don't see that would be in the best interests of
shareholders," Mr. Mott says, because the company figures it can earn more
later by leaving much of its gains unrealized for now.

Mr. Linsmeier of Michigan State compares the current situation for energy
traders with the accounting controversies that engulfed subprime automobile
and residential lenders during the late 1990s, though he emphasizes it's too
far early to tell whether the consequences will be similar. Using so-called
gain-on-sale accounting (a form of mark-to-market accounting), those lenders
booked earnings from loans as soon as they were made, rather than having to
wait for them to be paid off, as banks typically do.

But as interest rates fell in 1998, many customers paid off their loans
earlier than expected, slashing lenders' profit margins. Compounding matters,
the market for mortgage-backed securities dried up in the wake of financial
chaos in Russia and other foreign markets, leaving lenders to bear the higher
risks of many new loans.

Many investors complained they were blindsided, in part because these lenders
generally hadn't disclosed their assumptions about prepayment rates and other
variables. After the crash, subprime lenders routinely began disclosing the
key assumptions used to value their mortgage portfolios.

At New York University, accounting professor Baruch Lev says investors would
be better served if energy traders' financial filings explained the effects
of hypothetical commodity-price movements on the values of their
risk-management assets, and disclosed the basic assumptions about future
commodity-price movements ingrained in their mathematical models. Says Mr.
Lev, "I would like to see much more disclosure, particularly given that this
is now becoming a significant component of their earnings."

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


Terri, spoke with Fletch on the SWECI pricing and our indicative offers are as follows:

For full requirements energy, delivered to IP/Ameren systems, including Schedules 3-6 of the OATT, we are at $38.50/mwh.  Please note that losses were applied to our delivery obligations assuming that they are a pass-through function, along with all other delivery costs to SWECI's borders.  The pricing breaks out to:
$28.50 energy
$4.00 risk premium
$2.50 ComEd wheel
$1.00 Ancillaries (schedules 3, 5 & 6)
$2.50 Imbalance Energy (schedule 4)

For full requirements energy, delivered to IP/Ameren systems, we are at $34.50/mwh.  All other costs related to delivery of energy to SWECI's borders are assumed to be a pass-through.  The pricing breaks out to:
$28.50 energy
$2.00 risk premium
$2.50 ComEd wheel
$1.50 Imbalance Energy (schedule 4)

I'm out for the rest of the day at an appointment but can be contacted by cell phone to answer any questions.  713-857-5952.  Please provide Greg, Fletch and myself with a copy of the indicative term sheet that is submitted ot SWECI today.  Thanks

- Jim


Have you thought about Arthur Andersen or PriceWaterhouse?    Mark


P,

Please forward this to GD.  Thanks,

Kevin


Does Nat's organization look OK.   Looks OK to me.

-----Original Message-----
From: Webb, Jay
Sent: Sat 1/12/2002 3:52 PM
To: Belden, Tim; Presto, Kevin M.
Cc:
Subject: Steve Nat Organization

contained in enclosed spreadsheet.

--jay


FYI - This is a memo that Jim Scabareti sent to Clayton Preble and others on
the AGL team regarding the deal and potential regulatory issues.  I thought
you might like to see it.  I will be talking to Jim and Clayton later today,
and will give you an update thereafter.  If you have any questions, please
ask.
Ed

---------------------- Forwarded by Ed McMichael/HOU/ECT on 10/24/2000 08:19
AM ---------------------------

JScabareti@aol.com on 10/24/2000 03:15:52 AM
To: ed.mcmichael@enron.com
cc:
Subject: VSCC Regulatory Strategy - Gas Cost Prudency - Asset Management
Opportunity

Ed - see attached for your information - Jim

 - BESTRA~1.DOC


Are we sure we can live with everything else in the PJM Single RTO proposal?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Novosel, Sarah
Sent:	Wednesday, September 05, 2001 6:36 PM
To:	Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Robertson, Linda; Presto, Kevin M.; Fromer, Howard; Allegretti, Daniel; Hoatson, Tom
Subject:	Support of PJM's Proposal to Implement Northeast RTO

As I mentioned to each of you today, we plan to sign Enron's name as a member of the "One RTO Coalition" in support of PJM's proposal for developing a single Norhteast RTO with a single day-ahead and real-time energy market in the Northeast.  PJM's proposal is attached.  As you may recall, I gave you a copy of PJM's proposal and we discussed it when I was in Houston a couple of weeks ago.  The main concern with PJM's proposal is its timing -- their time line provides for an implementation date of November 2003.  We have talked extensively with PJM about the need to speed up the implementation process, and PJM agrees that they will move aggressively, but they are unwilling to change their target date in their proposal.

Because we disagree with the PJM date, we propose to have Enron Power Marketing, Inc.'s name included on the list of supporters of the proposal, with the following footnote:

	While all of the members of the One RTO Coalition support the substance of PJM's proposal to implement a single energy market as described herein, Enron 	Power Marketing, Inc. dissents from PJM's date of November 2003 for implementing the single RTO in the Northeast.  Enron believes that the PJM proposal 	can and must be implemented by December 2002 and that extension of the implementation date past December 2002 is unnecessary and contrary to the 	Commission's RTO policy established in Order No. 2000.

This footnote will preserve our right to argue against PJM's timing in comments to the Commission after the Judge submits his report (due on September 17).  In those comments we can go into much greater detail about the need for quick implementation.

Please let me know if you have any suggested changes to the footnote or if you disagree with our proposed strategy.  We will address this issue on Thursday at mediation (I thought it was going to come up today, which is why I called each of you), so if you have any comments or concerns, please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks

Sarah

	 << File: PJM Market Design Proposal.pdf >>


Done :)

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

	Tana Jones
	05/21/2001 05:07 PM

		 To: Taffy Milligan/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: XMS Expense Report

Can you handle this.  I have no ideal what they're talking about.
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 05/21/2001 05:06 PM -----

	Vance Bates@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	05/21/2001 04:47 PM

		 To: Tana Jones@ECT
		 cc: Taffy Milligan@ECT
		 Subject: XMS Expense Report

Tana,

Accounts Payable received a hard copy of your expense report; however, it is
not submitted in XMS for us to process for payment. Please go back into XMS
and select the report and click submit to your manager for approval. The
report not submitted is for $728.58.

Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,

Vance Bates
Accounts Payable
713-853-5731


---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 05/23/2000 10:27
AM ---------------------------

	From:  Colleen Sullivan                           05/23/2000 09:05 AM

To: Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Hunter S Shively/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip K
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Theresa Branney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maria Garza/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy
Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan Junek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dick
Jenkins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas Engel/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane
M Tholt/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: EOL Follow up Meeting

Please plan to attend a follow up meeting to discuss what is needed as far as
position screens for trading transportation capacity on EOL.  The meeting
will be at 11:30 -12:30 today, May 23, 2000, in Room 3321.

There is a NYMEX screen in this conference room, and lunch will be provided.


I looked in our financial agreement database and ECTRIC does not have a
master in place with either of those entities.  London Legal sent a draft to
Credit Lyonnais in March of 1999, but there appears to be no activity under
that master.  Credit Lyonnais has a master styled "Credit Lyonnais New York
Branch (AAA Program) with Enron North America, under which we trade interest
rate, currencies & equities, and Toronto Dominion has master in place with
Enron North America and one with Enron Gas and Petrochemicals Trading
Limited, an English corp., and a subsidiary of ECTRIC (however, I do not have
a copy and do not know if this is a limited purpose master or not), but
nothing for either of these entities under ECTRIC.  I hope this is helpful.
Let me know if I can be of further service

	Philippe Penet
	09/06/2000 12:40 PM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul J Jones/LON/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Antony Steiner/LON/ECT@ECT, Neven Dujic/LON/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: ISDA agreement

Tana / Paul,

 I am trying to check whether or not ECTRIC (US entity) has an ISDA agreement
in place with Credit Lyonnais and Toronto Dominion (TD) (or Master Swap
Agreement).
Justin Boyd from Legal gave me your names as a starting point. We are
currently negotiating a prepay transaction with Credit Lyonnais and TD and I
need this information quite urgently

Could you let me know if you are the right people to ask to?

Thank you for your assistance

Kind regards

Philippe Penet
Manager - EGF


Dear Andrew Lewis,

We have gifts for everyone on your list! You can finish your holiday shopping
in two shakes of your mouse's tail at 1-800-FLOWERS.COM!  From tasty gourmet
cookies and cakes to our very special holiday centerpieces to collectibles,
chocolates and jewelry - we have it all!  So "click" on in and see for
yourself what all the excitement is about!

Click here to view catalog:
http://www.s2u2.com/content.asp?wci=version&wnd=0&status_id=30925254

Happy Holidays!

From all of your Friends at 1-800-FLOWERS.COMsm

You received this email because you are a 1-800-FLOWERS.COM customer. If you
would no longer like to receive our promotional email offers, please send an
email to mailto:remove@1800flowers.com
from the email address you would like removed. If you have additional email
addresses on file with us you must send email from those addresses as well or
you will continue to receive emails at those addresses. Please do not reply
to this message. Due to timing issues, you may potentially receive a future
message before your unsubscribe request is implemented.

For questions about an order or any other issues, please email us at
mailto:custservice@1800flowers.com

The 1-800-FLOWERS.COM privacy policy is available online at
http://www.1800flowers.com/flowers/security/index.asp#privacy

*Exclusive of applicable service and shipping charges and taxes.  Items may
vary and are subject to availability, delivery rules and times.  Items
available online and by phone.  Offers cannot be combined, are not available
on all products and are subject to restrictions and blackout periods.  Void
where prohibited. (c) 2000 1-800-FLOWERS.COM, INC.


Carl,

Although both dates will most likely work for me, I would prefer choice # 1:  Nov 13th in the morning.  Thanks.

DG
713-853-9573

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Carl Sulzer GRE/ER Fuel/Plant <Csulzer@grenergy.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 3:54 PM
To:	Giron, Darron C.; 'Bowers, Janet'; 'Lewis, Mary Jo'
Subject:	Potential Houston Meeting Dates

There are a growing number of things for us to discuss relative to gas
supply for Pleasant Valley Station.  I would like to suggest the following
dates to meet in Houston.

Choice #1:	November 13, a morning meeting

Choice #2:	Novemer 6, a morning meeting

Please let me know (and reply all in your response) if one or both dates
work.

I will put together an agenda of the items for discussion.


Veronica Aquila did a great job of cleaning our house when we first moved back to the neighborhood, then she got called back to Mexico.  She's back in town ready to go to work, but we have someone we're very satisfied with. You can reach her at 713.426.3094.

Hilary

(Mr.) Hilary Smith

712 Bomar St.

Houston TX  77006-1316

713.523.0559

Fax: 713.523.3928

Website:
<underline><color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>http://pws.prserv.net/hilary</color></underline>


Jacques,

The amounts needed to fill in the blanks on Exhibit "B" are as follows:

Kipp Flores-Total Contract was $23,600 but $2,375 was paid and only $21,225
is outstanding.

Kohutek- $2,150

Cuatro- $37,800

George & Larry paid $3,500 for the appraisal and I agreed to reimburse this
amount.

The total cash that Keith and I will pay the Sellers is $5,875 ($3,500
appraisal and $2,375 engineering).    I couldn't find any reference to this
cash consideration to be paid by the buyers.

Let me know if I need to do anything else before you can forward this to the
sellers to be executed.

Phillip


Do you know where I can find a good description of the existing allocation
process?


Nice try, but no.

	Tana Jones
	09/06/2000 04:32 PM

		 To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: (00-315) Arts Club Invitation

Can I attend?
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 09/06/2000 04:31 PM -----

	exchangeinfo@nymex.com
	09/06/2000 05:19 PM

		 To: tana.jones@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: (00-315) Arts Club Invitation

Notice No. 315

September 6, 2000

The New York Mercantile Exchange requests the pleasure of your company at a
reception at

The Arts Club
40 Dover Street
London W1X 3RB

Sunday, October 8, 2000
6:00 to 8:00 P.M.

R.S.V.P to Helen Wogel
by e-mail: hwogel@nymex.co.uk or
by fax: (0011) 44-20-7734-9411

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

"
http://208.206.41.61/email/email_log.cfm?useremail=tana.jones@enron.com&refdoc
=(00-315)"

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


I'm leaving for the day.  All of my notes are on the word document.

I just spoke with my contact at Columbia Gas and she suggested that we call Columbia Gas's in-house counsel to discuss the issue.  I just update my word document with that information.

Steve, you may receive this email before I get to your office.  I will hand deliver the following items;
1.  The word document attached to this email
2.  Copy of the Columbia Gas PAL and FTS rate shedule from their tariff
3.  Copies of the 2 PAL's contracts that ENA is trying to utilize
4.  A copy of 1 of our FTS contracts
5.  Select sheets from Columbia Gas's tariff that apply to Creditworthiness.

Ed, I will be in on Wednesday to resolve this issue.  Then I will be taking ALL OF MY 2000 vacation until it runs out, which will be sometime during the second week of Jan.


This request has been pending your approval for  2 days.  Please click
http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000003619&Page=
Approval to review and act upon this request.

Request ID          : 000000000003619
Request Create Date : 9/27/00 9:18:21 AM
Requested For       : tom.halliburton@enron.com
Resource Name       : Unlisted Application/Software
Resource Type       : Applications


Start Date: 1/3/02; HourAhead hour: 3;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  Variances detected.
Variances detected in Load schedule.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2002010303.txt

---- Load Schedule ----
$$$ Variance found in table tblLoads.
     Details: (Hour: 3 / Preferred:  13.84 / Final:  13.81)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  LOAD_ID: PGE4
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 1/3/02
  SC_ID: ENRJ


Mark,

Are we considered to be 2nd or third tier under the new regulations?

Can we obtain a summary of what the new regulations say?

Dave
---------------------- Forwarded by David Forster/Corp/Enron on 12/27/2000
08:27 AM ---------------------------
From: Rahil Jafry@ECT on 12/26/2000 03:04 PM
To: Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave
Samuels/HOU/ECT@ECT, David.Forster@enron.com, Bob Shults/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angela
Connelly/LON/ECT@ECT, Julie Ferrara/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daniel Diamond/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Leonardo Pacheco/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kal Shah/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Paul Goddard/EU/Enron@Enron

Subject: CFTC Rules, Legislation Aim to Clear Up Regulation of
Over-the-Counter ...

---------------------- Forwarded by Rahil Jafry/HOU/ECT on 12/26/2000 03:01
PM ---------------------------
CFTC Rules, Legislation Aim to Clear Up Regulation of Over-the-Counter
Contracts.(US Commodity Futures Trading Commission)(Brief Article)

12/08/2000
The Oil Daily
ITEM00343007
Copyright 2000 Gale Group. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT 2000 Energy
Intelligence Group

  CFTC Rules, Legislation Aim to Clear Up Regulation of Over-the-Counter
Contracts

  A long process designed to clarify rules for over-the- counter (OTC)
markets may be drawing to a close after the  US Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC) - the main  regulatory agency - issued its
final framework for a new regime.

  The rules are designed to clear up the legal status of OTC  products
such as swaps, while providing more flexible  oversight of futures
markets and promoting the  establishment of independent clearinghouses.

  Unveiled late last month, the CFTC reforms are due to be  published in
the Federal Register next week, and would take  effect 60 days later -
in mid-February. In the meantime, a  new president should take office
Jan. 20. CFTC experts seem  confident that the reforms will survive the
changeover, saying it is hard for an incoming administration to pull
back final regulations.

  There are also signs of progress on a parallel bill  supporting the
reforms, the Commodity Futures Modernization  Act.

  This was passed by the House in late October, but got  bogged down in
the Senate, partly due to objections by Sen.  Phil Gramm (R-Texas), who
heads the Senate Banking  Committee.

  A compromise was hammered out early this week, sources say,  and the
law could still get through this year - most likely  as an attachment to
an appropriations bill. Legislation  would give the CFTC measures a
stronger legal footing, but  could require them to be tweaked into line.

  The CFTC reforms respond to the explosion of both  derivatives markets
and electronic trading, from equities  to natural gas. Currently,
electronic exchanges targeting  derivatives markets - such as the Big
Oil-backed IntercontinentalExchange - operate in a regulatory gray
area.

  The new reforms define futures exchanges more flexibly,  replacing a
"one-size-fits-all" approach with core  principles, and establishing
three tiers of regulation:

  The top tier - of "recognized futures exchanges" (RFEs) -  matches the
current futures markets, such as Nymex, and is  the most tightly
regulated

  The second rank, of "derivatives transaction facilities"  (DTFs),
comprises institutions requiring looser regulation,  if, for example,
participation is restricted to big  companies.

  The third tier, of "exempt multilateral transaction  execution
facilities" (Exempt MTEFs), escapes most  regulation.

  In parallel, the CFTC has clarified an old ruling removing  swaps from
regulation - the so-called Part 35 exemption.  This ends previous
restrictions, so that OTC products  traded between two parties can now
be "fungible, standardized, and cleared." This is part of a drive to
turn  derivatives into legally recognized products, making it  hard for
one side to renege on an unfavorable contract.

  Finally, the CFTC has moved to encourage the establishment  of
independent clearinghouses by separating the rules for  exchange and
clearing functions. Two start-ups, EnergyClear  and NexClear, have
already declared their intention to  offer such services, starting with
US gas and power.

  Amid concerns about price manipulation, the energy industry  has been
treated as a special case throughout the new  framework and does not
qualify for the least-regulated  Exempt MTEF category of exchange.

  The CFTC reforms also remain fuzzy in certain areas. In  particular,
the new Part 35 exemption for derivatives  covers bilateral
transactions, with multilateral activity  still in something of a gray
area.

  Basically, an exchange handling multilateral trades of  energy
derivatives can apply to the CFTC for official  status as a "commercial
DTF" if it thinks this will bring  credibility and legal standing.
However, a derivatives exchange that does not register with the CFTC
will not be  pursued. The new framework offers "legal certainty for
those who want recognition; it is not ruling on the status  of those who
don't," one expert said.

  In practice, outfits such as EnronOnline - the web system  for direct
transactions with Enron - are in the clear as  bilateral platforms
dealing in contracts outside CFTC  jurisdiction. Intercontinental, as a
multilateral exchange  dealing in standardized swaps, could probably
remain  unregulated, but could also register as a DTF to clarify  its
status.

  Nymex, in its current form, would be an RFE because it  entertains
noninstitutional traders. But the exchange could  apply for its planned
electronic arm enymex (or its  traditional floor) to become a DTF, by
limiting activity to  institutional users.

  David Pike, Manimoli Dinesh

  For more on this story, see the next issue of Oil Daily  sister
publication energy network.

Folder Name: Rahil Jafry
Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 80

______________________________________________________________________

To review or revise your folder, visit http://www.djinteractive.com or
contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at custom.news@bis.dowjones.com
or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511
or contact your local sales representative.)
______________________________________________________________________

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


FYI,,

Bob
---------------------- Forwarded by Bob M Hall/NA/Enron on 01/29/2001 02:14
PM ---------------------------

	Fran L Mayes @ ECT
	01/29/2001 01:38 PM

To: Thomas A Martin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Schwieger/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward D
Gottlob/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elsa Villarreal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg McClendon/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Danny Conner/NA/Enron@Enron, Carey M Metz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lauri A
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenny J Soignet/HOU/ECT@ECT, James McKay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary
A Hanks/HOU/ECT@ECT, Silver Breaux/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sam Garner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathy
Hilliard/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lee Pinkston/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sean J Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Earl Tisdale/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hohl/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven
Chambers/OTS/Enron@Enron, Michael C Winders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jill T
Zivley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian M Riley/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Michael C Bilberry/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jennifer Martinez/HOU/ECT@ECT, George
Weissman/HOU/ECT@ECT, JoAnne Harris/NA/Enron@Enron, Christy
Sweeney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Brazaitis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lee L Papayoti/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Janet H Wallis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary W Lamphier/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael W
Morris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve HPL Schneider/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jack
Simunek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nathan L Hlavaty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ron
Green/Corp/Enron@Enron, Gerald Lofton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cheryl
Marshall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Emma Kam Welsch/HOU/ECT@ECT, Fred
Biery/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Sean Brooks/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Kenny
Cooper/GCO/Enron@ENRON, John Miska/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Perry
Roberts/GCO/Enron@ENRON, John Towles/NA/Enron@ENRON, Karl E
Atkins/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Rose/NA/Enron@ENRON, Debbie
Boudar/NA/Enron@ENRON, Aric Archie/NA/Enron@Enron, Ken Parker/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Roger Spiller/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Tom Shelton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth W
Kaase/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charlie Thompson/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Steve
Cherry/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Robert Newman/GCO/Enron@ENRON, David
Kantenberger/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Nick Cocavessis/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Handley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Crockett/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Molly L Carriere/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barbara Sargent/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brad
Blevins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Sonneborn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Audrey O'Neil/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Lal Echterhoff/HOU/ECT@ECT, James R Haden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin
Kuehler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Fry/GCO/Enron@Enron, Dick
Danes/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Ty Porche/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Vicente
Sarmiento/GCO/Enron@Enron, Joe Zernicek/GCO/Enron@Enron, J R
Fosdick/GCO/Enron@Enron, Reid Hansen/GCO/Enron@Enron, Calvin
Dodd/GCO/Enron@Enron, Bac Thi Ly/GCO/Enron@Enron, Glenn
Gregory/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Ronald Surber/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Jacob
Krautsch/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Alan Locke/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Jesse
Logan/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Gerry Boyd/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Maurice
Rayburn/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Mike Polan/GCO/Enron@Enron, Pat
Clynes/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey
Neuweiler/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, O'Neal D
Winfree/HOU/ECT@ECT, Irene Flynn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Eiben/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Donna Consemiu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cathy L Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Howard B
Camp/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jackie Morgan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cheryl Dudley/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Veronica I Arriaga/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janie Aguayo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amelia
Alland/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mary M Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Acton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Poorman/NA/Enron@Enron, Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carlos J
Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sabrae Zajac/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Cotten/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Trisha Hughes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jackie Young/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rita Wynne/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Leslie Robinson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jason Vogler/NA/Enron@Enron, Fred
Boas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lindley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Anita Luong/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Thu T Nguyen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Hakemack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia
Shoup/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gregg Lenart/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charlene Richmond/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul Couvillon/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joanie H Ngo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca
Griffin/NA/Enron@Enron, Nick Moshou/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jim Coffey/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Karry Kendall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Yvette Miroballi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Melissa
Graves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Gruesen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Blanca A Lopez/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Anita Eisenbrandt/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cassi Wallace/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jackie
Nelson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terrance Pinckney/NA/Enron@Enron, Jacquelyn
Azore/NA/Enron@Enron, Erica Wright/NA/Enron@Enron, Ana Maria
Hernandez/NA/Enron@Enron, Tammy Masters/NA/Enron@Enron, James
Little/NA/Enron@ENRON, Becky Pitre/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donald P
Reinhardt/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vance L Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Susie Orsak/Corp/Enron@Enron, Carol Carter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Liz
Bellamy/NA/Enron@Enron, Melanie Facundo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Saidia
Matthews/NA/Enron@ENRON, Monica Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa
Lunz/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Deanna Washington/NA/Enron@ENRON, Dena
Pawlowski/NA/Enron@Enron, Katie Washington/NA/Enron@Enron, Suzanne
Garcia/NA/Enron@ENRON, Clem Cernosek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane
Coleman/NA/Enron@ENRON, Adriana Peterson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Theresa
McKinney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy Lenart/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENt,
Michael C Winders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bobby Ferrell/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Bill
Sheridan/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Randy Hotz/GCO/Enron@ENRON, David
Ayers/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Jurecek/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Rick
Ramirez/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Brian Redmond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lillian
Carroll/HOU/ECT@ECT, Candace L Bywaters/HOU/ECT@ECT, James I
Ducote/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kreg Hall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul
Tan/NA/Enron@Enron, Rusty Belflower/NA/Enron@Enron, Bob M Hall/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: AEP TRANSITION QUESTIONS


Diana stepped out of the office for a minute, but I left the e-mail printout
on her desk and I'll talk to her about it when she gets in.

Kate

	From:  Sharen Cason                           03/01/2001 07:14 AM

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

Subject: Modesto deals

There are four deals on the no report that look like they sould be
confirmed.  Can you take a look at them and check to see why they are coded
not to be confirmed?

#533919
#533931
#533932
#533934

I guess you have seen the email that shows what your computer looks like when
you work in (or apparently near) California?  You open it and the screen
starts moving around.

Stay well!


Robin Newman
Matthew Bender & Co.
212/448-2168


----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 08/15/2000 05:24 PM -----

	Bradley Diebner
	08/15/2000 05:19 PM

		 To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli
Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia
Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe Global
Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie
Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey
Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/15/00

The EOL approvals for 08/15/00 are attached below.

Regards,
bd


Hey there, I was online so I thought I would give you a line.  Have a good
Thanksgiving and drive carefully and go horns, I mean ags!  Just joking!
Stephanie
______________________________________________________________________________
_______
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com


Brent Hendry will be in late Tuesday morning.  He's meeting with the
insurance adjuster on his home for further claim discussion and picture
taking.


Mr. Sanders -

Attached please find pdf version of the Wilson v. PG&E complaint faxed to
you on Friday.

Thank you.
Jane

Jane Chen
Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison, LLP
Assistant to Gary Fergus & Kirstin Wolf
SF ext. 2944
SF rm. 2917
DD (415) 979-2944

 Wilson v. PG&E.pdf
 <<Wilson v. PG&E.pdf>>

=======================================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of
the original message.

To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to
postmaster@brobeck.com
BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP
http://www.brobeck.com

 - Wilson v. PG&E.pdf


This is the sponsor undertakings which we commonly refer to as the Central
Bank Indemnity.
---------------------- Forwarded by Rob G Gay/NA/Enron on 12/20/2000 09:51 AM
---------------------------

"RACITI, Melissa" <melissa.raciti@freshfields.com> on 11/08/2000 11:07:55 AM
To: acestero@velaw.com, "Adriana Mathias Baptista (E-mail)"
<amb@tfts.tozzini.com.br>, af@tozzini.com.br, alejandra.arze@citicorp.com,
ameyer@mmso.com.br, "Ana beatriz kesselring"
<ana.beatriz.kesselring@bakernet.com>, "Ana Silvia Dias"
<ana.silvia.dias@bakernet.com>, "Anabela de Oliveira"
<Anabela.DeOliveira@chadbourne.com>, anakarinasouza@mmso.com.br, "Analia
Miqueri (BFM&L) (E-mail)" <am@bfmyl.com.ar>, "Anamaria Rosenthal"
<anamaria.rosenthal@bakernet.com>, "Andrea Gavino (E-mail)"
<Andrea.Gavino@enron.com>, andrea.arze@citicorp.com, "Andreia Almeida"
<andreia.almeida@enron.com>, "Andrew Pierrie (E-mail)"
<ayp@dentonwildesapte.com>, "Barbara Boehm" <bboeh@opic.gov>,
barry.k.pettifor@uk.pwcglobal.com, bbilger@velaw.com, "Beatriz Mello"
<beatriz.mello@bakernet.com>, "Blanca Bollom" <blanca.bollom@enron.com>,
"Bradley Barta" <bradley.barta@stoneweb.com>, brian.gilbertson@stoneweb.com,
"BURKE, Ted (TDB)" <ted.burke@freshfields.com>, caio@mmso.com.br, "Carolina
Galvao" <carolinagalvao@tozzini.com.br>, "Chaim Wachsberger (E-mail)"
<chaim.wachsberger@chadbourne.com>, chris.m.j.dutton@si.shell.com, "Christian
Huizer (E-mail)" <Christiaan.Huizer@enron.com>, "Claudia Bonelli"
<ceb@tozzini.com.br>, claus-michael.koch@kfw.de, "Cliff Rankin"
<crankin@velaw.com>, cuiabaclosing@tozzini.com.br, dalaniz@velaw.com,
"Daniela Serpa" <daniela.serpa@citicorp.com>, "David Schumacher (E-mail)"
<david.schumacher@chadbourne.com>, "Deia Holzmann"
<deia.holzmann@citicorp.com>, "DELPINO, Fiorella"
<fiorella.delpino@freshfields.com>, "ELORZA, Juliana"
<juliana.elorza@freshfields.com>, "Fatima Carr" <fatima.a.carr@bakernet.com>,
"Fernando Aguirre (E-mail)" <faguirre@caoba.entelnet.bo>, "Fernando Rojas
(E-mail)" <fernando@rojas-lawfirm.com>, fferraz@mmso.com.br, "Frank Kluesener
(KfW) (E-mail)" <Frank.Kluesener@kfw.de>, g.g.garcia@enron.com, "gabriela
marques" <gabrielamarques@felsberg.com.br>, gordon.combs@stoneweb.com, "Gra?a
Pedretti" <gracapedretti@felsberg.com.br>, "haloliver@aol.com"
<holiver83@aol.com>, "Heloisa Andrade (E-mail)" <hsfa@tozzini.com.br>,
hercules.celescuekci@bakernet.com, hns@maples.candw.ky, "Ivan Bole (BFM&L)
(E-mail)" <ib@bfmyl.com.ar>, "Javier Errecondo (BFM&L) (E-mail)"
<je@bfmyl.com.ar>, jeff.moore@stoneweb.com, jenp@tozzini.com.br,
jlowenthal@mmso.com.br, "Joana Ryan" <joana.ryan@enron.com>, "Joao Francisco
Regos" <joaofrancisco.regos@bakernet.com>, "John Barquin"
<jbarquin@velaw.com>, "John Novak" <jnovak@enron.com>,
jorge.garoufalias@citicorp.com, "Jose Bestard" <jose.bestard@enron.com>,
"Jos, Roberto Martins" <j.roberto.martins@bakernet.com>, "Juan Carlos Moreno
(E-mail)" <jcmoreno@indacochea.com.bo>, "Karla Wurth (E-mail)"
<kwurth@indacochea.com.bo>, "Karl-Heinz Wellmann (KfW) (E-mail)"
<Karl-Heinz.Wellmann@kfw.de>, kevin.fitzpatrick@stoneweb.com, "Kruskaia
Sierra-Escalante (E-mail)" <kse@chadbourne.com>, "Laine Powell"
<Laine.A.Powell@enron.com>, loftsg@brazil.kben.com, "Louis Piscitelli"
<louis.piscitelli@citicorp.com>, "Maria del Carmen Ballivian (E-mail)"
<mariac@rojas-lawfirm.com>, "Mary Mervenne (E-mail)" <mmerv@opic.gov>,
mbeckworth@velaw.com, mike_g._Bignell@sedgwick.com, "Nancy Rivera (E-mail)"
<nrive@opic.gov>, "O'BRIEN, Lisa" <lisa.o'brien@freshfields.com>, "Pablo
Rojas (E-mail)" <pablo@rojas-lawfirm.com>, pandrade@freshfields.com, "Pedro
Seraphim" <pgs@tozzini.com.br>, qys@ceibo.entelnet.bo, "RACITI, Melissa"
<melissa.raciti@freshfields.com>, "Renata Araujo" <raraujo@velaw.com>,
"Ricardo Indacochea (E-mail)" <rindacochea@indacochea.com.bo>, "Ricardo
Nogueira" <ricardonogueira@felsberg.com.br>, "Ricardo Sanches"
<ricardosanches@felsberg.com.br>, richard.a.lammers@enron.com,
rndr@amcham.com.br, rnovais@mmso.com.br, "Rob Gay" <rob.g.gay@enron.com>,
"Robert Shapiro (E-mail)" <robert.shapiro@chadbourne.com>, "Roberto La Laina
(E-mail)" <rlalaina@tozzini.com.br>, "Rodd Werstil"
<Rodd.Werstil@chadbourne.com>, "Rodrigo Sales (E-mail)"
<Rodrigo.Sales@BakerNet.com>, russell.ridgway@stoneweb.com,
ruth.a.crawford@si.shell.com, sbaratta@sewkis.com, scraw@opic.gov, "SHAKOOR,
Fiona"
<IMCEAEX-_O=FRESHFIELDS_OU=USA-NEW+20YORK_CN=RECIPIENTS_CN=FSHAKOOR@freshfield
s.com>, starry@velaw.com, "Stefan Unna (C&P) (E-mail)"
<stefan.unna@chadbourne.com>, "Stephen Coats" <scoats@velaw.com>,
stephen.gray@enron.com, "Steve Muller" <smiller@velaw.com>,
susan.garven@stoneweb.com, susanna.stern@citicorp.com,
terri.powers@stoneweb.com, "Thomas Felsberg"
<thomasfelsberg@felsberg.com.br>, "Thomas Mahaffey (E-mail)"
<tmaha@opic.gov>, turton@brazil.kben.com
cc:

Subject: Central Bank 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.
==================================================

Attached are clean and blacklined copies of the revised execution copy of
the Central Bank Agreement.

Best regards.

 - COMPARE001.DOC
 - NY003678709.DOC


ENW submitted our preliminary revised budget two weeks ago.  In our meeting in the Board Room, we did acknowledge that the ENW budget is very dependent upon the business plans of the business units that we support.  Since our budget meeting was the first that you conducted, we agreed that the ENW revised 2002 budget would need to be reviewed again once the business plans and associated budgets for other Enron business units were completed.  Has that process been completed such that we can now re-evaluate the 2002 budget for ENW?

I will follow up with you or someone on your staff on January 2 so that we can complete this budget process.

I hope that you and your family enjoyed the holidays.  --Sally


Here's the CEC's own presentation from spring, 2000 noting shrinking reserve
margins. Delivered at Portland "Keep the Lights On" conference in March, 2000.


Hi Warrren,

Could you please print all of these attachments for me?

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/12/2001 08:54
AM ---------------------------

"Reuter, Marisa" <MReuter@KSLAW.com> on 04/11/2001 08:27:55 PM
To: "'JeremiahDeberry@paulhastings.com'" <JeremiahDeberry@paulhastings.com>,
"'Michael.Young@northwestern.com'" <Michael.Young@northwestern.com>,
"'MargueriteKahn@paulhastings.com'" <MargueriteKahn@paulhastings.com>
cc: "'Chris.Booth@enron.com'" <Chris.Booth@enron.com>,
"'Ben.Jacoby@enron.com'" <Ben.Jacoby@enron.com>, "'Kay.Mann@enron.com'"
<Kay.Mann@enron.com>, "Keffer, John" <JKeffer@KSLAW.com>

Subject: ENA/NorthWestern: Revised Letter Agreement and Exhibits

I am attaching for your review marked and clean copies of the following
documents:

1. Letter Agreement between Enron North America Corp. and NorthWestern
Generation I, LLC;
2. ENA Promissory Note (Exhibit A);
3. First Amended and Restated LLC Agreement (Exhibit C);
4. Escrow Agreement (Exhibit F); and
5. ENA Guaranty (Exhibit G).

In addition, I am attaching a preliminary draft of Enron's form of
Assignment and Assumption Agreement (Exhibit B) with the caveat that the
document remains subject to changes pending further review by Enron.  Please
note that I am not attaching (1) a copy of the GE Guaranty (Exhibit E)
because we are satisfied with Paul Hasting's draft of this document and (2)
the LLC Promissory Note (Exhibit D) because Marguerite will circulate this
document as soon as she is done preparing it.

Don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Best regards,

Marisa Reuter
King & Spalding
1100 Louisiana, Suite 3300
713-751-3244 (tel)
713-276-7440 (fax)

 <<LetterAgreement.DOC>>  <<MarkedLetterAgreement.DOC>>  <<ENANote.DOC>>
<<MarkedENANote.DOC>>  <<LLCAgmt.DOC>>  <<MarkedLLCAgmt.DOC>>
<<EscrowAgmt.DOC>>  <<MarkedEscrowAgmt.DOC>>  <<ENAGuaranty.DOC>>
<<MarkedENAGuaranty.DOC>>  <<Assignment&AssumptionAgmt.DOC>>

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

 - LetterAgreement.DOC
 - MarkedLetterAgreement.DOC
 - ENANote.DOC
 - MarkedENANote.DOC
 - LLCAgmt.DOC
 - MarkedLLCAgmt.DOC
 - EscrowAgmt.DOC
 - MarkedEscrowAgmt.DOC
 - ENAGuaranty.DOC
 - MarkedENAGuaranty.DOC
 - Assignment&AssumptionAgmt.DOC


---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 10/27/2000
03:39 PM ---------------------------

	From:  William Kelly                           10/27/2000 02:51 PM

To: Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kam Keiser/HOU/ECT@ECT, Darron C
Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Oliver/HOU/ECT,
kyle_etter@hotmail.com
cc:
Subject: FW: It's a tough game

This is what Goss did to Etter for quiting....

---------------------- Forwarded by William Kelly/HOU/ECT on 10/27/2000 02:44
PM ---------------------------

bspencer@annuncio.com on 10/27/2000 02:31:44 PM
Please respond to <bspencer@annuncio.com>
To: "UCX FFL \(E-mail\)" <ucxffl@football.commissioner.com>
cc:
Subject: FW: It's a tough game

Not for the squeamish...

-----Original Message-----
From: Kappes, Jerry [mailto:jkappes@WorldByNET.com]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 2:13 PM
To: Rock (E-mail); Thumble (E-mail); Britt (E-mail)
Subject: FW: It's a tough game

-----Original Message-----
From: Gallagher, Michael
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:26 PM
To: Reynolds, Kerri; Wheeler, Larry; Kappes, Jerry; Setzekorn, Russ
Subject: FW: It's a tough game

 - att2.jpg


Sarah Novosel and I are hearing rumors from the FERC that the two new RTO
dockets on the agenda for tomorrow may be orders in the Northeast RTOs and
the Southeast RTOs respectively, requiring single regional RTOs.  The orders
are still being worked on, but may include technical conferences or
settlement judge proceedings.

Pat Wood is being credited again with pulling together a majority (including
Massey who has wanted a more aggressive approach in the RTO process) to get
these orders on the agenda and hopefully voted out.  We will try to get more
information and copies of the orders as soon as they are available.

Donna Fulton and Sarah Novosel

	Sarah Novosel
	07/06/2001 04:51 PM

		 To: Kevin M Presto/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Edward D Baughman/Enron@EnronXGate, Joe
Gordon/Enron@EnronXGate, Janelle Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, mbrown9@enron.com,
Mark Bernstein/HOU/EES@EES, John Llodra/Enron@EnronXGate, George
Wood/Enron@EnronXGate, Paul J Broderick/Enron@EnronXGate, Jason
Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Mason Hamlin/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert
Stalford/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom May/Enron@EnronXGate, Gautam
Gupta/Enron@EnronXGate, Narsimha Misra/Enron@EnronXGate, Steve
Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Garrett Tripp/TOR/ECT@ECT, Berney C
Aucoin/Enron@EnronXGate, Jason Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob
Wheeler/Enron@EnronXGate, Rogers Herndon/Enron@EnronXGate, Jim
Meyn/Enron@EnronXGate, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Daniel
Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Pearce W Hammond/HOU/EES@EES, Donna
Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen
Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Thane
Twiggs/Enron@EnronXGate, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L
Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Charles Decker/HOU/EES@EES, Nick
Politis/Enron@EnronXGate, sscott3@enron.com, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, James
D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve
Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate,
Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard
Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: FERC Agenda

FERC has two meetings in July (July 11 and 25) and then is on recess for the
month of August.  The next FERC meeting after July will not be held until
September 12.  Consequently, FERC tries to get out as many orders as it can
in July so the backlog is not as great in September.

Consistent with that goal, FERC has included a lot of cases on its July 11
agenda.   While some of these cases may be stricken from the agenda for July
11(and either deferred to the July 25 meeting or until September), we are
still expecting a lot of action from FERC in July.  The following cases are
on FERC's July 11 agenda:

RTO Proceedings

Alliance RTO

SPP and Entergy RTOs

PJM and PJM West RTOs

New York RTO

New England RTO

RTO West

Southern RTO

Two new RTO dockets entitled "Regional Transmission Organizations"

Other Proceedings

Mirant vs. ISO New England (June 20, 2001 complaint by Mirant regarding ISO's
proposal to revise procedures for mitigation of generators run out of
economic merit order during transmission constraints).

NYSEG v. NYISO (regarding ISO's hybrid fixed block pricing rule)

NERC (these are old docket numbers that go back to orders issued in 1999
regarding TLR -- Southern and VEPCO sought rehearing of the TLR procedures in
June, 1999, arguing that they could result in shedding load.  FERC may be
responding to those rehearing requests).

HQ v. NYISO (regarding HQ's request for FERC to order ISO to reinstate the
May 8, 2000 market clearing price)

Maine PUC vs. New England ISO (regarding the PUC's complaint against the NE
ISO asking FERC to direct the ISO to recalculate the energy clearing price on
May 8, 2000).

California Proceedings

San Diego Gas & Electric v. Sellers (Docket No. EL00-95-038 -- several
parties have already sought rehearing of the June 19 order -- this could be a
non-substantive tolling order (putting on hold these requests for rehearing),
or it could be something more substantive.

Removing Obstacles to Increased Electric Generation and Natural Gas Supply in
the Western United States

Please let me know if you have any questions concerning these proceedings.

Sarah


---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 03/16/2001
01:35 PM ---------------------------

kpolozie@mwe.com@mwe.com on 03/16/2001 01:10:44 PM
To: Janice.R.Moore@enron.com, sshackl@enron.com, TeiglandL@sullcrom.com,
gilbergd@sullcrom.com, yyaish@exchange.ml.com, lmcmurray@exchange.ml.com
cc: ppantano@mwe.com, rpaul@mwe.com, daron@mwe.com, darezina@mwe.com
Subject: Revised Transfer and Assumption Agreement

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Attached please find the revised Transfer and Assumption Agreement.  I have
enclosed both a clean version and a version showing changes from the latest
version you received last night.  Please call me with any questions or
comments.

Best regards,

Kate Polozie

Katarina B. Polozie
McDermott, Will & Emery
kpolozie@mwe.com
(202) 756-8130

(See attached file: WDC99_406266_1.DOC)

(See attached file: WDC99_406261_1.DOC)

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

This message is a PRIVATE communication.   If you are not the intended
recipient, please do not read, copy, or use it, and do not disclose it to
others.  Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this
message, and then delete it from your system.  Thank you.
******************************************************************************
*******

For more information on McDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY please visit our website at:
http://www.mwe.com/

 - WDC99_406266_1.DOC
 - WDC99_406261_1.DOC


Something  to think about...please scroll down.
---------------------- Forwarded by Edith L. Kelly/SS/HouInd on 12/07/2000
11:07 AM ---------------------------

Kathy D Lacy
12/07/2000 08:21 AM

To:
cc:    (bcc: Edith L. Kelly/SS/HouInd)

Subject:  THE VALUE OF MONEY...

Money can buy a house, but not a home.
Money can buy a bed, but not sleep.
Money can buy a clock, but not time.
Money can buy a book, but not knowledge.
Money can buy food, but not an appetite.
Money can buy position, but not respect.
Money can buy blood, but not life.
Money can buy medicine, but not health.
Money can buy sex, but not love.
Money can buy insurance, but not safety.
You see, money is not everything.

"When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles'
hands, he offered them money and said, "Give me also this ability so that
everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit."  Peter
answered: "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could
buy the gift of God with money!  You have no part or share in this
ministry, because your heart is not right before God."
Acts 8:18-21 NIV

Kathy D. Lacy
(713) 207-8570
REP-35


Julie,

Everything you have mentioned up to this point sounds incredible.  I would
love to see the symphony, got to a polo match or the races, etc. etc.  I've
made everybody here at work green with envy talking about my trip.  I'm going
to email you back tomorrow with a much more detailed response to your emails
because I'm trying like mad to get out of work before 7:00 tonight.  Anyway,
like I said it all sounds great and I am very excited about the trip (believe
me it's much needed).

Susan

I'll give you the exact times tomorrow, but my flight gets in around 9:00
a.m. on Saturday and doesn't leave until around 6:00 p.m. on Monday.  Talk to
you tomorrow.


---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 04/16/2001
01:42 PM ---------------------------

Steve Walton@ECT
03/12/2001 10:13 AM
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: james d steffes@enron, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, mhain@enron.com,
smara@enron.com, steve.walton@enron.com, tim.belden@enron.com

Subject: Re: CAISO Market Stabilization Plant

Alan,

>>> Day-Ahead & Hour-Ahead Markets

 Market separation rules aside, we should resist any mandatory Day-Ahead
Market.  The results for day-ahead clearing markets have been bid gaming to
influence price in the day-ahead market.  In PJM and NY-ISO parties submit
false load and generation schedules in set price (most often this is a low
ball load estimate),then later the true load is scheduled.  I think there is
less of a problem with the hour-ahead market since the opportunity to submit
a false bid to set price and then replace it later is very limited if not
nonexistent.

>>> Unbalance Schedules

 The general direction we are going for Eastern ISO's is to allow unbalance
schedules in the real-time market.  Tim indicated a few weeks ago that he
still wants this feature.  Normally there would be no imbalance penalties,
however, when reserve margins are so slim that the system's security is in
jeopardy, penalties would be triggered.  The result is that parties can
choose to use the real-time market or they can choose bilateral schedules or
a combination.  They are not compelled to do either.  As long as reserves are
adequate, then why should we care.

>>> Unit Commitment

 Although not on your list, I think the primary problems that the Day-Ahead
Market is trying to solve is unit commitment.  While this may be the intended
purpose, it hasn't worked very well.  Centralized unit commitment would
address the problem, but then the operator decisions have a large impact on
prices without having any consequences.  We need a proposal for making sure
that resources will be on line and that the operator knows they will be in
place.  A possible approach may be as follows (as suggested by Mike Roan):

The Operator publishes its expected real-time price for the next 48 hours
based on information supplied by generators regarding their availability and
bid price (one part) and the ISO's estimate of hourly loads.  The estimates
roll forward every hour to that a continuous two day outlook is provided to
all market participants.  The Operator provides the demand/supply curves to
the market so everyone has the same information.
As units are committed and load forecast is adjusted, the estimate of
real-time prices changes, providing signals for units to use in deciding to
commit units.  As expected price rises, more units are committed and price
goes down.
At a given point in time, such as 4 hours ahead of real-time, the Operator
locks units in as committed.  If there are inadequate units committed, it
pays to add capacity (call contracts).  If not enough is voluntarily bid, the
Operator orders units on under emergency rules contained in
interconnection/integration agreements with the generators.
The cost of the call contracts or of units ordered on is included in the cost
of imbalance energy in real-time for the hours for which those costs were
incurred.

This procedure is a continuous bid type of approach, which provides signals
and information to the market.  It or some other procedure like it is needed
to address the Operators concerns that it will be able to operate the system
and to deal with the overly conservative tendencies of a not-for-profit ISO.

Steve

	Alan Comnes
	03/09/2001 01:10 PM

		 To: james d steffes@enron, smara@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com,
rick.shapiro@enron.com, tim.belden@enron.com, mhain@enron.com,
steve.walton@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: CAISO Market Stabilization Plant

Here are some initial reactions and questions to the CAISO market
stabilization plan, which is attached.

Give me or Sue Mara your comments and then we can turn it into message points
for  media / advocacy folks.

In addition to reviewing the plan, I listened in to part of a stakeholder
call that occured Friday 10 a.m. PST.

DRAFT MESSAGE POINTS:

With limited exceptions, the plan does nothing to increase supply or decrease
demand.  It primarily addresses costs and market "stability"

INTERESTING QUOTES:

"Over the edge into cost based regulation" Duke Power

Although the plan provides for cost control and for improving market
"stability" (whatever that means), the ISO staffer (Byron Wortz) who
presented the study admitted it "Will do nothing to increase supply this
summer"

A staffer, Lorenzo,  stated (paraphrased)" all out of state suppliers are
cost of service based and do not need to recieve market based rates

ON SPECIFICS

The Ugly:

Resource-specific cost based bid caps (RSBC or bid caps):  cost of service
regulation that disincent supply
The ISO will hold in-state resources hostage--cuts any exports when reserves
fall below a stated critera

Imports can only participate as price takers.  Thus if the highest-cost
in-state resource is below the opportunity cost of power, needed imports will
not come in:
 >>this will decrease supply!!
 >> Staffer stated ISO hopes to sign "longer term deals" if necessary to
secure out-of-state power but acknowledged the proposal needs more work.

The Bad:

The ISO is considering pay as bid, which is complex and does not increase
supply.  However, on the call they said they are leaing to a single price
auction.  However, with bid caps the market will still be distorted.

The Good?:

The ISO wll implement an hourly day-ahead and hour-ahead market, essentially
filling  a void created by the PX's demise.
 >>( Enron has strongly advocated market seperation in the past but do we
want to consider supporting a day ahead market?)

Market separation rules (MSR).  ISO is leaning towards option 2 in which SCs
submit bundled schedules but that market seperation would be suspended after
congestion process is conducted; i.e., final schedules may be imbalanced.
 >>What do we think of this?
.


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 04/13/2001
09:31 PM ---------------------------

Vince J Kaminski
04/13/2001 02:51 PM
To: vkaminski@aol.com
cc:
Subject: Btu's Weekly Power Report

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 04/13/2001
08:52 AM ---------------------------

"Btu" <subs@Btu.net> on 04/12/2001 04:50:25 PM
To: "Btu's Weekly Power Report" <>
cc:
Subject: Btu's Weekly Power Report

Attached is the latest issue of Btu's Weekly Power Report

e-mail: info@Btu.net
phone: 732-758-8222
fax: 732-758-8286

 - wp041601.pdf