California Power Exchange May Lose Monopoly on Federal Ruling
Bloomberg, 11/04/00

Grp Urges Re-Regulation In Wake Of FERC Calif Pwr Order
Dow Jones Energy Service, 11/03/00

FERC Leaves Calif Pwr Consumer Relief In Lap Of Congress
Dow Jones Energy Service, 11/03/00

State Utilities Left With Burden of Reclaiming Costs From Crisis Energy:
Issue will remain unsettled until next year when a new agreement is reached
and flaws in deregulation are fixed.
Los Angeles Times, 11/03/00

USA: Calif. gov. scraps Asia trip to deal with power woes.
Reuters English News Service, 11/02/00

FERC Leaves Calif Pwr Consumer Relief In Lap Of Congress
Dow Jones Energy Service, 11/02/00

Calif Legislators Urge FERC To Hold Nov Mtg In San Diego
Dow Jones Energy Service, 11/02/00
USA: Calif. Senator Boxer wants more help for power markets.
Reuters English News Service, 11/02/00

California Power Exchange May Lose Monopoly on Federal Ruling
11/4/0 11:56 (New York)

California Power Exchange May Lose Monopoly on Federal Ruling

     Pasadena, California, Nov. 4 (Bloomberg) -- The California
Power Exchange, the marketplace where the state's three investor-
owned utilities must buy electricity, is on the brink of losing
its monopoly following this summer's power-price surge.
     The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission this week proposed
eliminating a state rule that PG&E Corp., Edison International and
Sempra Energy purchase almost all their power through the
exchange, which cost California consumers more than $100 million
to create. FERC expects to issue a final order by year-end.
     Under the proposal, the utilities could buy electricity
through other exchanges or directly from providers such as Enron
Corp. and Dynegy Inc. FERC said the move would help fix
California's ``seriously flawed'' market, where supply shortages
forced utilities to cut power to some customers this summer.
     ``The role of the power exchange is going to shrink,'' said
Josh Rokach, an adviser to FERC Commissioner Curt Hebert. ``People
will rely more on bilateral contracts'' between utilities and
generators, he said.
     Nettie Hoge, executive director of the Utility Reform
Network, a San Francisco-based consumer group, went further:
``It's quite possible that the exchange will wither away if we
follow everything FERC has ordered.''

                         Expansion

     Others aren't so sure. Though intended to serve only
California, the exchange now handles one-fourth of the power
delivered in the Western Systems Coordinating Council, whose
members supply 14 western states, two Canadian provinces and parts
of Mexico.
     Further expansion into areas such as Nevada, Arizona and
Alberta, Canada, will offer local electricity buyers and sellers
``a well-developed market operator ready for competition,''
exchange President George Sladoje said in a statement.
     California lawmakers established the nonprofit exchange in
1996, as part of the deregulation of the state's electricity
market.
     The utilities buy 80 percent to 90 percent of their
electricity on the exchange, based in Pasadena, California. The
three utilities together supply about 75 percent of the state's
power, with the rest coming from cooperatives and municipal
agencies.

                         Long-Term Contracts

     The exchange is a day-ahead market, where buyers and sellers
set prices for power to be delivered the next day. The California
Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's grid,
sells electricity in the hourly market, which fills last-minute
needs.
     FERC wants to give the utilities the opportunity to lock in
prices for power through longer-term contracts known as forwards.
Arranging supplies in advance would reduce the amount of power
that utilities must buy during periods of peak consumption, when
prices can soar, FERC says.
     Though the exchange has operated a forwards market since July
1999, the utilities until recently were prohibited from using it.
Even now, they must receive approval from the California Public
Utilities Commission to enter such contracts, and the amount of
electricity they can buy is limited.
     By comparison, municipal utilities such as the Los Angeles
Department of Water and Power can freely enter into long-term
contracts and don't pay the transaction fees charged by the
exchange.
     Even if PG&E, Edison and Sempra are allowed to obtain
supplies through alternative means, the exchange isn't likely to
go away, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of Sacramento-
based Independent Energy Producers, a trade group that represents
about 50 power producers.
     ``There will continue to be a need for a place for people to
do day-ahead transactions,'' Smutny-Jones said.

                         Transparency

     The exchange's ability to compete would depend in part on
whether rivals such as Enron and Dynegy, which sell electricity
throughout the U.S., are required to list prices openly, exchange
spokesman Jesus Arredondo said.
     ``Those folks don't have transparency right now,'' he said.
``If there isn't a level playing field, we're going to be at a
disadvantage.''
     Yet transparency on the exchange hasn't kept prices low.
During this year's hottest months, as demand for air conditioning
soared, the prices utilities paid for electricity through the
exchange and the California ISO more than quadrupled from a year
earlier.
     Utilities weren't able to respond to the price jump by
cutting their purchases because they needed the power, noted Bob
Levin, senior vice president of planning at the New York
Mercantile Exchange, one of the exchanges hoping to attract
business from California's utilities.
     ``FERC's proposal is a good way to start improving the
market,'' Levin said.
     Not everyone thinks allowing companies to buy outside the
exchange is without risk. State Senator Steve Peace, a Democrat
from El Cajon who co-wrote the state's 1996 deregulation law,
worries that oil and gas companies, big users of electricity for
their refineries, might draw up supply agreements in secret and
keep consumers in the dark about the terms.

                        Monopoly's End

     He warned in an Oct. 3 letter to FERC Chairman James Hoecker
that eliminating the exchange in favor of bilateral contracts
``would be disastrous, particularly for small commercial and
residential consumers.''
     Keeping California power prices a secret would be difficult,
even without the exchange, some industry observers say.
     Publishing companies such as Platt's, the commodities
division of Standard & Poor's, Financial Times Energy, and
Bloomberg LP report energy prices from around the world.
     They would be expected to begin collecting more information
in California as well if the market requires it, said Mark Palmer,
vice president of communications for Houston-based Enron Corp.,
the world's largest trader of electricity.
     ``You'll probably see California price indexes,'' Palmer
said.
     Spokesmen for Rosemead, California-based Edison and San Diego-
based Sempra said their companies wouldn't comment on future of
the exchange or their power purchases until FERC issues a final
order. PG&E, based in San Francisco, is reviewing the agency's
report, a spokesman said.
     Whatever FERC's decision, the exchange's future ultimately
should be decided by the market, not the state, said Richard
Bilas, a member of the California Public Utilities Commission.
     ``If the exchange is operating efficiently, it will survive
on its own,'' he said. ``Not as a sanctioned monopoly.''

--Daniel Taub in the Los Angeles newsroom (323) 801-1261, or at
dtaub@bloomberg.net, and Christopher Martin in Chicago, with
reporting by Liz Skinner in Washington, through the Princeton
newsroom (609) 279-4000/shf/alp

Story illustration: For California Power Exchange prices, see
{CAPX <GO>}. For a chart of California-Oregon border electricity
prices for the past year, see {ELGFCOON <Index> GP D <GO>}.

Grp Urges Re-Regulation In Wake Of FERC Calif Pwr Order

11/03/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- State regulators and legislators should re-regulate
deregulated power markets after federal regulators left California consumers
in the lurch, Public Citizen said Friday.
The Ralph Nader-founded activist group decried an order by the U.S. Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission Wednesday, which found electricity rates in
California were unjust and unreasonable, but failed to find legal reason to
refund money to consumers.
FERC found that the "seriously flawed" state-mandated market structure was to
blame, rather than deregulated power producers, for the sky-high power prices
roiling the first-in-the-nation deregulated electricity market.
"In short, FERC found that California consumers were robbed of billions of
dollars - reportedly more than $5 billion. But the agency can't find the
robber, and thus it can't protect the victims of the crime," said Charlie
Higley, the group's energy research director.
"FERC's inability to protect consumers from unlawful price gouging reveals
that state electricity deregulation has created unregulated monopolies and
cartels that are free to fleece consumers for billions without fear of
retribution," Higley said.
Public Citizen's reaction served to underscore concerns voiced by FERC
regulators that the consumer backlash spurred by California's flawed market
design will work against continuing efforts by federal and state policymakers
to further deregulate U.S. electricity markets.
Public Citizen also called for the U.S. Justice Department to launch an
investigation "to determine who is responsible for the unlawful abuse of
California ratepayers by greedy power suppliers."
Power producers angrily reject such characterizations. They say market
forces, environmental regulations, hot weather, depressed hydropower supplies
and record-high natural gas prices are behind the state's electricity-supply
and market-volatility woes.
-By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647, bryan.lee@dowjones.com

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

FERC Leaves Calif Pwr Consumer Relief In Lap Of Congress

11/03/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

(This article was originally published Thursday)

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Members of Congress representing the San Diego area
expressed disappointment Thursday that federal regulators found they couldn't
order refunds to power consumers hard by the state's high-flying power market.
The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Wednesday issued an order in
response to chronic power-supply problems in California that have sent
wholesale power prices soaring.
While the order called for a sweeping restructuring of the market to lessen
wholesale power price volatility, the commission found it lacked authority to
refund money to consumers.
"Clearly federal legislative action is necessary because FERC didn't take the
authority I think it has," said Rep. Bob Filner, R-Calif.
"All the consumers and utilities are still on the line (to absorb soaring
power costs) because FERC couldn't find any culpability anywhere," Filner
said. "FERC should have found some specific culpability here."
Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif., who has made the power price shock an issue in
his re-election campaign, criticized the commission for blaming the market
structure dictated by state legislators, rather than power providers, for the
soaring costs.
"I've never known a federal agency to override a state legislature like
that," Bilbray said, accusing FERC of shrugging its shoulders by recognizing
that market abuses occurred, but blaming the state lawmakers for it.
"FERC's pointing the fingers at the state and not the power companies," he
said.
The commission's conclusion will make it all the more difficult to prod
Congress to provide relief for California consumers, said Bilbray, who like
Filner has sponsored a windfall profits bill in Congress.
Bilbray suggested that California Gov. Gray Davis should call back the state
Legislature in emergency session to address the problem. If he doesn't, then
Congress will need to step in, he said.
Filner said he is drafting legislation based on FERC's conclusions to give
FERC the authority to refund consumers the windfall profits of the state's
deregulated power producers.
The bill would allow FERC to provide refunds in cases like California's where
the commission found rates to be unjust and unreasonable, but found no
specific companies to blame for the situation, Filner said.
FERC Chairman James Hoecker anticipated disappointment as the commission
discussed its order Wednesday.
"Those eagerly anticipating this order expected two things, a lynching and a
transfer of large amounts of money," Hoecker said. "Round up the bad guys ...
and order digorgement of all their ill-gotten gains."
Hoecker noted that if he were a retiree on a fixed income or a small business
owner in San Diego, "I'd want my money back."
But, he said, it's "not as simple as all that."
Instead, Hoecker put the onus on Congress to act legislatively if the
commission is to respond for consumers. FERC's ability to order retroactive
refunds "ultimately rests with Congress," he said.
-By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647, bryan.lee@dowjones.com

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

Business; Financial Desk
State Utilities Left With Burden of Reclaiming Costs From Crisis Energy:
Issue will remain unsettled until next year when a new agreement is reached
and flaws in deregulation are fixed.
CHRIS KRAUL; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS
TIMES STAFF WRITERS

11/03/2000
Los Angeles Times
Home Edition
C-1
Copyright 2000 / The Times Mirror Company

The $6-billion wrecking ball that is waiting to slam either California
consumers or the utility industry is back in the control of state officials
after a federal commission this week failed to even address the problem.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission declared Wednesday that California
has defects in its deregulated electricity market and proposed sweeping
changes, but declined to deal with one of the most serious problems.
The summer's electricity crisis forced the state's three investor-owned
utilities to purchase wholesale electricity costing $6 billion more than what
they could charge consumers under existing rates.
Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric now want consumers to
pay the full cost of those purchases in the form of monthly surcharges over
the next five years--a plan that would push into the distant future any hope
that deregulation would bring relief to the high-cost California electricity
market.
But state officials and Wall Street experts doubt the industry has any
realistic chance of collecting all $6 billion. Despite their confident public
stand, the utilities will likely settle with consumers.
"I'd say the chances of utilities being made whole is zero, and the chances
of them eating all the undercollections is zero," said Steve Fetter, an
analyst with debt raters Fitch of New York. Fetter is former chairman of the
Michigan Public Service Commission.
A high state official who asked not to be named said a majority of the Public
Utilities Commission believes that utilities are not entitled to the $6
billion under current law. "The commission has interpreted the law the same
way five times in a row," the official said. "So if anything is to change,
the legislature will have to write new law."
And yet division within the PUC has been evident lately, adding to the
confusion. Despite repeated PUC declarations that SCE and PG&E cannot raise
rates under the current deregulation law, the utilities were encouraged when
PUC President Loretta Lynch said on Oct. 17 that "the basic assumptions
underlying AB 1890 are ripe for reconsideration."
The electricity cost issue is a political hot potato that California
politicians and regulators clearly hoped the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission would handle by declaring costs "unjust and unreasonable" and by
ordering generators to give back profits.
But FERC said it found no evidence of specific market abuses and that it
lacked the legal authority to order refunds of federallysanctioned wholesale
rates in the absence of market-power evidence.
Early next year, after a new state Legislature is sworn in and Gov. Gray
Davis appoints his third of five members on the state Public Utilities
Commission, lawmakers, officials and stakeholders will have to hammer out an
agreement, which will probably require a new law. Wall Street is already
signaling its impatience.
"Our position has been that it is an unsettled situation as far as utilities
are concerned," said Richard Cortright, a director at Standard & Poor's
debt-rating service that downgraded its outlook on California utility debt to
negative last summer.
Consumer groups on the one side are clamoring for the utilities and power
companies to pony up for the costs of a failed experiment in a free market
for electrons, while on the other side the utilities who want full
restitution from customers for the electricity they dutifully delivered at
going market rates.
"What FERC effectively did was say to California: You guys have to choose
between utilities and consumers," said Douglas Heller, consumer advocate at
the Santa Monica-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "It's up
to Gov. Davis and the Legislature to do the right thing and stand up to these
utility companies."
FERC's proposed order "really passed the buck" and left the PUC with clear
jurisdiction over the utilities' transition costs, said Bob Finkelstein, a
lawyer with The Utility Reform Network.
The San Francisco consumer group has proposed that the PUC require the
utilities to use sharply increasing profits earned through deregulation, such
as from the sale of power into the market, to pay off the cost of electricity
that they have not been able to pass along to customers.
Utilities will argue just as strenuously that to make them absorb the
unexpected costs of a vital service is unfair and would impinge on needed
investments in electric infrastructure.
PG&E and SCE have each petitioned the state Public Utilities Commission for
permission to begin collecting those billions of dollars by approving rate
increases. In SCE's case, the proposed rate increase would be no more than
10%, which would add about $5.50 to the typical monthly residential bill.
Although wholesale electricity rates have risen dramatically, SCE and PG&E
customers are still protected by a rate freeze until utilities pay off costs
related to "stranded assets" such as nuclear, wind and other noneconomic
assets, or until March 2002.
San Diego Gas & Electric got out from under the rate freeze after paying off
its stranded assets early in 1999, and began passing along wholesale
electricity costs directly to customers. But the state legislature imposed a
rate cap last summer after wholesale rates doubled and tripled, causing a
political firestorm.
Steve Baum, chief executive of SDG&E parent Sempra Energy, said Thursday that
he was disappointed that the FERC did not open the way for refunds from the
power generators.
"This is going to make Wall Street less than happy," Baum said. "They say
they have no basis for refunds but that door is not slammed shut."

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

USA: Calif. gov. scraps Asia trip to deal with power woes.

11/02/2000
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2000.

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Nov 2 (Reuters) - California Gov. Gray Davis Thursday
scrapped a planned trip to Asia this month to remain at home to cope with the
state's increasingly troubled power market, officials said.
"The Asia trip has been postponed. We do not have a date for rescheduling,"
spokeswoman Hilary McLean said.
Davis had been due to visit Singapore, Brunei, Beijing, Shanghai between Nov.
11-18. Instead, he now intends to remain in California to tackle the energy
problems head-on.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) this week said that a probe
into California's newly deregulated electricity markets had shown that
drastic changes were needed to prevent a repetition of this past summer's
price spikes and near power blackouts.
But the regulators, though declaring power prices charged this summer were
not "just and reasonable," as required by law, said they did not have the
legal authority to demand refunds from generators, some of whom have made
huge profits selling power in the California market.
McLean said that Davis "has been very focused on California's electricity
problems, and wants to make sure that California's electricity supply is
reliable and affordable."
"The governor is going to be needed to here to continue to engage in this
issue," she said, without providing any further detail.
(Andrew Quinn in San Francisco bureau, 415-677-2541,
andrew.quinn@reuters.com).

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

FERC Leaves Calif Pwr Consumer Relief In Lap Of Congress

11/02/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Members of Congress representing the San Diego area
expressed disappointment Thursday that federal regulators found they couldn't
order refunds to power consumers hard by the state's high-flying power
market.
The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Wednesday issued an order in
response to chronic power-supply problems in California that have sent
wholesale power prices soaring.
While the order called for a sweeping restructuring of the market to lessen
wholesale power price volatility, the commission found it lacked authority to
refund money to consumers.
"Clearly federal legislative action is necessary because FERC didn't take the
authority I think it has," said Rep. Bob Filner, R-Calif.
"All the consumers and utilities are still on the line (to absorb soaring
power costs) because FERC couldn't find any culpability anywhere," Filner
said. "FERC should have found some specific culpability here."
Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif., who has made the power price shock an issue in
his re-election campaign, criticized the commission for blaming the market
structure dictated by state legislators, rather than power providers, for the
soaring costs.
"I've never known a federal agency to override a state legislature like
that," Bilbray said, accusing FERC of shrugging its shoulders by recognizing
that market abuses occurred, but blaming the state lawmakers for it.
"FERC's pointing the fingers at the state and not the power companies," he
said.
The commission's conclusion will make it all the more difficult to prod
Congress to provide relief for California consumers, said Bilbray, who like
Filner has sponsored a windfall profits bill in Congress.
Bilbray suggested that California Gov. Gray Davis should call back the state
Legislature in emergency session to address the problem. If he doesn't, then
Congress will need to step in, he said.
Filner said he is drafting legislation based on FERC's conclusions to give
FERC the authority to refund consumers the windfall profits of the state's
deregulated power producers.
The bill would allow FERC to provide refunds in cases like California's where
the commission found rates to be unjust and unreasonable, but found no
specific companies to blame for the situation, Filner said.
FERC Chairman James Hoecker anticipated disappointment as the commission
discussed its order Wednesday.
"Those eagerly anticipating this order expected two things, a lynching and a
transfer of large amounts of money," Hoecker said. "Round up the bad guys ...
and order digorgement of all their ill-gotten gains."
Hoecker noted that if he were a retiree on a fixed income or a small business
owner in San Diego, "I'd want my money back."
But, he said, it's "not as simple as all that."
Instead, Hoecker put the onus on Congress to act legislatively if the
commission is to respond for consumers. FERC's ability to order retroactive
refunds "ultimately rests with Congress," he said.
-By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6647, bryan.lee@dowjones.com

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

Calif Legislators Urge FERC To Hold Nov Mtg In San Diego

11/02/2000
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Seven federal legislators from California are
urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to hold its scheduled Nov. 9
public hearing on California's electricity problems in San Diego, not
Washington.
At the hearing, FERC will announce proposed remedies based on a FERC report
issued Wednesday that found California's electricity market seriously flawed.
The legislators said in a Nov. 1 letter to FERC chairman James Hoecker that
FERC should hold its hearing in San Diego because that is where people
affected by proposed remedies live. The letter was signed by Sens. Dianne
Feinstein and Barbara Boxer; and Reps. Bob Filner, Brian Bilbray, Ron
Packard, Duncan Hunter, and Randy Cunningham.
San Diego residents were the first in the nation to be charged deregulated
rates, and many saw their bills double and triple this summer due to a spike
in wholesale power prices. FERC held hearings in San Diego in August to
determine why those prices were so high.
The letter asked that a supplementary hearing be held in San Diego if the
Washington hearing couldn't be moved.
"Clearly, the electricity crisis has caused more than a ripple in San
Diegans' lives - a tsunami is more like it. For that reason, your Commission
should hear of the real impacts that your order would have on the people and
institutions of San Diego," the letter said.
Nobody at FERC could be reached for comment.
-By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;
jessica.berthold@dowjones.com
USA: Calif. Senator Boxer wants more help for power markets.
By Patrick Connole

11/02/2000
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2000.

WASHINGTON, Nov 2 (Reuters) - California Sen. Barbara Boxer on Thursday said
she was "distressed" that U.S. regulators did not provide immediate relief
for her state's power consumers when they backed draft measures on Wednesday
for fixing the troubled electricity system there.
Democrat Boxer, in a letter to U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) Chairman James Hoecker, urged the commission to take stronger actions
before their draft order becomes final next month to aid consumers.
"It is imperative that FERC act promptly to address California's energy
crisis," Boxer wrote to Hoecker.
Boxer wants FERC to approve a regional price cap throughout the 14 Western
states on electricity price rates, order utilities to provide refunds to
California customers and convene the next FERC meeting on the issue in San
Diego on Nov. 9 so that California consumers can weigh in on the matter.
San Diego consumers were most impacted by a sharp price rise in California's
wholesale power markets this summer, since under the state's deregulation
plan they were forced to pay market rates without a safety net.
FERC did not order refunds as part of its draft remedies announced on
Wednesday, saying they legally did not have the power to do so. The Nov. 9
meeting is scheduled at commission headquarters in Washington D.C.
The commission approved measures on Wednesday to establish independent
oversight boards for the California Independent System Operator and Power
Exchange (PX). Both entities help balance power supplies for state utilities
and act as auction houses for buying and selling last-minute power.
Other measures would eliminate the need for the three largest California
utilities - Pacific Gas and Electric, San Diego Gas and Electric and SoCal
Edison - to have to sell power to, or buy power from the PX.
San Diego Gas & Electric is a unit of Sempra Energy , SoCal Edison is a unit
of Edison International and Pacific Gas is owned by PG&E Corp. . The three
are based in the San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco areas,
respectively.
Other changes backed by FERC would allow the three investor-owned utilities
to manage risk by allowing long and intermediate-term power supply contracts
and would temporarily modify market auction bid processes.

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


Brent Price and I will be in the London office next week.  Wanted to see if
you, Frank and Mo might be available for dinner one evening.  We arrive on
Monday morning (March 20th) and will return to Houston on Friday morning.
Our Tuesday night is booked, having dinner with Fernley.  But Monday,
Wednesday and Thursday are available.  Does it work for you with the baby to
do evenings?  Let me know.


Oh, that's very funny.  Just like the good old days?

	Prentice Sellers <psellers@Haas.Berkeley.EDU>
	04/16/2001 06:49 PM

		 To: Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: FW: A.00-11-038 Rate Design Proposal of the Energy  Producers
and  User s

Did you want me to summarize these for you?

At 08:37 PM 4/15/2001 -0500, you wrote:

>----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/15/2001 08:30 PM -----
>
>
>                     JBennett
 >
>                     <JBennett@GMS        To:     "'Harry Kingerski
> (E-mail)'"
>                     SR.com>              <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>,
> "'dblack@enron.com'"
>                                          <dblack@enron.com>,
> "'James.D.Steffes@enron.com'"
>                     04/14/2001           <James.D.Steffes@enron.com>,
> "'jlewis@enron.com'"
>                     09:39 AM             <jlewis@enron.com>,
> "'Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com'"
>                                          <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>,
 >
>                                          "'Paul.Kaufman@enron.com'"
 >
>                                          <Paul.Kaufman@enron.com>,
 >
>                                          "'Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com'"
 >
>                                          <Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com>,
 >
>                                          "'Susan.J.Mara@enron.com'"
 >
>                                          <Susan.J.Mara@enron.com>,
> "'tjohnso8@enron.com'"
>                                          <tjohnso8@enron.com>,
> "'Leslie.Lawner@enron.com'"
>                                          <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>
 >
>                                          cc:
 >
>                                          Subject:     FW: A.00-11-038
> Rate Design Proposal
>                                          of the Energy Producers
> and      User s
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Phil Vizcarra [mailto:pav@a-klaw.com]
>Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 3:17 PM
>To: jbushee@sablaw.com; kmccrea@sablaw.com; callen@akingump.com;
>jweisgall@aol.com; rogerberliner@bcjlaw.com; rcsstl@cdmnet.com;
>mbrubaker@consultbai.com; anchau@shellus.com;
>keith-sappenfield@reliantenergy.com; jsmollon@newwestenergy.com;
>jlyoung@sempra.com; napedersen@jonesday.com; athomas@newenergy.com;
>kmcspadd@milbank.com; hchoy@isd.co.la.ca.us; lgurick@calpx.com;
>douglass@arterhadden.com; randy_britt@mayco.com; dmarshall@greggind.com;
>frank.cooley@sce.com; glwaas@calpx.com; uwuaregion5@earthlink.net;
>fmo@sdcity.sannet.gov; jleslie@luce.com; julesan@aol.com;
>mshames@ucan.org; jparrott@sempra.com; kmelville@sempra.com;
>riald@kindermorgan.com; bill.mccallum@ci.fresno.ca.us;
>btenney@landuselaw.com; ronknecht@aol.com;
>furutanj@efawest.navfac.navy.mil; kpoole@adamsbroadwell.com;
>mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com; freedman@turn.org; rcosta@turn.org;
>bfinkelstein@turn.org; theresa_mueller@ci.sf.ca.us; jjz@cpuc.ca.gov;
>chrisw@greenlining.org; joseh@lif.org; Evelyn Kahl; jnnc@chevron.com;
>jlondon@gralegal.com; imoosen@gralegal.com; clpearce@duanemorris.com;
>phanschen@mofo.com; tmberliner@duanemorris.com; dpritchard@mofo.com;
>smoss@hooked.net; epoole@adplaw.com; chilen@llgm.com; jsqueri@gmssr.com;
>jbennett@gmssr.com; bloomje@la.whitecase.com; pbray@newpower.com;
>rick.counihan@greenmountain.com; thoulihan@mdbe.com; mday@gmssr.com;
>jmalkin@orrick.com; edwardoneill@dwt.com; lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com;
>jguzman@nossaman.com; whe1@pge.com; ssmyers@worldnet.att.net;
>pxo2@pge.com; pat.williams@dhcmail.com; wbooth@booth-law.com;
>jerryl@abag.ca.gov; mgomez1@bart.gov; askaff@energy-law-group.com;
>pjpowerlaw@aol.com; difellman@energy-law-group.com;
>nryan@environmentaldefense.org; rschmidt@bartlewells.com;
>rrcollins@n-h-i.org; patrickm@crossborderenergy.com;
>tomb@crossborderenergy.com; brbarkovich@earthlink.net;
>pmcdonne@wenet.net; pjmuller@ricochet.net; jbradley@svmg.org;
>tsmegal@calwater.com; sberlin@mccarthylaw.com; bishop@jrwood.com;
>cwrmccv@worldnet.att.net; scottst@mid.org; bill@jbsenergy.com;
>cmkehrein@ems-ca.com; jweil@aglet.org; abb@eslawfirm.com;
>bpowers@seniors.org; dcarroll@dbsr.com; dkk@eslawfirm.com; ed@clfp.com;
>jtachera@energy.state.ca.us; howens@seniors.org;
>sgreenberg@realenergy.com; tknox@klalawfirm.com; smutny@iepa.com;
>lmh@eslawfirm.com; hodgesjl@pacbell.net; rpernell@energy.state.ca.us;
>kmills@cfbf.com; rliebert@cfbf.com; aorchar@smud.org; Michael Alcantar;
>jcpaine@stoel.com; mhg@hetrading.com; dws@keywaycorp.com;
>hbd@gweiss.com; gerhordt.herbert@msdw.com; cread@steptoe.com;
>jogg@jhenergy.com; peter_fox-penner@brattle.com;
>DavoodiKR@efaches.navfac.navy.mil; bill.wells@afcesa.af.mil;
>ad046@detroit.freenet.org; bob_anderson@apses.com; gdreed@sidley.com;
>robert.d.schasel@fritolay.com; cyounger@manatt.com; dhuard@manatt.com;
>rkeen@manatt.com; georgeperrault@msn.com; picketse@sce.com;
>jsilva@edisonenterprises.com; jherrera@dpw.co.la.ca.us;
>LVanWagenen@sempra.com; jbarthrop@powersavers.com; foothill@lmi.net;
>fosterbc@sce.com; ljhubbard@sempra.com; ktilton@gralegal.com;
>mpatel@brownwoodlaw.com; paul.harris@bridge.com; oshirock@pacbell.net;
>natutt@duanemorris.com; j3m9@pge.com; musicamaria@yahoo.com;
>derkp@newsdata.com; luluw@newsdata.com; tom.oneill@abnamro.com;
>mmattes@nossaman.com; RJP2@pge.com; brb3@pge.com; ell5@pge.com;
>jyf1@pge.com; NXK2@pge.com; rrh3@pge.com; alexm@calpine.com;
>gtbl@dynegy.com; joe.paul@dynegy.com; honest@compuserve.com;
>jyoung@ebmud.com; jon.jacobs@paconsulting.com;
>emitchel@angnewspapers.com; jptang@oaklandcityattorney.org;
>rbw@mrwassoc.com; dmarcus@slip.net; jeff@hmhresources.com; ed@apx.com;
>wendy@econinsights.com; chrism@mid.org; fwmonier@tid.org;
>rmccann@cal.net; blaising@braunlegal.com; melanie_gillette@rmiinc.com;
>twetzel@thermoecotek.com; Slayman@energy.state.ca.us;
>swchurchill@juno.com; jdh@eslawfirm.com; ddavie@hesinet.com;
>karen@klindh.com; cpeyton@sacbee.com; thaines@smud.org;
>huse@eesconsulting.com; mer@cpuc.ca.gov; awp@cpuc.ca.gov;
>cmw@cpuc.ca.gov; ctd@cpuc.ca.gov; bsl@cpuc.ca.gov; dlf@cpuc.ca.gov;
>fua@cpuc.ca.gov; jlo@cpuc.ca.gov; jsw@cpuc.ca.gov; jrd@cpuc.ca.gov;
>jmh@cpuc.ca.gov; kok@cpuc.ca.gov; kim@cpuc.ca.gov; llk@cpuc.ca.gov;
>lss@cpuc.ca.gov; mv1@cpuc.ca.gov; pmd@cpuc.ca.gov; gig@cpuc.ca.gov;
>rtf@cpuc.ca.gov; raw@cpuc.ca.gov; sfc@cpuc.ca.gov; car@cpuc.ca.gov;
>txb@cpuc.ca.gov; ztc@cpuc.ca.gov; nevillm@hdcdojnet.state.ca.us;
>dwrlegal1@water.ca.gov; ath@cpuc.ca.gov; LKristov@energy.state.ca.us;
>randy.chinn@senate.ca.gov; firmiyas@dof.ca.gov; rax@cpuc.ca.gov;
>rtavares@energy.state.ca.us; mschwebs@energy.state.ca.us
>Subject: A.00-11-038 Rate Design Proposal of the Energy Producers and
>User s
>
>
>Attached pursuant to the Assigned Commissioner Ruling in A.00-11-038 et
>al is the Rate Design Proposal of the Energy Producers and Users
>Coalition.  The proposal includes three attachments:
>
>1.   Prepared Direct Testimony of Donald W. Schoenbeck on Behalf of the
>Energy Producers and Users Coalition and Rate Spread and Rate Design
>Proposal (Schedule 1).
>
>2.    Schedule 2:  EPUC ACR Template for Southern California Edison
>Company.
>
>3.    Schedule 3: EPUC ACR Template for Pacific Gas and Electric
>Company.
>
>Should you have any problems opening the attached documents, please let me
>know.
>
>Phil Vizcarra
>Alcantar & Kahl LLP
>
>  <<EPUC Rate Design Testimony .doc>>  <<Exhibit DWS Schedule 2 EPUC Rate
>Design Testimony .doc>>  <<Exhibit DWS Schedule 3 EPUC Rate Design
>Testimony
>.doc>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>(See attached file: EPUC Rate Design Testimony .doc)
>(See attached file: Exhibit DWS Schedule 2 EPUC Rate Design Testimony .doc)
>(See attached file: Exhibit DWS Schedule 3 EPUC Rate Design Testimony .doc)
>
>


-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Melissa Martinez <mmartinez@fvtech.com>
An: Mom <MrsPiggy123@aol.com>; Erica Banks <erica@fvtech.com>; Shaye Nielsen
<shaye@fvtech.com>; Paula <suzieq@wyoming.com>; Colleen
<ccowan@sportcourt.com>; JEANNE <jeanne@fvtech.com>; Amber DeGeorge
<DeGe7200@student.suu.edu>; ANDREA <STACK2@EARTHLINK.NET>
Datum: Montag, 22. Oktober 2001 13:48
Betreff: Fw: I'LL TAKE IT AS A HINT IF I DON'T GET THIS BACK!!

Melissa Orton
FV Tech
mmartinez@fvtech.com
----- Original Message -----
From: MrsPiggy123@aol.com
To: MartinezT78@aol.com ; Bird1992@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 8:22 PM
Subject: I'LL TAKE IT AS A HINT IF I DON'T GET THIS BACK!!

        I'LL TAKE IT AS A HINT IF I DON'T GET THIS BACK!!
        How many people actually have 8 true friends? Hardly anyone I know!

        But some of us have all-right friends and some good friends!!!

        You, my friend, have been tagged by the friendship Angel

        Which means you are a

        GREAT FRIEND!!!

        You will have good luck for two years if you send this to 8 people
or
        more.

        And, if this is sent back to you, then you will know that you are a
true
        friend.

        You must send it in 5 minutes or your good luck will be broken!!!

        Eleanor Roosevelt wrote:

        Many people will walk in and out of your life, but only true friends
will
        leave footprints in your heart.

        To handle yourself, use your head; to handle others, use your heart.

        Anger is only one letter short of danger.

        If someone betrays you once, it is his fault; if he betrays you
twice, it
        is your fault.

        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds
        discuss people.

        He who loses money, loses much; he, who loses a friend, loses much
more;

        He, who loses faith, loses all.

        Beautiful young people are accidents of nature, but beautiful old
people
        are works of art.

        Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to
make them
        all yourself.

        Friends, you and me - you brought another friend - and then there
were 3.

        We started our group - our circle of friends - and like that
circle -
        there
        is no beginning, nor an end.

        Yesterday is history - tomorrow is a mystery - today is a gift.


Please email me with requests for central deals.  Thanks.
PL


-----Original Message-----
From: Kay Garcia
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 8:58 AM
To: Bobby Jackson; Carol Quijada; Dianne Yarbrough; Harriet R. Boudreaux;
Helen Boyd; Jacqueline Terrell; Juslyn Woods; Linda Young; Mary Anne Kane;
Patricia Julian
Subject: FW: Christmas Magic

-----Original Message-----
From: jeanetteautrey [mailto:jeanetteautrey@email.msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 7:32 AM
To: Kay Garcia
Subject: Christmas Magic

  http://sendafriend.com/magical/ <http://sendafriend.com/magical/>

 - Christmas Magic.url


Next Steps

Resumes 1/10/01 in WDC.  Enron will continue to attend.

In the Room

Reliant submitted its proposal for blended rates and determining the real gap
between a blended wholesale price and potential retail rates. Reliant showed
that the gap is potentially quite small.
Reliant's effort was to move us away from the "Sharing the Pain" concept
offered by PG&E.
Enron again requested utility ideas for a quid pro quo, assuming any deal
could be struck.
Judge requested additional info from ISO and PX on market shares -- several
marketers explained their concern (e.g. Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch,
Avista) that this request gave credence to the "Pain" allocation proposal and
refused to give permission to release their data.  Enron said it was checking
on whether to release the data, but had the same concerns as the other
marketers on the principles.
Judge decided to use a joint statement for his report (see attached) to the
public. The statement was agreed to, in large part, by the participants.
Judge mentioned that 40% of the A/S market is apparently held by three
municipal/alien utilities.
Judges order urges participation by these parties.

Out of the Room

More bilateral discussions between utilities and gens.
Marketers discuss whether to continue to stay in the room and participate.


I will be out of the office on Friday the 22nd.

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


Tana,
Just wondering if you ever received the credit worksheet for this counterparty. This is the company that Lee Jackson in NGLs is so eager to get online.

Thanks,
jennifer


Ernesto, can you please provide the following information:

1.	Please confirm that the date that Accro commenced commercial operation was 7/6/2001.
2.	At the time Accro payouts were approved for payment relative to financial close, the projected NPV of cash flows related to Enron's interest was $18.331 million.  An updated NPV calculation, reviewed and signed off on by RAC is required, to determine what, if any, additional payments might be presented to the Compensation Committee for approval.  Norm Spalding has supplied December financials to Compensation and can supply them to the appropriate RAC individual.  By copy of this email to Rick Buy, I am asking who in RAC is available to review the financials.  Have you spoken to anyone in RAC about this project?

I think the process will entail:
1.	Sign off by RAC.
2.	Sign off by Jim Hughes and Stan Horton.
3.	Sign off by Compensation Committee.
4.	Sign off by Creditor Committee and possibly E&Y even though these are bonuses associated with non-debtor entity.

Thanks for your help.


Becky Johnson just called me and said that today is the deadline for imbalance trading however, that is all she knew about the matter.  She transferred me to accounting but I rec'd no answer.  I will keep looking on the website but the only add'l info. I have found is what Jeanne listed below.  I will keep calling tgt in the meantime.

Stephanie

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wukasch, Jeanne
Sent:	Tuesday, November 20, 2001 10:30 AM
To:	Pereira, Susan W.; Erwin, Stephanie
Subject:	TGT - Imbalance Trade provisions

Here is the provision in the tariff for Imbalance Trading:
Subject to the provisions of Section 17.3(h) above, Customers may resolve their monthly transportation imbalances by trading their imbalance with another Customer. If requested by Customer, Texas Gas will post imbalances available for trades on its EBB. Customers trading offsetting imbalances must provide Texas Gas a notice of their agreement to trade imbalances in writing and signed by both Customers. All imbalance trades must be completed within ten (10) days of the date Texas Gas renders notice to Customer as to their monthly transportation imbalance. Customers must make-up in-kind or cash out all monthly transportation imbalances not resolved through trading in accordance with Section 4 of these General Terms and Conditions.

Since the imbalance data sent to ENA was dated November 10th,   then it appears that TODAY would be the last day to trade this imbalance.

STEPHANIE -- Can you verify this imbalance trading deadline with your TGT rep ?     Does TGT post the imbalance data earlier in the month on their nomination system ?    If so,  then the deadline could have already passed to trade the imbalance.

Jeanne Wukasch
ext.  58495


You are probably asking yourself, what is a Virtual Dedicated Server?
We have created a web based control panel that will give your
company most of the features previously only available in a dedicated server, at a fraction of the cost!

Our comprehensive control panel not only enables you to provision your
customers services, it also allows YOUR end users to control most
aspects of their hosting right from their browser.

You may customize the graphics that are displayed on the interface your client sees,
so YOUR customers never even know we exist. We can also help you register
aliased name servers to provide total anonymity.

Your Virtual Dedicated Server will have all of the following features:
*- Add/Delete Domain Names at your convenience
*- Automated DNS Provisioning
*- Add/Delete MYSQL Databases
*- Complete Web based E-mail Provisioning
.and too many additional features to list

Chat with a live sales Representative by clicking on the link.  Or you may call 1-800-668-1406 http://server.iad.liveperson.net/hc/45802963/?cmd=file&file=visitorWantsToChat&site=45802963&byhref=1&AEPARAMS

Our Virtual Dedicated Servers
Start for as little as $39.96/mo for unlimited domains and 200/mb disk space
A larger version of this will run you $79.95/mo with Unlimited Domains and 500/mb disk space
The monster version of this is $143.96/mo with Unlimited domains and 1 GB disk space

Chat with a live sales Representative by clicking here http://server.iad.liveperson.net/hc/45802963/?cmd=file&file=visitorWantsToChat&site=45802963&byhref=1&AEPARAMS

Or you may call 1-800-668-1406 to speak with a Sales Representative

You have nothing to lose by clicking the links and chatting with one of our sales Reps. We are so convinced that you will love your  Virtual Dedicated Server that we back it up with our 15 Day FREE Trial and our 30 day money back guarantee NO QUESTIONS ASKED!

We also stand behind our rock solid network with a real live UP-TIME GUARANTEE that compensates you in the unlikely event we should not provide you with 99.9% uptime.

 Call NOW!!! 1-800-668-1406

Or click below to chat with a live Representative
http://server.iad.liveperson.net/hc/45802963/?cmd=file&file=visitorWantsToChat&site=45802963&byhref=1&AEPARAMS


Just to follow up on our conversation this morning.  I definately would like to nominate Bob Superty for promotion.  Bob has done  a fabulous job for several years
managing our overall logistics function.  Let me know if you additional info from me.


> Contact: Samantha Jordan
>                (202) 225-2002
> Date:      Friday, January 5, 2001
>
> Statement RE: Electricity Price Concerns in California
>
>  "Electricity restructuring, in principle, did not cause the problems
> California is experiencing -- it just exposed them more obviously to
> consumers there.  California did not deregulate properly, nor did it
> ensure a sufficient power supply.
>
>  The state framework in place in California created a situation
> allowing for almost zero growth in generation and almost zero growth in
> transmission at a time when the service region's population was growing
> substantially.  The strict process to obtain permits or new licenses
> limits interest in constructing new power plants and transmission lines.
> California's stringent environmental standards, the most rigid in the
> nation, restrict the interest of new providers wishing to enter the
> market.  The California legislation was therefore enacted in an
> environment in which consumers were not encouraged to limit usage, demand
> continued to increase and the power reserves began to deplete.  The
> surrounding states, strapped by their own growth, have been unable to
> provide additional power supplies to California at a reasonable cost.
>
>  Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration and the California
> government had an opportunity as early as last summer to foresee this
> oversight and make changes that would have helped stave off this
> situation, however they chose not to make the fundamental changes
> necessary.  The problems in the state's market were obvious months ago and
> earlier action could have avoided a crisis.  The actions now necessary did
> not need to be this painful.
>
>  Governor Davis should be looking for a practical, California-based
> solution rather than name-calling, threatening and playing politics with
> the pocketbooks of his consumers and stockholders.  It is very important
> to keep independent generators of power interested in selling to
> California -- these crucial participants should not be scared away when
> California needs power the most.
>
>  When the 107th Congress convenes for business, it is my intention to
> hold a series of hearings, focusing not only on the California situation,
> but the overall energy situation in the United States.  I have also
> requested a meeting with Bush officials to discuss these issues, and
> develop a plan of action to deal with them, as soon as the Administration
> is formally in place."
>
>
> -U.S. Representative Joe Barton (R-TX)
>
> As Chairman of the House Commerce Subcommittee on Energy & Power, Barton
> was responsible for the first comprehensive electricity deregulation
> package to pass a House Subcommittee.  He is expected to be re-appointed
> to this chairmanship in the 107th Congress, where he will have House
> jurisdiction over all energy matters.


Could you let me know how many there are, so I'll know how we want to handle
this.

---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 01/22/2001 10:10
AM ---------------------------

"George Kutzschbach" <gkutzschbach@fulbright.com> on 01/19/2001 06:14:02 PM
To: kay.mann@enron.com
cc: DPedigo@INTERGEN.com, CCampbell@KSLAW.com

Subject: Resignations of CAED I & II Man. Dir. & Officers

Kay,

Please have the appropriate managing directors and officers of CAED I
and CAED II execute the attached resignations and return the executed
resignations to Doug Pedigo.  If any other persons were manging
directors or officers of CAED I or CAED II prior to closing, please have
them execute similar resignations and furnish them to Doug.  Thanks.

George

 - 5bx_j01_.DOC


This request has been pending your approval for  115 days.  Please click http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000041547&Page=Approval to review and act upon this request.

Request ID          : 000000000041547
Request Create Date : 6/19/01 7:50:30 AM
Requested For       : jaime.gualy@enron.com
Resource Name       : \\nahoutrd\houston\pwr\common\power2\Region - [Read]
Resource Type       : Directory


I was wondering if ya'll wanted to have a happy hour on Friday for Tim and
Louise in honor of their recent engagement.  Do you have any ideas on places
to go?

Let me know


Mark:

Attached is the Master List of Departmental Duties.  It might make your job
as "space guru" a little less frustrating if you know which Assistant is
responsible for what.

Janette Elbertson
Enron North America Corp.
Legal Department - EB3326
Telephone:  (713) 853-7906
Fax:  (713) 646-2600
janette.elbertson@enron.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Bishop, Serena
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:44 PM
To: Bishop, Serena; Williams III, Bill; 'El Paso dispatchers'; 'Greg
Grill'; 'jhadda'; 'Kathy Peterson'; 'Luis Zaragoz'; 'Powermarketing';
Portland Real Time
Subject: Schedule for March 10th-11th and revised schedule for March 9th


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/31/2001
10:25 AM ---------------------------

LawrenceLRTNMT@aol.com on 03/28/2001 09:03:08 AM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Additional analysis using new distribution

Please see attachments.

 - kaminski_let_02.ZIP


Debra,

Please prepare a GISB contract between Enron North America Corp. and Lost
Creek Gathering Company, L.L.C.

Lost Creek's address is

Lost Creek Gathering Company, L.L.C.
c/o ECT Wind River, L.L.C.
1200 17th Street, Suite 2750
Denver, Colorado  80202

Let me know if you need any further information.

Call with any questions.

Thanks.

Shonnie


Gentlemen,

Tom Halter from Gas Recovery System will be calling over the weekend.  They will be coming back from an outage over the weekend.  They have 8mw available in SP15.  Just give him your bid, and if he accepts it, you will confirm the transaction over the APX trade application.  Just click on the "Bilateral" button in the APX, and then all you have to do is highlight the bilateral trade at the bottom, right click, and then click "confirm bilateral."

Thanks,
Stan


Daily Blessing
http://www.daily-blessings.com/bless148.htm

Accident
http://www.daily-blessings.com/humor56.htm

Are you working on crafts or gifts for Christmas?  One of my favorite offline
stores for craft and homemade gift supplies is JoAnn's.  And now they offer
an online store that I can shop right from home!!  And they have a great
promotional offer that you should definitely take advantage of...check it out
at the link below

http://www.daily-blessings.com/cjjoann.htm

Are you looking for a gift for someone who has everything?  or at least a
cell phone?  Did you know that cell phones give off harmful radiation?  These
folks offer a way to make your mobile phone safer to use.  Buy one for
yourself...and put them on your list for a gift this gift giving season!

http://www.daily-blessings.com/cjcellphones.htm

Hundred's of you have taken advantage of the free download available for the
Work From Home folks.  If you haven't checked it out yet...you should!!

http://www.daily-blessings.com/cjworkfromhome.htm

<<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>>
* To remove yourself from this mailing list, point your browser to:
http://inbound.postmastergeneral.com/remove?dailyblessings:10
* Enter your email address (judy.hernandez@enron.com) in the field
provided and click "Unsubscribe". The mailing list ID is "dailyblessings:10".

OR...

* Reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject line.

This message was sent to address judy.hernandez@enron.com
X-PMG-Recipient: judy.hernandez@enron.com
<<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>>


I dripped a frappucino on my linen dress today!  We are so dainty aren't we!
How are you today?\

I took Ruthie in today for a day of beauty.


Dale ---

In answer to you questions:

a.) We have traded this directly before and have just looked at it as two
individual deals....a baseload purchase at index, and a sale at index plus
some number with daily nom flex of zero to whatever is negotiated as the
daily max.  Example: Sitara deals #246931 and #246926

b.) These would definitely be separate products priced separately.  I would
expect a 3-day, 5-day, and 10-day product with a different two-way for each.

c.) Hopefully the other answers help here.

d.) To the extent that the deals are like the ones I mentioned in a.), can
they bridge to Sitara (at least the baseload piece)?

e.) We'll have to decide at what time the customer would have to give notice
(for now let's assume 9:30 am central).  The customer can make the
nomination  daily and would only need to notify us if they/we are going to
take the gas under the second part of the deal (the non-baseload).  In other
words, the   default would be zero, unless the customer or Enron (whoever
bought the service) nominates by 9:30 am.

FYI, the expectation is that there would be 3 products (at this point).  The
3-day would naturally be more expensive than the 10-day.

If you have any questions, please let me know.  I'm hoping, that if we view
the product as two separate deals, that will make things much easier
system-wise.

Scott

Dale Neuner   05/04/2000 01:21 PM

To: Scott Hendrickson/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sarah Mulholland/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dick Jenkins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bjorn
Hagelmann/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jennifer deBoisblanc
Denny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jefferson D
Sorenson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Larry Joe Hunter/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: New EOL Products for TCO

Scott -

Thanks for the explanation.  A few questions/comments for you all:

a) Have we been trading this Product OTC in the past, or is this
unprecedented? Naturally if we've done this in the past it will be a lot
easier to develop the language for the Product Description. Joe; ever seen
this?

b) Are we creating a single Product where the customer has the ability to
choose either 10-day, 5-day, or 3-day delivery, or are these three different
Products one 10-day, one 5-day, and once 3-day. I worry about having one
Product where the customer has the choice between the three because each
'trade' has a Sigma Factor that helps value the transaction. I think it would
be very difficult for RAC to assign a Sigma Factor to a single Product Type
which allows three possible scenarios, and that SigF ultimately assists
Credit in determining headroom. Tom and Bjorn; any comments?

c) For the same reason above, it may be difficult to create a pricing
algorithm that will give you a good value in the Position Summary. I presume
the level of difficulty for questions b and this issue will be determined by
the answer to question a.

d) Clearly these Products will not bridge into Sitara/TAGG, so we also have
to think about how the risk folks will identify these trades so they know how
to book them. Jennifer; any comments?

e) Using your example below: How much notice does the customer have to give
before noms take place? Is it a one time notice to designate all five days,
or can the customer call five different times, each time one day prior to
each nom?

David; am I missing anything?

Scott Hendrickson
05/04/2000 08:36 AM
To: Dale Neuner/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sarah Mulholland/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dick Jenkins/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: New EOL Products for TCO

Dale -

We would like to create the following products:

TCO Pool Physical Flexibility (3-day, 5-day, and 10-day)

Pipeline: Columbia Gas Transmission
Trading Point: TCO Pool
Term:  1 Month
Volume: Monthly Quantity

Description ---

Buyer will deliver a fixed baseload quantity to Seller at Inside FERC TCO
Pool Index.

Seller will deliver to Buyer, on Buyer's choice of days, up to a maximum
daily volume of 10% (10-day), or 20% (5-day), or 33% (3-day) of the monthly
quantity, at Inside FERC TCO Pool Index plus the price of the product.

Buyer is obligated to take all volumes back by the end of the month.  (Net
volume to each party should be zero.)

Example: Company X lifts Enron's offer for TCO Physical Flexibility at $0.03
for 300,000 MMBtu in June with 5-day payback.

  Company X will deliver to Enron's TCO Pool 10,000 MMBtu everyday in June.

  On five days of Company X's choosing, Company X can take delivery at TCO
Pool from Enron of up to 60,000 MMBtu/d.  Company X may take   anywhere from
0-60,000 MMBtu on any day, provided they can only take a maximum quantity of
300,000 MMBtu for the month.  Company X must   take all 300,000 MMBtu by the
end of the month.

  Company X will charge Enron TCO Pool Index for volumes it delivers to Enron.

  Enron will charge Company X TCO Pool Index plus $0.03 for volumes it
delivers to Company X.

I'm sure you'll have questions, so please call me at x-36736 and I'll be
happy to go over it with you.

Thanks,

Scott


<TITLE>froses_comp_01</TITLE><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">

over                     24 Games

Incredible                     125% Match Deposit Bonus

$125                     FREE

from Five Roses Casino

When                     you                      open an account                      with a $100 deposit, the Five Roses Casino will more than                     double your bankroll with a 125% bonus!

You                     will receive an enormous $125 FREE to experience !
our casino                     first-hand as player.  Welcome to Five Roses!

                                                                        Receive Your Bonus Here

Be                     our guest today as a real player and discover                     the finest virtual

gaming in the privacy of your own home.                      Five Roses Casino brings                     the glamour and excitement of real casino action to your desktop.                     Fast payouts, generous comps, and around-the-clock friendly                     customer support make Five Roses the premiere destination                     for wagering online.

                 125%                   Match Bonus!

Click here

Download                     casino

Click on button!

Click               Here to Download Free Games and Get $125!


Meeting with Carl Livermore on the Synthetic CC will be at 9:00am on
Wednesday down at his desk.  Thanks
Ben
3-7998


Gerald:

I have reviewed the draft language you sent me.  The language looks good.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09, 2001 10:25 AM
To:	Ferries, Nelson; Thorne, Judy
Cc:	Hodge, Jeffrey T.; Wallumrod, Ellen; Hesse, Lisa; Perlingiere, Debra
Subject:	Keep Whole Language

Attached is a draft of the Keep Whole language we discussed last week.  Please review and provide any comments you may have.

 << File: KeepWhole1.doc >>


Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 09:53:45 -0500
From: "Mike Kotar" <Mike.Kotar@psiusa.com>
To: Carlos.Giron@psiusa.com,Clint.McDowell@psiusa.com,	Stephanie.McDonald@psiusa.com
Subject: Fwd: Ground Zero
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Received: from femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com	([24.254.60.34])	by psiusa.com; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 09:48:07 -0500
Received: from HeatherWasgatt ([65.13.49.215])          by femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP          id <20011019144834.HICT25699.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@HeatherWasgatt>;          Fri, 19 Oct 2001 07:48:34 -0700
Message-ID: <002e01c158ae$ccda58e0$d7310d41@sctdl1.az.home.com>
From: "Heather Wasgatt" <hwasgatt@home.com>
To: "Andy Hutson" <andy_hutson@starkey.com>,	"Kathy Rall" <kcrall@earthlink.com>,	"Mike Kotar" <Mike.Kotar@psiusa.com>,	"Matt Vance" <matt_vance@hotmail.com>,	"Kevin Brenda" <kevin@nativeresources.com>,	"Dianne & Tom Wasgatt" <AZtomwas@worldnet.att.net>,	"Elizabeth Wasgatt" <emw3@dana.ucc.nau.edu>,	"Lisa Fraizer" <FIREBIRD2@mindspring.com>,	"Lydia McDonald" <lydia@nativeresources.com>,	"Melanie Travis" <golfgrrrl97@aol.com>,	"Patty Cascio" <patty@nativeresources.com>,	"Walter Barrios" <wbarrios1@msn.com>,	"Marjut Coursaris" <M_Coursaris@beutel-can.com>
Subject: Ground Zero
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 08:00:31 -0700
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_3369D5E1.AFCEAB73"

This is an aerial photo of Ground Zero.  Perhaps this will help us understand the true magnitude of the destruction.  God Bless.

Click here:  http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~rdgarr/WTC.htm

 - Part.001


Pls. see the attached for the brochure content.

Monica, give me a call on my cell phone if you have any questions/concerns.

Rahil
+44 777 556 8558


Good Afternoon!  If your able to get a total of 4 tickets to the game that
would be great.  Thanks for your help with this matter.
Ben


I just completed a lengthy call with A & K concerning the form facility
agreement.  A revised draft should be out mid-day today.

I have once again called ABB, but haven't heard back from them yet.

Kay


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/24/2000
05:08 PM ---------------------------

RealPlayer News <news@real-net.net> on 02/20/2000 01:14:03 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Speed Up Your Internet Connection

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
To unsubscribe to this email, please read the information at
the end of this message.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dear RealPlayer Customer,

We're excited to tell you about an easy-to-use software tool which
will dramatically speed up your Internet connection -- guaranteed.

TweakDUN boosts your connection without adding any additional
hardware to your system. And it is just $14.95 -- a fraction
of the cost of new equipment.

With TweakDUN you automatically experience faster Internet
downloads and smoother streaming with less need for rebuffering,
all without upgrading any hardware or changing your Internet
Service Provider. TweakDUN works with Windows 95/98/NT4 to
change "hidden" default settings and tweak most Network adapters,
including the Windows Dial-Up Adapter. With TweakDUN, data
no longer fragments, so your online experience is as fast as
possible.

You can download TweakDUN risk-free for only $14.95.  If your
Internet connection isn't faster after using TweakDUN, we'll
refund your money, guaranteed. Just contact us within 30 days
for a full refund.

==>  http://www.realstore.com/offers/tweakdun3.html

We are glad to offer these special products to our RealPlayer
customers.   Thanks for your continued support.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ABOUT THIS E-MAIL

You are receiving this email because you downloaded our
RealPlayer and indicated a preference to receive product
news, updates and special offers from RealNetworks.

To remove your name from future email communications,
simply visit the following URL and click on the Remove
button:
==> http://ml.real.com/mlr/vkamins@ect.enron.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

RealNetworks respects your right to privacy online.
Your e-mail address will never be shared with a third
party without your consent. Our privacy statement,
which has been reviewed by TRUSTe, is available at:

=>  http://www.realnetworks.com/company/privacy/index.html

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

RealNetworks(r), and RealPlayer(r) are trademarks or
registered trademarks of RealNetworks, Inc.
Names of third party companies or products listed herein are
trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.


Hey Greg.  I see no objection to amending the ISDA to cover power
transactions.  Also,  potential credit exposure related to a prompt month
power trade should be modest.  You may want to ensure that Tracy has no
objection, but this transaction should be fine.

Rod

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Wolfe, Greg
Sent: 25 May 2001 15:51
To: Nelson, Roderick
Cc: St Clair, Carol; Ngo, Tracy
Subject: RE: Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation - UK and US swaps

Rod:

We are looking at doing a June physical index power purchase today with
Kaiser. however, Kaiser only wants to proceed if we can assure them that we
can add electricity to the existing ISDA between Enron and Kaiser such that
they could fix the price during the month of June. After reading your comment
below about netting it appears that a longer term transaction would not be
advisable until further legal clarification occurs. Is there any reason we
can't or shouldn't pursue adding electricity to the ISDA provided we only do
one month transactions (assuming we see no risk of near term bankrupcty)?
Please advise immediately.

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Nelson, Roderick
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 2:53 AM
To: Ngo, Tracy
Cc: St Clair, Carol; Shackleton, Sara; Pitt, Michael; Boyd, Justin; Evans,
Mark; Wolfe, Greg
Subject: RE: Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation - UK and US swaps

Tracy,

Did you have a chance to read my email response earlier this week?  I believe
that it is highly unlikely that we will be able to net exposures across
non-defaulting (Enron) entities.  Paul Simons can (and maybe has by now)
given opinion to this idea.  Historically, I believe the opinion has long
been that such netting (set-off against affiliates of non-defaulting party)
in the US should work within the case of contractual default, but outside of
bankruptcy.  However, in the special case of legal bankruptcy, such netting
(though contractually agreed by the parties) may be challenged.  Introducing
the fact that one of Enron's entities is a UK entity may further cloud the
likelihood.  Clearly, if the relationship involves more than on Kaiser
entity, netting almost certainly will not work.

Has Diana not responded to your credit exposure questions regarding the form
of governing confirmation and legal entity?  I believe that she is in the US,
but should be checking in.  Perhaps you should try calling her?  I think we
will find that the transacting entity is a subsidiary of Kaiser Aluminum.

Risk management systems for metals are still not ideal.  Volumetric/CVAR type
analysis may not yield such reliable results.

Rod

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Ngo, Tracy
Sent: 24 May 2001 22:15
To: Nelson, Roderick
Cc: St Clair, Carol; Shackleton, Sara; Pitt, Michael; Boyd, Justin; Evans,
Mark; Wolfe, Greg
Subject: Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation - UK and US swaps
Importance: High

Rod,

Enron North America is looking to enter into power swaps with Kaiser Aluminum
& Chemical Corporation starting June 2001.  I'm seeing in the credit system
that MG plc has forward financial metals positions with Kaiser, however I
need clarification on whether the swaps are done with Kaiser Aluminum &
Chemical Corporation or Kaiser Aluminum International Inc.  Secondly, is
there a Master ISDA Agreement governing those swaps?  In pulling the mtm
monthly breakout, it appears that MG plc is OTM north of $10MM US and the
liquidation of that portfolio occurs mostly in cal '02.

Given Kaiser's limited credit line, I'd like to look into the potential of
setting off financial exposures in the UK and US in cases of default.  Kaiser
is looking at other businesses with Enron and this could be quite fruitful to
tap into in order to increase trading liquidity going forward.

In summary, we need to answer at minimum the following:
? confirmation of which Kaiser entity is financial transacting with MG plc
? volatility of the metal positions that go out to Jan '04 to ensure how
quickly this out-of-the-money position can move
? what type of paper is confirming the swaps (whether long-form confirms or
Master ISDA)
? what credit/legal terms and laws may affect our efforts to establish a
Netting Agreement for UK and US financial

Can you help me in coordinating a meeting with London legal/credit and
Portland credit/Houston legal to discuss pertinent issues associated with a
Netting Agreement between Kaiser (single entity or multiple entities) and
Enron entities (MG plc and ENA) as soon as possible.  Please let me know your
thoughts to the above and who we need to contact to get the above points
addressed.  In Houston legal, Carol St. Clair is available to work on the
drafting of such a Netting Agreement and is speaking with Sara Shackleton
about the concept as well.

Please let me know as soon as possible your comments to the above and in
setting up a conference call to push this forward.

Thanks,
Tracy


FYI, this is the copy of the "business process patent presentation" given
today by Larry Chaney of V&E.
----- Forwarded by Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 02:37 PM -----

	"Chaney, Larry" <lchaney@velaw.com>
	09/11/2000 11:21 AM

		 To: "'Gray, Barabara'" <BGray@Enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Here is the ppt presentation to make the hard copies.

Please call if there are problems downloading.  Thanks!

>  <<MSTR_CLE3p.PPT>>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> +++++++++++++++++++++++
> The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This
> email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization
> named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized
> representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if
> any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have
> received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by
> return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You
>
>

 - MSTR_CLE3p.PPT


Good question.  I think John is the designated hen shooter on the Omaha
marketing team.  John, do we even allow TW people to use Pheasant Haven?  DF

Kevin Hyatt
09/06/2000 05:03 PM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Customer Outings

How do I get set up to take customers out on the ET&S pheasant hunts at the
club?  Who do I need to call?
thanks
KH


Sally, accomplishments as requested. Sheila


I have two things biting me.

First is time.  I need to turn a draft for Hannon and Rice ASAP.  So,  the
value of a deliberative approach to coming up with a V@R policy will quickly
evaporate if we take 2 weeks to study what the policy should say.

Second,  I have a unique situation.  Our concept of V@R is really unlike the
rest of Enron's today.  What happens today is that network engineers
unilaterally make decisions about deployment, configuration and other matters
which effect the longs and shorts of our asset/contract portfolio that they
view strictly from a network operating standpoint.

A good example was a decision to move our primary TeraPop (three large
servers storing 165 gigabytes each) from Portland to LA.  The servers are
already in place and purchased,  so no capital was involved.  But the
decision has huge ramifications on the future LA/New York and other Bandwidth
usage, and that cost money.  Now it could be that the LA/New York cost is
cheaper than the Portland/New York cost,  the whole point is no one knows.
What our "value-at-risk" policy attempt to corral is these types of decisions
and put them into the hands of the risk management group,  where the decision
will be made with at least some economic work behind it.

I really see the EBS V@R policy to be misnamed,  since we don't really have
the math done to calc V@R.  It really is a volumetric-based control policy
that says you can't make network changes over XX amount of Megabytes (a
storage measure)  or OC-3 equivalents (a bandwidth measure) without Risk
Management making or approving the decision.  I do believe that with
Research's help,  we can in time actually calculate the V@R impact of such
decisions.  At that time,  the policy should be modified to set metrics based
on the V@R calculations.

So if you have an open enough mind to let us co-op your word for a minute,
we need to start turning the minds of the network industry people into
thinking about their decisions as having value effects.  Said directly,
Kevin Hannon has given me authority to write a policy to move control over
significant network changes from the field to the trading floor,  and I am
going to issue something NOW to effectuate that......

So... I really want your views on what we are doing,  but thought you needed
some flavor and an sense of the urgency.  If you can weigh in,  do so
quickly.....

	Barry Pearce
	06/30/00 04:47 AM

		 To: John Echols/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lou Casari/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EBS VaR Transaction Policy

Positive....
----- Forwarded by Barry Pearce/Enron Communications on 06/30/00 04:49 AM
-----

	Ted Murphy@ECT
	06/29/00 11:33 AM

		 To: Barry Pearce/Enron Communications@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EBS VaR Transaction Policy

Barry,
Conceptually, I see no reason that a process like this can not be
implemented.  In some way we have attempted to do so through the Enron Corp
Transaction Approval Process (TAP).  I have forwarded to John a copy of this,
along with the Risk Management Policy.   I'll let him share with you if ok (I
really don't want to act as the firm's in-house Kinko's!!).   We have taken
the first step and done poorly on follow-up steps to create a very easy to
follow process for anything other than direct funded capital.  However, some
process around a greater number of assets/deals is better than none.   I
agree that I have not seen a really good fully baked one implemented, but I
think it is wrong not to try.

The only concerns I have is that, given that we want to have "standard"
metrics and approval processes around the firm, EBS creates a process/metric
which is complementary to and integrates with processes/metrics that the
other Business Units are subjected to .
Ted

	Barry Pearce @ ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
	06/29/2000 09:09 AM

To: Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dale Surbey/LON/ECT@ECT, Ted
Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Lou Casari/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, John Echols/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications
Subject: EBS VaR Transaction Policy

Hey you guys,

We are trying to implement a 'VaR transaction' policy - and would like your
opinion.

This is going to be tough - because I'm not sure we have implemented a
similiar policy across any of our other 'books' - that is - we looking to
bring in all the accrual/operational assets as well as the MTM stuff
(lambdas). To have a real-live 'configuration' of the system.

If assets/routes/servers etc...are added - what is the impact on the 'value'
of the system and what it's worth.

John has attached a draft below - for your review and thoughts.

I can see how this works in a trading environment - when you actually know
the VaR of your whole trading portfolio. However - I've not seen this done
with a mixture of MTM & accrual assets. Add the spice of a 'operational
system' valuation  - and this will be tough to quantify and model.

Step 1 - configure system and value it
Step 2 - calculate a VaR on this. We will need to do some work here!
Step 3 - calculate the incremental VaR of new deals/amendements/reconfigs etc
- tough....

See what you think?

B.

	John Echols
	06/28/00 05:41 PM

		 To: Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Barry Pearce/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Lou Casari/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications
		 cc:
		 Subject: Policies

Here is a first rough draft of a "value @ risk" transaction policy.

I would like you to start looking at where we are going on the policy and get
some early thinking going on limits for the V@R.  For example, should we
effectively shut down all server relocations without approval,  or allow some
level of MB of storage to be moved around or reconfigured?

I need some commercial and industry realism for this.  We may need Rick
Paiste or your industry helpers (Marquardt, etc. to help us).

Barry,  Lou,  I need your input.


On Friday (October 19), DWR released a revised revenue requirement.  The
result was to lower the Customer Revenue Requirement by$2.4 billion from the
revenue requirement submitted on August 7th.  The stated reasons for the
change are:

1. Reduction in Gas Prices.     For example, the August estimate included a
fourth quarter 2001 gas price forecast of $7.68 at the Southern California
border.  In the recent submittal, this was reduced to $3.54.

2.  Change in Load because of Direct Access.  As a result of the Commission
delaying the suspension date from July 1 to September 20th there was a
significant bump up in DA load, thus reducing the load fo which DWR must
buy.  For example, the August submittal contained an estimate of 448 GWh in
the fourth quarter 2001 for direct access load.  The October 19th submittal
factored in a direct access load of 6,571 Gwh for fourth quarter 2001.

3.  Changes in Forecast due to DSM.  DWR has decided not to engage in any
demand side and demand bidding programs and has deferred decision on whether
to reinstitute the 20/20 program next summer.  The result of these decisions
was a decrease of $513 million in the revenue requirement, while also
increasing the load that DWR must buy for by 1896 Gwhs.

4.  Changes to Contracted for Power.  An additional 156 MW (which is
expected to be available to meet summer 2002 peak) has been contracted for
since the August 7th submittal.

5.  Adjustments to the calculations of ancillary services costs.

6. Changes in Debt Dervices Costs.  For example, on October 11 (the day
after the Commission rejected the rate agreement), the interest rate on the
interim financing went up from .75% to  2.75%.

7.  Changes in Receipt of Funds from UDCs.  Until the rate agreement between
the Commission and DWR is approved, the UDCs have been withholding on the
remittance of DWR's share the revenue receive from the sales of the UDCs own
volumes.

If any one would like a copy of DWR's entire submittal, let me know.

Jeanne Bennett


Barry,
Sorry for not getting back to you. The Power MTM positions are approx $570,000 and all related to physical positions with a total Net Power  position of approx $1.2MM. I have been working with Beverly Ikeda of Puget on the issues and so far so good. Puget is going to deliver a $10MM  Letter of Credit to cover the financial positions. From our conversations, her traders do not anticipate hedging any further and really only need access to short term EOL business. In addition, she and I discussed the needs of bilateral contracts with margining rights to prevent a similar situation from occurring in the future.

Thanks,
-D

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Tycholiz, Barry
Sent:	Monday, October 22, 2001 2:52 PM
To:	Vanek, Darren
Subject:	Puget Energy

Darren, did you check this already.... are there any power MTM positions with Puget Energy that would be in addition to the Gas MTM that you put on my desk. ( $ 50 MM)

Thanks. BT


-----Original Message-----
From: Shively, Hunter S.
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 8:32 AM
To: Arteaga, Airam
Subject: please send to group


Notice No. 00-323
September 12, 2000

TO:
ALL NYMEX MEMBERS AND MEMBER FIRMS
ALL NYMEX CLEARING FIRMS
ALL NYMEX OPERATIONS MANAGERS

FROM: Neal Wolkoff, Executive Vice President

SUBJECT: MARGIN RATE CHANGE

Effective Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 (close of business)

Futures Contracts:
Crude Oil Futures
Unleaded Gasoline Futures
Heating Oil Futures

Contract Months: All Months

Rate Change:

NYMEX Division Margins on Crude Oil, Unleaded Gasoline, and Heating Oil
Futures Contracts

Effective at Close of Business on Tuesday, September 12, 2000
Clearing Member (Maintenance Margin) Old: $2,500 New: $3,000
Member Customer (Initial Margin) Old: $2,750 New: $3,300
Non-Member Customer (Initial Margin) Old: $3,375 New: $4,050

The margin credit for NYMEX Light Sweet Crude/IPE Brent Crude Oil futures
spread positions will also be increased, from $2,000 to $2,500 (at the
Clearing Member level), as of Tuesday, September 12, 2000.  The net margin
after the spread will remain unchanged.

Effective at Close of Business on Tuesday, September 12, 2000

Clearing Member(Maintenance Margin)
NYMEX Light Sweet Crude: $3,000
Less NYMEX Light Sweet/IPE Brent Crude Spread Credit: $2,500
Net Margin of Spread: $500

Member Customer (Initial Margin)
NYMEX Light Sweet Crude: $3,300
Less NYMEX Light Sweet/IPE Brent Crude Spread Credit: $2,750
Net Margin of Spread: $550

Non-Member Customer (Initial Margin)
NYMEX Light Sweet Crude: $4,050
Less NYMEX Light Sweet/IPE Brent Crude Spread Credit: $3,375
Net Margin of Spread: $675

Should you have any questions regarding these changes, please contact Artie
McCoy at (212) 299-2928 or Joe Sanguedolce at (212) 299-2855.  This notice
supersedes all previous notices regarding outright margins for the NYMEX
Crude Oil, Unleaded Gasoline, or Heating Oil Futures Contracts and the margin
credit for the NYMEX Light Sweet Crude Oil/IPE Brent Crude futures spread
positions.

__________________________________________________
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&refdo
c=(00-323)"

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.


Steve -- I received your note that you had received Dan's comments.  I
thought it made sense, in any case, to pass on a few comments; Dan probably
had the same thoughts, but just in case here they are:

Section 2(a):  the parenthetical "including the transmission of electric
energy in interstate commerce that is sold at retail", while technically a
correct fix, is still a little troubling.   Just as everyone is someone's
native load customer, all electricity is ultimately sold "at retail."
Nonetheless, this hasn't stopped FERC from concluding that it lacks
jurisdiction over the transmission component of bundled retail service.  The
possibility that this ambiguity could be exploited would be avoided by using
the "transmission component of bundled retail service" language, and
including separate definitions of bundled and unbundled retail service
(rather than "quick and dirty" approach in new section 205(g).

This approach would also get rid of the possible ambiguity in new section
205(g)(1)(A), which requires the filing of a schedule for the "transmission
of electric energy... that is separate from the rates...applicable to the
sale of electric energy and to local distribution."  It is not abundantly
clear that the filed rate schedule must be for the transmission component of
unbundled retail service, although that seems to be the intent of the
drafters.

Section 205(g) uses the "not unduly discriminatory or preferential basis"
standard.  That language, as with the existing Federal Power Act language,
can be interpreted as permitting native load service to maintain its
priority status in all situations, on the basis that it is not "undue"
discrimination to favor those who paid for the system or the other usual
defenses of this approach.  Language similar to that we have worked on
previously, which makes it absolutely clear that no native load preference
is permitted, would eliminate this possible result.

Similarly, it would be useful, in section 205(g)(5), to make it clear that
the transmission of bundled service must be reserved and scheduled on
exactly the same basis as unbundled service; as written, this provision
might be interpreted as not so requiring.

If Enron accepts the preference for "firm wholesale and retail customers" in
Section 205(g)(6), it should revise the language to make it clear that this
is a "one-time" preference, and that, with respect to future service,
transmission customers are to be placed on equal footing.  This might be
done be including a specific cut-off, such as "Any such rule shall cease to
be applicable no later than one year after the date such rule takes effect."

Section 2(f) permits transmission rates to be capped at the rate set by the
State commission.  This approach leaves open the option for States which
have, or which, as part of the establishment of retail competition, to set
transmission rates at a higher than cost-justified level, and to subsidize
the sale price of their owned generation or purchased power from that
subsidy.  Such an approach would put marketers at a severe disadvantage.  I
suggest including a prohibition against such subsidization.

Adam Wenner
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.
1455 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004-1008
(202) 639-6533
(202) 639-6604 (fax)
awenner@velaw.com


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Brackett, Debbie R.
Sent:	Tuesday, January 08, 2002 3:06 PM
To:	Gossett, Jeffrey C.; White, Stacey W.
Subject:	FW: Revised Book Entry template

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Champion, Andrew
Sent:	Tuesday, January 08, 2002 11:47 AM
To:	Brackett, Debbie R.
Cc:	Ramesh, Ganapathy
Subject:	Revised Book Entry template

Debbie, here's the updated Book Entry template.  Added a few dropdowns and "helpful entry tips".  Thanks.


Dr. Kaminski,

I called the number you gave me.
yesterday I couldn't reach you,
and today, the assistant told me that you will be back on Friday.
I'll call again on Friday.

Regards,
Jinbaek

-----Original Message-----
From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com [mailto:Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 12:23 PM
To: jinbaek@queue.IEOR.Berkeley.EDU
Cc: Molly.Magee@enron.com; Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com;
Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
Subject: RE: Hi,

Jinbaek,

Great, I look forward to working with you.
Please, call me during the next few days
(713) 853 3848 and we can chat about the projects.

Please, contact Molly Magee to talk about the first day
orientation program. Her E-mail address
is molly.magee@enron.com, and her phone number is
(713) 853-4804.

Vince

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   Jinbaek Kim <jinbaek@ieor.berkeley.edu>@ENRON

[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Jinbaek+20Kim+20+3Cjinbaek+40ieor+2Eberkeley+2Eedu+3E+40E
NRON@ENRON.com]

   Sent:   Sunday, May 20, 2001 8:07 PM
   To:     Kaminski, Vince J
   Subject:  Hi,

   Dr. Kaminski

   How are you?
   The process for starting summer work is going well,
   and there will be no problem we start work
   on May 30.
   I got a place to live, and reserved a flight.
   I'm going to leave for Houston on May 29
   (expected time to arrival is around noon)
   I am very much excited to have opportunity
   to join the project making an exchange platform.

   I think it's time I'd better remind you
   of scheduling a meeting with me,
   sometime on May 30.

   I hope you let me know what to to
   after I arrive at Houston.
   And please let me know if you have anything
   you think I prepare, to get better outcome
   from the summer work.
   If you give me a brief on the work,
   it would be a great help for me to decide
   which material I should carry from here to Houston.

   I look forward to the date we meet,
   Warm regards,

   Jinbaek

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Jinbaek Kim
   Ph.D Candidate
   Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research
   U.C.Berkeley
   http://www.ieor.berkeley.edu/~jinbaek

   Go Bears!

         :"'._..---.._.'";       `.             .'       .'           `.
        :      a   a      :                 __....._
        :     _.-0-._     :---'""'"-....--'"        '.
         :  .'   :   `.  :                          `,`.
          `.: '--'--' :.'                             ; ;
           : `._`-'_.'                                ;.'
           `.   '"'                                   ;
            `.               '                        ;
             `.     `        :           `            ;
              .`.    ;       ;           :           ;
            .'    `-.'      ;            :          ;`.
        __.'      .'      .'              :        ;   `.
      .'      __.'      .'`--..__      _._.'      ;      ;
      `......'        .'         `'""'`.'        ;......-'
            `.......-'                 `........'

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


This would be analogous to every time you send me an e-mail, I forward it
directly to Drew and Maria.  How do you tactfully advise your coworkers about
corporate etiquette?  I wonder.
On a substantive note, I sincerely believe the analysis MKM wants is beyond
the scope of this letter, and would have no qualms about sending it.

Jeffery Fawcett
11/22/2000 08:22 AM
To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Proposal to Caithness Big Sandy

Now do you see why I didn't want to send this to Keith Petersen???  Anytime
you send anything to Omaha, the MKM cult goes into their Satan worship
chamber, they sing a few chants, and then sacrifice the good commercial
effort to the demon regulatory god.

Jeez, next time I'm gonna just send it out to the customer and ask for
forgiveness later.

---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron on 11/22/2000
08:10 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Mary Kay Miller                           11/22/2000 08:07 AM

To: Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James Centilli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Re: Proposal to Caithness Big Sandy

Jeff,  do you have the information for the rate?  We would have to file a
certificate and the rate would need to be calculated in accordance with the
standard COS methodology-  I want to make sure that the rate you are planning
to quote matches what the rate derivation for the filing would be-  avoid a
potential issue-  maybe James could send us what he did- thanks  MK

Keith Petersen
11/21/2000 04:56 PM
To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michele Winckowski/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Proposal to Caithness Big Sandy

I have not yet reviewed, this is for your information.

Keith

---------------------- Forwarded by Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron on 11/21/2000
04:53 PM ---------------------------

Jeffery Fawcett
11/21/2000 01:17 PM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron
cc: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ronald
Matthews/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@ENRON, James
Centilli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Proposal to Caithness Big Sandy

Attached for your review and comment is a broad outline of a rate proposal to
Caithness for the construction and operation of the 40-mile lateral to the
Big Sandy project.  This non-binding proposal was requested by Caithness'
consultant, George Briden, as a starting point for modeling the economics of
the project's gas supply and a basis for further discussions aimed at
designing an appropriate deal structure.  For your information, James
Centilli calculated the transport rate based on the (+/- 30%) $20.33MM cost
estimate with a ten-year (contract) amortization.

I plan to put this in the mail by the close of business tomorrow.  If you
have any suggestions, please let me hear from you by mid-day.   Thanks.


I keep hearing that Mcsherry is gone yet his xxxxxx name keeps coming up.

Lavo


Just a note to let you know that CBS SportLine.com's Fantasy
Basketball 2001 and Basketball Commissioner are both on-line.

FANTASY BASKETBALL 2001 - Presented by Honda
http://www.sportsline.com/links/6/1/87/fantasybbNUM2102301.cgi
* The best game for those looking to join a league and
  compete for great prizes.
* Stats and standings updated daily; reports available
  via e-mail or wireless.
* Each team gets a private web site, including tons of
  scouting reports and fantasy analysis.
* This year, $150 goes to the champion of every Fantasy
  Basketball GOLD league.

BASKETBALL COMMISSIONER - Presented by Honda
http://www.sportsline.com/links/6/1/87/fantasybb102301.cgi
* The best league management and stats service to run
  an existing league, or start a private league on-line.
* You make all the rules for scoring, drafting, playoffs,
  prizes and more.
* We calculate all the stats and standings for you.
* We give you all the tools you need, including tons of
  statistics, scouting reports and analysis.
* Enjoy great perks with Commissioner GOLD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
This message has been provided free of charge and free of obligation.
If you prefer not to receive emails of this nature please send an
email to remove@commissioner.com.  Do not respond to this email
directly.

This message was sent to: joe.stepenovitch@enron.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------


planning on going.  which night are you inviting guys for?

also, heard there were some issues about contract negotiations.  don't know
specifics but if you want to discuss give me a call.  might be able to
mediate this a little bit  if you want.

Caroline Abramo@ENRON
03/30/2001 03:37 PM
To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Maggi/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Guggenheim/Enron Event May 24th

I think you guys need to attend
---------------------- Forwarded by Caroline Abramo/Corp/Enron on 03/30/2001
04:37 PM ---------------------------

	From:  Per Sekse @ ECT                           03/30/2001 12:02 PM

To: Caroline Abramo/Corp/Enron@Enron, Russell Dyk/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Guggenheim/Enron Event May 24th

I'm asking for 20 tickets, possibly 40 depending on whether they have spouces
attending. Make a note for the calander. I'm thinking we can use this to get
people like Paul Tudor Jones, Louis Bacon, etc. to attend an Enron function,
while also gving the traders an opportunity to go as well.

Per
---------------------- Forwarded by Per Sekse/NY/ECT on 03/30/2001 02:10 PM
---------------------------
From: Margaret Allen@ENRON on 03/29/2001 02:40 PM CST
To: Michael L Miller/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Engberg/HOU/ECT@ECT, George
McClellan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Tawney/Enron@EnronXGate, Tim
Battaglia/Enron@EnronXGate, John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jean
Mrha/NA/Enron@Enron, Eric Holzer/ENRON@enronXgate, Lauren
Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Friddle/NA/Enron@ENRON, Peggy
Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Suzanne Rhodes/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Ondarza/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Rick
Bergsieker/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Eric Gonzales/LON/ECT@ECT,
per.sekse@enron.com, Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Raymond
Bowen/enron@enronxgate, Jeffrey A Shankman/Enron@EnronXGate, Randal
Maffett/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Dennis Vegas/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Yvette
Simpson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Allen/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Guggenheim/Enron Event

Hello all,

Over the last few weeks correspondence has been disseminated to you in
regards to opportunities with the Guggenheim Museum in New York. We need to
get a more accurate head count if we would like to have a private Enron event
at the Frank Gehry Exhibit.  Tentatively, we have May 24th on hold and Frank
Gehry has agreed to be in attendance, which is an added-value. The event
would be a formal dinner with approximately 150-200 people, including Enron
executives and their potential/existing customers.  Again, the attendance
list is created through your requests but Enron Corporate covers the cost of
the event (excluding travel arrangements).

We need to make a firm commitment to the Guggenheim by Monday.  Please let me
know approximately how many people you would like to bring by tomorrow. Feel
free to call me at 39056 or email me if you have any questions.

Thanks, Margaret