Hi James:

My name is Pat Brandt and I work for the Legal Research Center ("LRC") in
Minneapolis.  As you may know, we are the nation's leading provider of
outsourced legal research and writing services.  Recently, we have entered
into a strategic business alliance with Integrity Interactive Corporation
("IIC"), to offer industry-leading, online compliance training - training
that could help Enron save millions in the event of a DOJ prosecution.
LRC's role in this alliance is to provide the legal research content for the
compliance courses and assist in the marketing and selling of the IIC
product.

You can view our compliance modules at work or home, as long as you have
access to the internet and a personal access code.  To receive an access
code or more information, please call (800-776-9377) or send me a reply
email.  Thank you for your time and have a great day!

Sincerely,

Patrick C. Brandt, Esq.
e-Compliance Sales Director
Legal Research Center
700 Midland Square
331 Second Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55401
pbrandt@lrci.com


David,

I am sending you the latest Pulp & Paper disclaimer per Sara Shackleton's
request.

 Kaye


you da man!

-----Original Message-----
From: Parks, Joe [mailto:Joe.Parks@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 9:45 AM
To: Chet Fenner (E-mail)
Subject: QLGC

pulled the trigger on the march 45puts. we will see

**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and
may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the
intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by
others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply
to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all
copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not
intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a
binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its
affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be
relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise.
Thank you.
**********************************************************************


You're welcome.  I talked to Janet last night - would you and Pete be able to
make dinner at our house next weekend - perhaps Sunday night?  dn

>>> Hain, Mary 03/25/01 03:52PM >>>
Thanks for sharing.  She's just adorable!

From:    Douglas Nichols/ENRON@enronxgate on 03/24/2001 12:17 PM CST
To:    Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:    Fwd: I'm back

Mary,
I told you I had a picture of Stan's new addition - here it is.  dn

-----Original Message-----
Date:  03/09/2001  10:23 am  (Friday)
From:  "Berman, Stan " <SBerman@HEWM.com>
To:  "'douglas_nichols@pgn.com '" <douglas_nichols@pgn.com>
CC:  "'jim_piro@pgn.com '" <jim_piro@pgn.com>
Subject:  I'm back

Hi,

Over the past weeks, I have been staying at home with my new daughter (a
picture is attached, though it does not do her justice).  Monday, March 12,
I intend to return to the office.

My sense is that Paul Mohler has been doing a fine job running the rate
case.  I hope you agree -- if not, please tell me.  I intend to start
reintegrating myself into the RTO West/TransConnect work, and will call to
discuss -- I'm writing now to get you thinking about it.

Stan


I would like to exchange ideas on topics for the upcoming Enron Advisory
Council meeting.  The discussion you led last time was particularly thought
provoking and I'd like to extend an open-ended invitation for you to take the
floor again on a topic of your choice.

We will have presentations from Gavyn Davies and Larry Lindsay on
macroeconomic trends as well as the customary domestic political update from
Bill Kristol.  The balance of the meeting will focus on markets which are, or
could be, commoditized.  We will update the Council on new markets we've
added to the Enron portfolio through Enron Networks, (most recently metals
and paper).  A presentation by you on this, or another trend, would be most
welcome.

Let me know what you think.


An emergency change control has been submitted for implementation this weekend...

Oct.   13	From 12:00 - 1:00 p.m., Telephony Services will reboot the back-up processor on the Cajun ATM Network.  This change is necessary to alleviate dropped calls in EB, ECS and 3AC due to an unstable environment on the back-up processor.   No impact is expected.

ETS Solution Center - Houston, at 713-345-4745
ETS Solution Center - Omaha, at 402-398-7454


13:00

FYI,

I called Terry at AEP for price information and they refused to give it, saying "he shouldn't even be talking with me" and he hung up the phone.

brant


Jean,

Attached is my marked -up version of this DASH for your review.  Can I get an abbreviated legal risk memo with respect to this transaction?

Regards,

Dave

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Mrha, Jean
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 11:09 AM
To:	Gorte, David
Cc:	Nemec, Gerald; Rainer, Eva
Subject:	Revised DASH to include Post Sale Adjustment Language

Dave,

Please see revised deal description.

Regards, Jean

 << File: DASHtemplate.doc >>


Diana,

I represent a firm which has specialized in energy and power market
placement for over ten years.  I'm currently working with several
organizations across the country looking for energy traders, coordinators,
analysts and schedulers.  These are great opportunities to change location
or better ones position quickly.  I'd like to schedule a ten minute
telephone conversation to discuss these positions and determine whether or
not you may have interest or may be able to assist with these openings.

Please reply or call me at 630-990-7510 at your earliest convenience.  I
look forward to speaking with you soon.

Best Regards,
Todd Kubicki
Kappa Search, Inc.
tkubicki@kappasearch.com


<<30C_01!.DOC>>

Kay:

Enclosed is the initial draft of a closing memorandum for the Salmon
transaction.  Please review and advise of any comments.  Thank you.

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

Enclosure: 140424v1

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

 - 30C_01!.DOC


I meant a shopping date, no Michael.


I exchanged v-mails with Elena Scmid at the ISO.  The leaked information
pertains to a filing to be made at FERC today that responds to the FERC
Staff's report on market mitigation.  The ISO had last week released its own
proposed market mitigation plan -- or, as they referred to it, the market
stabilization plan.  There was much negative response to it.  I spoke against
it at the Board meeting and submitted written comments in opposition.  The
Board blessed it "in concept" and agreed to the let the staff file it, but to
ask the staff for a few changes.  I would be surprised if much has changed
since we've seen it.  Along with the filing are two staff reports, one by
Angeli and one by Eric Hildebrandt that identifyy what they see as market
power.  According the Elena, she does not believe that the reports use the
term "gouging." These reports are just extenstions of what we've seen from
the ISO before.  Previously, the ISO talked about $650 million or so in
potential refunds.  These reports extend the time period of the analysis.
I've asked Elena to let me know if Enron is named and when it will be
posted.  Elena says that the ISO also asks for the mitigation period to be at
all times not just at 5% of the time as FERC has sugested.

It is not yet posted on the ISO web site.  The ISO is holding press
conference now and I'm listening in.

Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854


(See attached file: hpl0801.xls)

 - hpl0801.xls


- FIN group project.xls


Hi Folks,

You guys that got fired up after Terry Glenn's outstanding performance (I'm
one of you) last week need to keep an eye on this.

Foxboro, MA (Sports Network) - Patriots wide receiver Terry Glenn injured
his hamstring during a workout on Thursday, and may not suit up for Sunday's
game against the Colts.

Midway through the Patriots' afternoon session, Glenn came up hobbling after
making a cut on a pass route. The extent of his injury is not known.

Glenn also experienced soreness after the team's 29-26 overtime win over the
Chargers last week. Yet, he may have aggravated the injury on Thursday,
possibly resulting in a pull or tear.

The six-year Ohio State product caught seven passes for 110 yards with a
touchdown in his first game back since being suspended on August 3 for
violating the league's substance abuse policy.

[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [  OUR VIEW  ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ]

This is all I know for right now.   We'll keep you posted.

Thanks to Footballguy Matt Rosenthal for pointing me to this one.

Joe

/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Bryant Analytics, Inc.   All Rights Reserved 1999-2001

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Notice No:  01-88
March 8, 2001

NYMEX BOARD EXTENDS PROPRIETARY FEE REDUCTION PROGRAM

At its meeting on March 7, 2001, the NYMEX Board of Directors determined to
extend the current Proprietary Fee Reduction Program ("Program") through
April 30, 2001.

Pursuant to the Program, Member Firms and individuals members who own seats
will have their NYMEX Division fees reduced by 12 cents per round turn (6
cents per trade side).

Individual members who lease their seats, or hold a membership under an ABC
Agreement, will have their NYMEX Division fees reduced by 2.5 cents per
round turn (or 1 ? cents per trade side).

Clearing Members who clear Member Firm trades should adjust their billing
systems accordingly.

Clearing Members clearing floor members' accounts should not adjust their
billing systems for such individual members.  NYMEX issues payments
directly to individual members based upon their trading activity.

Floor members who execute Type 3 trades are asked to pay special attention
to NYMEX Rule 6.18 (B) (ii), requiring the executing member to report the
alpha code (badge symbol) of the receiving member on PTS.

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to
contact M. Dawn Lowe or Donna Talamo at (212) 299-2370.

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


Care to attend?

GP

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Heitmeyer, Kayla
Sent:	Friday, October 12, 2001 11:21 AM
To:	Westbrook, Sharron; Brassfield, Morris; Lowry, Phil; Martin, Jerry D.; Dobler, Mark; Stanley, Brian; Watkins, Sherron; Shepperd, Tammy R.; Linnell, Elizabeth; Tardanico, Gregory; Barrow, Cynthia; Butts, Bob; Colwell, Wes; Jones, Robert K.; Causey, Richard; Leibert, Richard; Alexander, James C.; Sommer, Allan; Sparger, Bob; Cunningham, Les; Twachtman, Ceci; Ng, Linda; Vegas, Dennis; Rub, Jenny; Perlman, Beth; Piper, Greg; Hayslett, Rod; Hotte, Steve; Jacobson, Kimberley; Kean, Steven J.; Nadasky, Marge; Donovan, Bill; Parsons, Andrew; Dickens-Wilson, Shirley Jo; Honey, Lisa; Nelson, Mike; Craig, Rick; Rice, Randy; Bucknell, Martin; Marcinkowski, Danielle; Peck, Omar; Alexander, Dwight; Eisenstein, Arnold L.; Cunningham, Cutty; Terraso, Michael; Worthen, Susan; Eghneim, Gus; Woods, Steve; Bouillion, James L.; Perkins, Rick; Bailey, Colin; Kemp, Sam; Pattillo, John; Alvarez, Gloria; Becher, Amanda; Borgman, Laine; Brent, Jason; Brown, Craig H.; Buerkert, Eileen; Calderon, Gina; Carlisle, Darin; Chaston, Justin; Chu, Dian; Clark, Kathleen; Cleaveland, Derryl; Clement, Jody; Coleman, Daniel; Corey, Paula; Davila, Raul; Duke, Amy; Eakins, Calvin; Eckels, Diane; Fitzgerald, Stacy; Flores, Leticia; Frost, Michael; Galassini, Amanda; Gillespie, John; Goebel, Peter; Hartstein, Roy; Heitmeyer, Kayla; Hopkins, Tamara; Hudgens, Mark; Hunter, Sarah-joy; Ischy, James; Jacobs, Sandra; Jacobson, Kimberley; Thomas, Jerry; Johansen, Robert C; Johnson, Shelley; King, Lucy; Kubiak, Helen; Lagrimini, Randy; Leath, Jeff; Lewis, Glenn; McCurley, Peggy; Medcalf, Jennifer; Moody, Duane W.; Moore, Tom O.; Ramsey, Tracy; Riley, Cathy; Rinehart, David; Ross, Johnny; Ruff, Donna; Salewsky, Felicia; Sikes, Andy; Silva, Mary; Slone, Cheryl; Smith, Heidi; Smith, Ron L.; Smith, Sarah J; Snell, Margaretta; Stevens, Norman; Sublet, Cheri; Tragesser, Pamela; Warri, Janet; Wasaff, George; Weber, George; Wedel, Carolyn; Will, John; Zhang, Hank
Cc:	Cleaveland, Derryl
Subject:	Agenda for GSS's 3rd Quarter Business Review

GSS 3rd Quarter Business Review
October 24, 2001 - Wednesday 7:30 AM - 11:00 AM
The Forum, 2AC, 12th Floor

Business Review Schedule

Pastries, Fruit, Juice & Coffee							7:30 - 8:00 AM

Introduction - George Wasaff							8:00  - 8:05 AM

1.	John Gillespie - Platforms & Processes  (iBuyit & iPayit)			8:05 - 8:15 AM
2.	Bob Johansen - Metrics & Financial Engineering				8:15 - 8:25 AM
3.	Jennifer Medcalf - Business & Diversity Development			8:25 - 8:35 AM
4.	Derryl Cleaveland - Operations Overview					8:35 - 8:45 AM
5.	Peter Goebel - Technology & Utilities					8:45 - 8:55 AM
6.	Ron Smith - Professional & Administrative Services			8:55 - 9:05 AM
7.	Craig Brown - Chemical, Gases & HVAC					9:05 - 9:15 AM
8.	Roy Hartstein - Operating Equipment			 		9:15 - 9:25 AM

BREAK										9:25 - 9:40 AM

9.	Dan Coleman - Construction Services					9:40 - 9:50 AM
10.	John Will - PVF, MRO & Logistics						9:50 - 10:00 AM
11.	Tracy Ramsey - Travel & Transportation Services				10:00 - 10:10 AM
12.	Sam Kemp / Colin Bailey - Enron Europe					10:10 - 10:20 AM

Closing Remarks 									10:20 - 10:30 AM

Thanks,

Kayla Heitmeyer
Phone:  713/646-7697
Fax:     713/646-2450
Cynet:   281/664-4560


I had to wait to get back to you this morning, sorry I will not be able to be there.  I need to leave
at 2:00 pm today to take my daughter to the dentist.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hook, Connie
Sent:	Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:39 AM
To:	Schoolcraft, Darrell; Lohman, TK; Faucheaux, Eric; Spraggins, Gary
Subject:	Firm Transport @ Halley

I sent a message out last week regarding this meeting for today that Jo Williams requested and have not received a response from you.  Please let me know if you are available or if I need to reschedule.

Meeting time:	3:00 - 4:00 pm
Place:		(VCR) 4102/696


Attached is a link to the team's website.  Please bookmark the site or save
this message for continued access to the site.

The Discussion section is intended for the whole team for posting.  The
Library, Calendar, and Task sections are to for population only by Rick
Shapiro, Ginger Dernehl, Jim Steffes, Marcia Linton, Janel Guerrero, and John
Neslage.

Your log-in id is - your first name <space> last name - in lower case, and
your password is first two letters of first name * first two letters of last
name.
Example:  joe smith and jo*sm

Please contact me at 713-853-3896 if you have any problems accessing the
site, or if you have any questions.

Thanks!

Your AppsOnline Web Address (URL) is:
http://quickplace-2.interliant.com/californiasolutions | QP | quickplace-2


You are looking at the right screen.  The MDQ is 16373.  Why do you think
this is wrong?  16373 was released by executed.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Germany, Chris [SMTP:Chris.Germany@ENRON.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:09 PM
> To:	Noack, Sherry
> Subject:	ENA/VNG contract 35874
>
> When I look up this contract in Passkey, I show an MDQ of 16,373.
>
> We think it should be 4723 with the following primary receipt points.
> Leg	MDQ
> 800   	1228
> 500	897
> Z0	2598
>
> I might be looking in the wrong screen.  I am going under
> contracts/contract maintenance/review
>
>
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate
> and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of
> the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by
> others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
> authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or
> reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and
> delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto)
> are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or
> evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of
> its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not
> be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or
> otherwise. Thank you.
> **********************************************************************

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


---------------------- Forwarded by Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT on
01/27/99 04:02 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  xtrials@optioninvestor.com (Option Investor Newsletter     Trials)
                       01/24/99 06:19 AM

Please respond to xtrials@optioninvestor.com
To: Option Investor Newsletter Trials <xtrials@optioninvestor.com>
cc:  (bcc: Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT)
Subject: Sunday - Option Investor Newsletter 3 of 6 (calls)

The Option Investor Newsletter          1-24-98
Sunday             Part 3 of 6

Telecom
*******
SNC - Snyder Communications, Inc. $37.75 (+2.44)

Snyder Communications, Inc. designs develops and implements
innovative and value-added outsourced marketing services.
The company's marketing programs are designed to target
high-value customer segments through database management
services, proprietary product sampling, publications,
sponsored information display in prime locations, field sales
representatives, inbound and outbound teleservices and related
services.  Snyder also provides proprietary distribution
channels, customer care and retention services.  The company
has international operations in the United Kingdom, Ireland
and Hungary.

SNC is right at previous resistance.  If it can break through
and hold above $38.00, it could have some room to really go.
SNC doesn't announce earnings until February 10th.  In the past,
SNC has announced nice earnings surprises.  The last seven
surprises have gone like this: +4%,9%,11%,6%,15%,33%,14%.
Earnings are figured to increase by 65% over the prior year
period.

Snyder Communications, Inc. announced on the 14th of January
that it has extended an earlier contract sales relationship
with Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.  This latest
two year pharmaceutical sales contract builds upon earlier
agreements under which Snyder Healthcare Sales, a division
of Snyder Communications, has provided targeted national sales
support for Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals since 1997.

BUY CALL FEB-35 SNC-BG OI= 522 at $4.38 SL=2.50 ITM $2.75
BUY CALL FEB-40 SNC-BH OI= 245 at $2.25 SL=1.13
BUY CALL MAR-35 SNC-CG OI= 286 at $5.50 SL=3.75 ITM $2.75
BUY CALL MAR-40*SNC-CH OI=2379 at $3.00 SL=1.50
BUY CALL MAR-45 SNC-CI OI=  33 at $ .94 SL=0.00

Picked on Jan.23rd at   $37.75   PE =151
Change since picked      +0.00   52 week low =$26.62
Analysts Ratings     5-0-0-0-0   52 week high=$54.18
Last earnings on 10-98 est=.25   actual=.26
Next earnings on 02-10 est=.28   versus=.17
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=SNC&d=3m

Software - Sector
*****************
MSFT - Microsoft $156.25 (+6.50)(-0.13)(+11.19)(P6W +25.07)

From their own words, "Microsoft Rules." Although it's
current reign is being rocked with revolution, the Evil M-
pire (as some programmers and anti-Internet Explorer
browser patriots call it), has been fighting the Federal
government on anti-trust grounds for months. The line to
take their turn and bad mouth the bully was long and
distinguished. The fact is, MSFT is good at what they do.
They are the world's #1 software company (Y2K compliant or
not!) and their operating systems dominate the PC
landscape.

To those who closed their eyes and held their breath
through earnings, congratulations on a great play!  If you
sold prior to the announcement you still did very well.
MSFT gave us blowout earnings of $0.73.  The street's
whisper number was $0.64.  See, no material effect on
earnings.  Technical indicators are still positive, but a
pullback from its 1-day $13 spike after earnings should be
expected.  MSFT may drift a bit during this period of
market turmoil.  But be ready when the market firms, as
fund buyers have fresh cash to buy the big cap tech stocks.
MSFT will be their #1 target after its muscular
demonstration of earnings growth.  This post-announcement
drift won't last and presents a buying opportunity.  Rumors
are circulating that MSFT may still give us our previously
predicted split this coming week.  It comes from a
reputable source in addition to the usual suspects, but
should still be treated as a rumor.  We've also heard that
Microsoft's CFO, Greg Maffei, would rather wait to split
the stock until it reaches $200.

We will keep you apprised if it happens.  In the meantime,
the trial goes on.  MSFT's man took the stand today in the
company's defense.  To wit, Dow Jones News quotes Mr.
Maritz, "Competitors such as International Business
Machines Corp., Apple Computer Inc. and Sun Microsystems
Inc., focus primarily upon selling their operating system
products as part of relatively expensive new computer
systems, necessarily limiting their sales volume, and
thereby reducing incentives for other software developers
to create applications that run on their operating system
products.  Conversely, Microsoft provides a platform that
is compatible with a range of products, offers its product
at a low price and continually innovates.  Ironically, the
very thing that makes Windows valuable to computer
manufacturers, software publishers and customers is now
under attack in this lawsuit."  Well said.

BUY CALL FEB-150*MSQ-BJ OI=10063 at $11.13 SL= 8.75
BUY CALL FEB-155 MSQ-BU OI= 8146 at $ 7.88 SL= 6.25
BUY CALL FEB-160 MSQ-BX OI=10976 at $ 5.38 SL= 3.75
BUY CALL APR-160 MSQ-DX OI= 5301 at $11.75 SL= 9.25
BUY CALL JUL-165 MSQ-GW OI= 1854 at $15.13 SL=11.75

Picked on December 8th at $133.63     PE = 68
Change Since Picked      +$ 22.62     52 Week High= 167.75
Analysts Ratings       14-8-5-0-0     52 Week Low =  67.75
Last Earnings 01-98 est. 0.58 actual .73 surprise    25.86%
Next Earnings 04-22 est. 0.60 versus .43
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=msft&d=3m
*****

ORCL - Oracle Corporation  $49.88 (+2.75)

Oracle is the leading developer of database management system
software, which lets multiple users and applications use the
same data at the same time.  Its flagship database software
runs on everything from notebook computers to mainframes.
Oracle8, a faster, more flexible version of the firm's database
software, provides support for a system of network computers -
stripped-down, low-cost computer terminals operated through a
control server.  Oracle also makes application development
productivity tools and computer-automated software engineering
products, among others.

ORCL gapped open on Tuesday in reaction to the IBM
announcement (see below).  After setting a new 52 week high
early on Wednesday, it traded down for the rest of Wednesday and
Thursday on what looked like profit taking.  It then bounced
nicely off of its 10 day moving average on Friday.  Since late
November, ORCL has been getting a little ahead of its 10 day
moving average, then pulling back to it, all in a nice upward
trend.  Last week this movement was a little exaggerated with
IBM announcement, but ORCL might be a good candidate for some
target shooting around its 10 dma.

In the news last week, ORCL announced that it is teaming up
with IBM to offer its software on IBM hardware.  The offering
will be targeted at manufacturers and will be available
sometime during the 1st quarter.  It will feature ORCL's
manufacturing and financial applications running on IBM's
Netfinity and RS/6000 servers.  In other news, Morgan Stanley
raised their price target for ORCL to $58 and maintained its
outperform rating.

BUY CALL FEB-45 ORQ-BI OI=1759 at $6.25 SL=4.25
BUY CALL FEB-50*ORQ-BJ OI=5274 at $3.13 SL=1.50
BUY CALL FEB-55 ORQ-BK OI=2296 at $1.19 SL=0.00
BUY CALL MAR-55 ORQ-CK OI= 858 at $2.88 SL=1.25
BUY CALL JUN-55 ORQ-FK OI= 461 at $5.63 SL=3.75

Picked on Jan 24th at $49.88   PE = 37
Change since picked    +0.00   52 week low =$18.19
Analysts Ratings  8-14-8-0-0   52 week high=$53.88
Last earnings  11-98 est=.24   actual=.28
Next earnings  03-12 est=.29   versus=.22
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=ORCL&d=3m

Retail
******
WAG - Walgreen Co. $58.44 (+1.44)

Walgreen's is ranked #1 in the US among drugstore chains.
It has more than 2,600 freestanding stores located throughout
the US and Puerto Rico.  They even have the infamous
"drive-through" service in case you're just too sick to go
into the store! On January 13th, they announced a 71% increase
in first quarter earnings above that of last year's Q1 report.
Prescription drugs account for almost half of their sales.
Over the counter medications and general merchandise ranging
from food an beverages to toiletries make up the other half.

A little over a week ago, Walgreen Co. reported strong first
quarter earnings and a 2:1 stock split scheduled for Feb. 12th.
We waited until WAG showed signs of a steady uptrend before
adding them as one of our plays.  Walgreen's finished the week
up +$1.44 and held firm in the rocky market waters.
This could be the beginning of the split run.

No new news for Walgreen's this week.

BUY CALL FEB-55 WAG-BK OI=1015 at $4.75 SL=3.25
BUY CALL FEB-60 WAG-BL OI=1682 at $2.00 SL=1.00
BUY CALL APR-60 WAG-DL OI=1277 at $4.13 SL=2.50

Split play only

Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=wag&d=3m

Semiconductor
*************
PRIA -PRI Automation, Inc. $35.88 (+1.33)(+4.87)

PRIA designs, develops, manufactures, and markets factory
automation systems for the cleanroom manufacturing operations
of semi-conductor makers and OEM equipment suppliers. Last
year's $178.2 million in revenues reflects the big downturn
in the semi-conductor industry, but that is changing. The
1998 glut of chips has been depleted, and demand is strong
again for these products.

Although it hit a high of $37.50 in Feb, 1998, PRIA stock had
lost about 75% of its value by the time the market bottomed
in October. However, it has been climbing fairly steadily
ever since, except for a brief correction in December. With
the chip industry recovering, it follows that a company in
PRIA's business will benefit. This is a momentum play in an
improving industry.

PRIA is a quiet company, with little news. Earnings are due
out Jan. 28th.

BUY CALL FEB-30 UXQ-BF OI=186 at $7.38 SL=5.75
BUY CALL FEB-35*UXQ-BG OI=140 at $4.13 SL=2.50
BUY CALL MAR-40 UXQ-CH OI= 38 at $3.63 SL=1.75
BUY CALL MAY-35 UXQ-CG OI= 35 at $7.38 SL=5.50
(No volume on MAY-40s yet).

Picked on Jan 17th at   $34.50     P/E=n/a
Change since picked    $ 1.33     52 week low = 9.56
Analysts' ratings   1-5-4-0-0     52 week high=37.50
Last earnings  9/98 act=-$.20 est=-.08 surprise=-150%
Next earnings  1/28 est=-$.25 versus $.31
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=PRIA&d=3m
*****

MU - Micron Technology $70.50 (-.81)(+7.68)

Micron Technology makes semi-conductor memory products, PCs,
circuit boards, memory modules, and system level assemblies,
and has a market capitalization of $17.6 billion. Revenues
for MU declined last year due to lower selling prices of PCs
and semi-conductor products. This was a result of too much
product industry wide and too little demand, but the company
is recovering now, as demand increases.

An overabundance of chips sent prices down from $200 a year
ago to below $60 in May, but they have recovered to near $90
now, as the surplus has dried up. A decreasing supply is
partly the cause. The Koreans, for instance, have been
cutting production. But the demand for chips is also
increasing because sales of PCs are on the rise. PC maker
Gateway reported strong earnings on Thursday after the bell.
Intel, the semi-conductor sector heavy-weight, showed a 12%
earnings surprise in its just-ended quarter. Micron's quarter
doesn't end until February, but it appears to be doing well.

Analyst Gregory Mishou, at Warburg Dillon Read, upped his
1999 earnings forecast to $.12 from a LOSS of $.11, and
raised his 2000 estimate to $2.31 from $1.95. He believes MU
could trade up into the mid-90s in this market. After hitting
a new high of $78.25 on Wednesday, MU pulled back with the
rest of the market. It was up slightly on Friday, however. If
the stock continues to move up on Monday, this may be an
opportunity to move into options on MU.

BUY CALL FEB-70*MU-BN OI=2046 at $5.00 SL=3.25
BUY CALL FEB-75 MU-BO OI=1616 at $3.25 SL=1.50
BUY CALL MAR-70 MU-CN OI= 116 at $7.50 SL=5.75
BUY CALL MAR-75 MU-CO OI= 169 at $5.63 SL=3.75
BUY CALL APR-70 MU-DN OI=3199 at $9.13 SL=6.75
BUY CALL APR-75 MU-DO OI= 671 at $7.25 SL=5.50

Picked on Jan. 17TH at $71.31      P/E = n/a
Change since picked   -$  .81      52 week low =20.06
Analysts' ratings  10-3-7-0-1      52 week high=78.25
Last earnings 11/98 act.=-.19 surprise=39%
Next earnings  3-22 est.=-.09 versus -.41
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=MU&d=3m
*****

XLNX - Xilinx, Inc. $78.19 (+5.31)

Xilinx is one of the top makers of field-programmable gate
arrays (FPGAs) and complex programmable logic devices (CPLDs),
integrated circuits that customers can program to perform
specific functions.  The company also provides the software
necessary for programming its chips.  Xilinx's chips are used
by electronics makers in the telecommunications, data
processing, industrial and medical instrumentation, military
and aerospace, and networking markets.  The company minimizes
its overhead by contracting out its chip manufacturing to
companies in Asia.  About a quarter of Xilinx's sales are in
Europe.  Main rival Altera has a nearly equal market share.

XLNX had an interesting week.  On the 20th, XLNX announced
record earnings along with a 2:1 stock split in March.  This
pushed the shares as high as $87.63 on the 20th.  The last two
trading days saw a little bit of profit taking.  It looks like
XLNX might fill the gap open it made on the 20th and start a new
run.  A good risk reward ratio would be a bounce off the gap on
the 20th.  This is at the $75.00 range.  XLNX might also just
turn and go up if the NASDAQ continues its record move up.
(the split is set for March 11th)

On the 20th, six different analysts upgraded XLNX.  This is a
very good sign for the future.  These analysts would have
downgraded the stock if they thought the stock was to highly
valued already.  XLNX noted in their earnings report that
revenue from telecommunications companies increased substantially.
This is a good sign.  The telecoms are a fast growing industry
and this should help XLNX's future earnings.

BUY CALL FEB-75*XLQ-BO OI=1365 at $ 7.88 SL= 6.00 ITM $3.19
BUY CALL FEB-80 XLQ-BP OI=  12 at $ 5.38 SL= 3.25 low OI
BUY CALL MAR-75 XLQ-CO OI= 242 at $10.00 SL= 7.50
BUY CALL MAR-80 XLQ-CP OI=  73 at $14.25 SL=11.25
BUY CALL MAR-85 XLQ-CQ OI= 104 at $ 5.38 SL= 3.50

Picked on Jan.23rd at   $78.19    PE = 48
Change since picked      +0.00    52 week low =$ 9.25
Analysts Ratings    8-10-4-0-0    52 week high=$87.63
Last earnings on 01-99 est=.40    actual=.45
Next earnings on 04-19 est=.47    versus=.39
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=XLNX&d=3m

Electronics/Peripherals/Hardware
********************************
LXK - Lexmark Intl $99.25 (+1.19)(-2.50)(+.06)(+7.25)(+1.31)

Lexmark has good peripheral vision. Lexmark International
Group is a leading maker of computer printers and related
products, which generate more than 80% of its sales. Its
printer line includes laser printers (designed primarily
for corporate networks and desktops) and ink-jet printers
(for home and business use). Unlike many of its competitors,
Lexmark develops and manufactures it's own printers, which
results in fast product cycle times. The company also makes
supplies for IBM and other name brand printers and typewriters.
Lexmark's products are sold in more than 15,000 retail outlets
in more than 150 countries.

LXK held up pretty decent this week, considering the market.
LXK has it's earnings announcement before market on Monday (25th).
This has been confirmed with investor relations.  LXK is sitting
right on its 20-dma for the 2nd week in a row.  For those looking
to get in on the split, wait for a pullback after the gap
open.  If LXK disappoints, we feel its time will come to an end.
This earnings season has been disastrous for many companies that
seemed to have announced good earnings.

LXK news has been non existent for the last week.  In general,
the technology sector has held up.  LXK has held up slightly
better than its industry.  It all depends on the announcement
Monday.

BUY CALL FEB- 95 LXK-BS OI= 87 at $ 9.38 SL=6.75 ITM $4.25
BUY CALL FEB-100*LXK-BT OI=672 at $ 7.13 SL=4.75
BUY CALL FEB-105 LXK-BA OI=296 at $ 5.00 SL=3.25
BUY CALL MAR-100 LXK-CT OI= 16 at $ 9.75 SL=7.00
BUY CALL APR-105 LXK-DA OI= 82 at $ 9.63 SL=7.00

Picked on Dec 15th at    $88.38   P/E = 34
Change since picked:     +10.87   52 week low =$ 33.63
Analysts' ratings     1-4-1-0-0   52 week high=$106.25
Last earnings  10-98 est= $ .79   actual= $.81
Next earnings  01-25 est= $1.09   prior = $.78
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=LXK&d=3m
*****

EMC - EMC Corporation $98.50 (-1.56)(+6.50)(+8.56)(+3.38)

EMC is a Fortune 500 company that designs, manufactures,
markets an supports high performance storage products.  The
company's products store retrieve, manage, protect and share
information from all major computing environments, including
UNIX, Windows NT and mainframe platforms.  EMC markets its
memory products under the name Symmetrix.  EMC and its
enterprise storage systems have developed a clear cut
technological edge over its competition.  The company has been
able to successfully leverage its leadership position in the
mainframe storage area into the lucrative, faster growing open
systems market.

In the news last week, Staples, the world's largest operator of
office superstores, announced that they have standardized their
data storage needs on an EMC system.  The reasons they gave
were to more effectively manage rapid business growth, reduce
information management costs, and improve customer service.
Also, there was an interesting article at MSN MoneyCentral
comparing EMC and its rival NTAP.  An observation by the
article was that every bit of new e-mail, every sale over the
Internet, and every extra page view increases the need to build
more storage into the Internet.  It also pointed out that EMC
has just begun selling software to its customer base.  Software
sales are expected to grow from $400 million in 1998 to $1
billion by 2001.

Last week was EMC's first losing week in the last 5 weeks.
Then again, the techs were under some heavy selling pressure
last week.  EMC set a new 52 week high on Wednesday, and then
traded down.  There was a scary gap down at the open on Friday,
but EMC recovered nicely.  EMC reports earnings before the
open on 1/26, and as we indicated last week, we don't believe
there will be a split announcement with earnings.  After
further research, EMC does not have enough shares authorized
and their next shareholders meeting is not expected until
April.  Also, please note that the option root on some EMC
options has changed.

BUY CALL FEB- 95 EMB-BS OI=1274  at $11.00, SL= 8.75
BUY CALL FEB-100*EMB-BT OI=6119  at $ 7.63, SL= 5.75
BUY CALL MAR-100 EMB-CT OI= 333  at $11.88, SL= 9.50
BUY CALL APR-100 EMB-DT OI=2917  at $13.88, SL=11.25

Picked on Nov 8th at $69.06     PE=58
Change since picked  +29.44     52 week low =$ 23.50
Analysts Ratings 10-4-0-0-0     52 week high=$107.13
Last earnings  9-98 est=.36     actual=.38
Next earnings  1-26 est=.46     versus=.32
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=EMC&d=3m
*****

XIRC - Xircom Inc. $42.00 (+2.12)(+1.38)(+4.50)(+1.25)

Xircom makes adapters that connect portable PCs to corporate
networks, the Internet, and commercial online services. The
company's products include adapter/modem cards (CreditCard
Ethernet+Modem), network adapters for portable PCs (Pocket
Ethernet Adapter, Pocket Token Ring Adapter), and modem-only
PC cards (CreditCard Modem). Xircom sells its products to
original equipment manufacturers and through a worldwide
network of distributors, value-added resellers, and computer
retailers. Over half of its income is from foreign sales.
Intel owns 11% of Xircom; chairman and CEO Dirk Gates owns
about 5%.

XIRC announced earnings on the 19th of January that were $.05
above consensus estimates and a penny ahead of the whisper.
On the 20th, XIRC traded as high as $44.50.  We feel when the
market resumes its bullish stance, XIRC will be a strong
mover.  XIRC bounced off its 10-dma Friday for the 3rd time in
5 days.  A close right on the high of the day on Friday also
shows some internal strength.

No recent news on XIRC.  Here are some of the actual figures
announced with XIRC earnings.  Net sales increased 83% over
the prior year period.  Net income increase 354%, to $.39
from $.11.  The RealPort family of Integrated PC Cards now
accounts for about 40% of revenues.  Pretty impressive.

BUY CALL FEB-40*XQR-BH OI=529 at $4.38 SL=2.50 ITM $2.00
BUY CALL FEB-45 XQR-BI OI=139 at $2.25 SL=1.13
BUY CALL MAR-40 XQR-CH OI=189 at $5.88 SL=3.75 ITM $2.00
BUY CALL JUN-40 XQR-FH OI= 60 at $8.62 SL=6.50

Picked on Jan.9th at    $38.50    PE = 28
Change since picked      +3.50    52 week low =$ 9.25
Analysts Ratings     4-2-1-0-0    52 week high=$44.50
Last earnings on 01-99 est=.11    actual=.39
Next earnings on 04-21 est=.36    versus=.14
Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=XIRC&d=3m
*****

SUNW - Sun Microsystems $98.00 (-2.44)(+9.56)(+5.25)(+2.32)

UltraSPARCs, Netra servers, SPARCstations, and Solaris (for
Unix) are all products of Sun Microsystems.  Sun is also the
creator of the Java computer language.  They are also the
recent partners with AOL in the Netscape merger.

This past Wednesday, SUN traded as high as $115.75.  But
severe profit taking and differing opinions drove the stock
to as low as $96.44 before their earnings announcement on
Thursday.  Even after announcing positive earnings, a 22%
increase in revenues, and a 2:1 stock split, SUNW's stock
wasn't able to recover.  Sun had actually attempted to shrug
off all of the profit takers and reached $100.25 in intraday
trading on Friday.  But, it then lost those gains and closed
down -$0.25.  Maybe the unstable market contributed to the
drop.  Maybe it had to do with BancBoston Robertson Stephens
downgrading the stock stating a drop-off in bookings, backlogs,
more competition, and revenue reports that weren't up to par
with their expectations.  However, S&P rated them an
accumulate and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter rated them a strong
buy.  They were happy with the "sharp rise" in earnings which
were in line with their expectations and the positive future
outlook of the company.  In any case, we would like to see the
market and Sun Microsystems turn around before initiating any
new plays on the split news.  Friday's lack of any serious
profit-taking on top of Thursday's action and earnings
report is an encouraging sign.

Other News:   SUN will officially unveil their Jini technology
on Monday.  Excitement is building over the possibilities of
networking electronic devices by using the new language.
Eight companies, including Sony and Sharp, will collaborate
with SUN to develop the ability for HAVi compliant devices to
use the new Jini.

BUY CALL FEB- 95 SUQ-BS OI=5157 at $ 9.13 SL= 6.75
BUY CALL FEB-100 SUQ-BT OI=8740 at $ 6.50 SL= 4.75
BUY CALL MAR- 95 SUQ-CS OI= 255 at $12.25 SL= 9.50
BUY CALL MAR-100 SUQ-CT OI=1178 at $ 9.63 SL= 7.25
BUY CALL APR- 95 SUQ-DS OI=2041 at $14.25 SL=11.25
BUY CALL APR-100 SUQ-DT OI=3070 at $11.88 SL= 9.50

Momentum Play

Chart = http://quote.yahoo.com/q?s=sunw&d=3m

*****

PLAYS CONTINUED IN SECTION FOUR.

*****
DISCLAIMER
*****
This newsletter is a publication dedicated to the education
of options traders. The newsletter is an information service
only. The information provided herein is not to be construed
as an offer to buy or sell securities of any kind. The
newsletter picks are not to be considered a recommendation
of any stock or option but an information resource to aid the
investor in making an informed decision regarding trading in
options. It is possible at this or some subsequent date, the
editor and staff of The Option Investor Newsletter may own,
buy or sell securities presented. All investors should consult
a qualified professional before trading in any security. The
information provided has been obtained from sources deemed
reliable but is not guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness.
The newsletter staff makes every effort to provide timely
information to its subscribers but cannot guarantee specific
delivery times due to factors beyond our control.


I would appriciate if you would send to me each week the PGE Position
Report.  Also, at your convenience I would like to spend some time via
telephone to run through the report to make sure I understand just what is
being reported.  I'll have my assistant call to set-up the phone call early
next week.

Also, to whom in Risk Management do you send the position report?

Thanks.


-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Delgado [mailto:sdelgado_vitoltvl@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 2:19 PM
To: IRANGEL@ENRON.COM
Subject: 14OCT HOUSTON TO PORTLAND = JAY REITMEYER = TICKETED

                                          AGENT JH/SS BOOKING REF
YCQDAG

                                          REITMEYER/JAY

  ENRON
  1400 SMITH
  HOUSTON TX 77002
  INA RANGEL X37257

  DATE:  OCT 12 2001                   ENRON

SERVICE               DATE  FROM           TO             DEPART
ARRIVE

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES  14OCT HOUSTON TX     PORTLAND OR    540P    810P
CO 640     Q          SUN   G.BUSH INTERCO PORTLAND INTL
                            TERMINAL C
                            SNACK                         NON STOP
                            RESERVATION CONFIRMED         4:27 DURATION
                  AIRCRAFT: BOEING 737-800
                            NO SMOKING SEAT REQUESTED FOR REITMEYER/JAY

HOTEL                 14OCT MARRIOTT PORTLAND DOWNTOWN
                      19OCT 1401 SW NAITO PARKWAY
                            PORTLAND, OR 97201
                            UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                            TELEPHONE: 1-503 2267600
                            FAX: 1-503 2211789
                            CONFIRMATION: 82536389
                            REFERENCE: ENRB00
                            SINGLE ROOM
                            RATE: ENR USD 109.00 PER NIGHT
                            GUARANTEE GIVEN
            **24 HOUR CANCEL POLICY AT THE MARRIOTT DOWNTOWN

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES  17OCT PORTLAND OR    HOUSTON TX     300P    905P
CO 128     Q          WED   PORTLAND INTL  G.BUSH INTERCO
                                           TERMINAL C
                            SNACK                         NON STOP
                            RESERVATION CONFIRMED         4:05 DURATION
                  AIRCRAFT: BOEING 737-300
                            SEAT 21D REQUESTED REITMEYER/JAY

      AIR FARE 165.58       TAX 20.92           TOTAL USD
186.50
                    ORIGINAL FARE PAID 005-7034200658
-186.50
                                     EXCHANGE PENALTY
100.00
                                            AIR TOTAL USD
100.00

                                        INVOICE TOTAL USD
100.00

PAYMENT: O/CCAX/+/CCAX379401961711002/0303/A000028

RESERVATION NUMBER(S)  CO/UDHBHC

REITMEYER/JAY                            TICKET:CO/ETKT 005 7035060312

**CONTINENTAL RECORD LOCATOR: UDHBHC
THIS IS A TICKETLESS RESERVATION. PLEASE HAVE A
PICTURE ID AVAILABLE AT THE AIRPORT. THANK YOU
***********************************************
NON-REFUNDABLE TKT MINIMUM $100.00 CHANGE FEE
                  THANK YOU FOR CALLING VITOL TRAVEL

=====
Vitol Travel Services
713 FARGO AVE.
HOUSTON, TX 77006

713-526-0633 NEW NUMBER
800 724-7002 24 HOURS

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com


This thread is a little confusing but the upshot is that NP15-NW1 was undersubscribed (only 50 MW out of 165 MW bid upon) but the winning prices was very high: $10,000/MW-yr.

GAC
-----Original Message-----
From: McClain, Jim [mailto:JMcClain@caiso.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 10:08 AM
To: Comnes, Alan
Subject: RE: Question about the Auction results

Hi Alan,
Sorry about that.  I didn't walk all the way through the numbers.  We had an
initial offer of 165MW but only 51MW were bid on so the remaining 104MW go
back to the TOs.  So 51MW times the clearing price of $10,002 gives you the
$510,102.  If you have any questions on this please let me know.

Thanks,

Jim McClain
Account Manager - Client Relations
Phone  916-608-7072
Pager   916-814-2408
jmcclain@caiso.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan [mailto:Alan.Comnes@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 9:46 AM
To: McClain, Jim
Subject: RE: Question about the Auction results

Jim,

Thanks for the reply.  If I take the total revenues for that branch group
($510k) and divide by the MW sold (165 MW) I get the $3k/MW/yr number not
the $10k number.

Alan

-----Original Message-----
From: McClain, Jim [mailto:JMcClain@caiso.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:22 PM
To: Comnes, Alan
Subject: RE: Question about the Auction results

Hi Alan,
The closing price for COI NP15-NW1 was $10,002.  It closed in the first
round, thus was the seed price as posted on the web-site.  Where did you get
the $3092 number from?  Give me a call if something doesn't look right.

Thanks,

Jim McClain
Account Manager - Client Relations
Phone  916-608-7072
Pager   916-814-2408
jmcclain@caiso.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Comnes, Alan [mailto:Alan.Comnes@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:59 PM
To: jmcclain@caiso.com
Subject: Question about the Auction results

Jim,

I can't make sense of the $/MW number for COI_BG in the "by branch group"
report.  Shouldn't it be $3092 instead of $10000+?

Alan Comnes
Enron Corp

**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and
may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the
intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by
others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply
to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all
copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not
intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a
binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its
affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be
relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise.
Thank you.
**********************************************************************


Robin Barbe is a Northeast originator and I'm sure she will be interested too.

Remember, steak dinner for the WINNER!!!!!


As you know, now that we are nearly done in capturing the DPR numbers in the
database, we have been working to present the data in compelling ways.  We
have started to do this by creating the VaR Limit Usage graphs and the
Sharpe, Rovar, and Risk - Return graphs.

I am sorry for the misunderstanding with Ted concerning the latter.  I had
explained what I wanted to produce in an e-mail and during a Risk Forum
Luncheon.  Therefore, Shona and I did not expect the reaction we got.  I have
talked to Naveen and Rudi since then, and we have changed the graphs to be
agreeable to RAC.

Today I worked on the graphs below.  They show the P&L decomposition for the
month (rolling 20 business days) up to 9/20 (one in dollar terms and the
other as a percentage of P&L).  I showed them to Shona, and she thought you
should see them before Naveen, Rudi, and Ted, because these graphs are very
powerful and are likely to be controversial.  The graphs show that European
Gas and UK Power released a lot of prudency.  Half of total P&L for European
Gas is prudency, and UK Power would have had a loss of about $20 million
(instead of a gain of $27 million) were it not for prudency.   In the case of
North American Gas, $46 million gain in new deals partly offset about $106
million in trading losses.

Please note that these are rough drafts intended to show what we can do.  I
do not think that there are problems with the data, but I threw these
together today, and I have not yet double-checked the accuracy of my
aggregating calculations.

Please launch the attached spreadsheet, and feel free to call or page me with
questions or concerns.

Thank you,

Eugenio


---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 02/15/2001
10:23 AM ---------------------------

From:  Veronica Espinoza @ ENRON
               02/15/2001 09:47 AM

To: Larry Joe Hunter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bob Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kim S
Theriot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Melinda Whalen/CAL/ECT@ECT, Dianne Seib/CAL/ECT@ECT,
Janie Aguayo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Derek Bailey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Meredith/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ellen Wallumrod/NA/Enron@ENRON, Celeste
Cisneros/NA/Enron@Enron, Diane Anderson/NA/Enron@Enron, Tiffany
Williams/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Feldman/CAL/ECT@ECT, Patricia
Boulanger/CAL/ECT@ECT, Linda Sietzema/CAL/ECT@ECT, Sharon
Crawford/CAL/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya
Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Russell Diamond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nidia
Mendoza/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kam Keiser/HOU/ECT@ECT,
David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Errol McLaughlin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Darron C
Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT, Walter Guidroz/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Veronica Gonzalez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jean
Bell/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Credit Report--2/15/01


Hi Mark and Tana,

I called the Dept. of the interior and was subsequently given the number to
the Director's office.  I was told that anyone there could help me. and I
asked the woman who answered the phone what the legal name is.  She stated
that the legal name is Minerals Management Service.  I asked if U.S. Dept. of
Interior should be included as part of the legal name.  She said that it
should appear as follows:

       U.S. Department of the Interior
       Minerals Management Service

I'm about to make the correction in Global Counterparty.   Do you have any
objection to putting a comma between them, because we do not have 2 lines to
set it up in GCP as written above?

Cheryl x33103

From: Tana Jones@ECT on 02/21/2001 01:57 PM
To: Cheryl Johnson/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Minerals Management Service

Per the directions of Sam Schott, I am forwarding this email on to you.  I
discussed the counterparty name "Minerals Management Service" with my boss,
Mark Taylor, General Counsel of ENA, and he agreed that agencies and
departments of the US government should have the correct governmental
agency/department as part of the counterparty name.  You could say "Minerals
Management Service" is a dba for the US Department of the Interior.  We
generally do not like to contract with dbas, we want the legal entity as part
of the name.  A more appropriate name for this counterparty is "US Department
of the Interior Minerals Management Service".  The way the exposure rolls up
under the GCP System is an exposure issue, not a contract issue.  If you
disagree with this assessment, please call Mark Taylor at x37459.
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 02/21/2001 01:39 PM -----

	Samuel Schott
	02/21/2001 10:12 AM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Cheryl Johnson/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Re: Minerals Management Service

Hi Tana,

I tend to agree with you, however, that's the verified name in the GCP
System. Exposure roll-up should be fine, being that it's Ultimate Parent is
the Government of the United States. If you have proof of a CP Name
discrepancy, it should be directed to Global SAP (Cheryl Johnson, x3-3101).

Have a Great Day Tana !!

Samuel x3-9890
(GCP_Enron Networks)

From: Tana Jones on 02/21/2001 09:14 AM
To: Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: EOL approvals, 2-20-01 _ GCP Response

I'm not so sure I agree with your name change for US Department of the
Interior.  I think as part of the name we've got to have that it's a govt
agency.  Anything else would be misleading to what it actually is.  I think
more appropriate would be United States Department of the Interior, Minerals
Management Service.

	Samuel Schott
	02/20/2001 05:43 PM

		 To: Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT,
David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia
Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT, Enron Europe Global Contracts
and Facilities@ENRON, Enron Europe Global CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephanie
Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT, William
S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Lees/HOU/ECT@ECT, Juana Fayett/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Trang Le/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Maley/LON/ECT@ECT,
Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT, Lee Munden/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT,
Karen O'Day/NA/Enron@Enron, Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kelly
Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Brian Lindsay/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications@ENRON, EOL Call Center@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EOL approvals, 2-20-01 _ GCP Response

GCP adjustments highlighted in red.

Rgds.

Samuel x3-9890
(GCP_Enron Networks)

Walter Guidroz@ENRON
02/20/2001 05:24 PM
To: Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel
Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie
R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Cynthia Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe
Global Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global
CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa
Lees/HOU/ECT@ECT, Juana Fayett/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Trang Le/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Maley/LON/ECT@ECT, Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT, Lee
Munden/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Karen O'Day/NA/Enron@Enron, Tanya
Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kelly Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Brian Lindsay/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, EOL Call Center
cc:
Subject: EOL approvals, 2-20-01

Please see attached.


Attached is the weekly GenCo model. You might want to start getting familiar
with it before things get heated up for FPL. We can sit down early next week
so that I can walk thru with you how the model works and how to update it
weekly.

Thanks.


FYI

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	firstcall.notes@tfn.com@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-firstcall+2Enotes+40tfn+2Ecom+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Monday, July 02, 2001 2:18 PM
To:	Koenig, Mark
Subject:	"BLAME CANADA" - Some Thoughts on the Cali... PART 1

                          FIRST CALL RESEARCH NETWORK

10:45am EST 02-Jul-01 Bear Stearns US (K. Winters,R./D. Franson,R. 212 27) REI
"BLAME CANADA" - Some Thoughts on the Cali... PART 1

Robert K. Winters 212 272-6844 rwinters@bear.com                       6/28/01
Robert D. Franson 212 272-6196 rfranson@bear.com

Subject: Industry Overview
Industry: Wholesale Energy

                           BEAR, STEARNS & CO. INC.
                               EQUITY RESEARCH

   "BLAME CANADA" - Some Thoughts on the California Energy Crisis, the FERC
            Settlement Negotiations and Wholesale Energy Companies

***"BLAME CANADA" - Curiously Absent in the California Debate

***MOVING BACK FROM THE PRECIPICE - Will the FERC Settlement Process Prevent
Governor Davis from Leading the Industry (and the State of California) Over the
Precipice?

***CONFUSING NUMBERS

There are admittedly a lot of numbers floating out there with respect to the
California Power Crisis.  The administrative law judge (ADL) for the FERC,
Curtis L. Wagner Jr., is currently knee-deep in these numbers and allegations
as he attempts to reach a settlement between the various sides of this issue
during a compact 15-day settlement period mandated by the FERC.  The deadline
for this settlement if July 9th - if no settlement is reached, the FERC has
threatened to impose its own solution, which would most likely lead to a
protracted legal battle that could play out over several years.

California Dreaming $9 Billion - But Where Does the Number Come From?  One
thing does appear to be clear here - no one, including Judge Wagner, appears to
have any idea where this $9 billion number, which Governor Davis and his
compatriots keep quoting, comes from.  According to the information we have
obtained, the total amount of "Estimated Wholesale Revenues Above Competitive
Market Baseline" (pre and post Oct 2000) for the generators over which the FERC
has jurisdictional control is around $4.75 billion.  However, as has already
been pointed out many times, the FERC can only order refunds from Oct. of last
year onward due to a Federal law which requires a filing for refunds to be made
within 60 days of the purchases - the CA. ISO didn't begin appealing for
refunds until Dec. of 2000.  Therefore, looking at the Oct.-Feb. time period,
the amount involved appears to be more like $2.61 billion for generators over
which the FERC has jurisdictional control.  For all generators, the numbers
look more like $3.8 billion for the Oct.-Feb. time period and $6.8 billion for
the entire period - May 2000 through Feb. 2001.

It's worth noting that none of the generating companies know where any of these
numbers from the CA. ISO come from and what the bases of any of these
calculations are.  For now these numbers appear to be just another data point
in the negotiations, although they clearly do appear to undermine the
California's position on the $ 9 billion refund its demanding.  Judge Wagner
has already appeared to put out one data point in the negotiations, stating at
the outset that the California is owed refunds (of course, California hasn't
paid its bills yet on this issue, so calling this a refund is a bit
disingenuous) of perhaps a billion dollars or so (according to the Wall Street
Journal).  We believe that this represents one line of demarcation being set
out by the judge early on to encourage both sides in this debate.  Known
reserves, or quoted reserves, taken by generators or wholesale energy companies
involved total more than $1 billion, and of course that doesn't include
everyone since there are a number of generators involved who aren't or haven't,
disclosed any information.

Reserved Amounts, Amounts Owed to Generators by CA. ISO, Alleged Overcharge
Computed by CA. ISO - No Wonder Investors Having Been Steering Clear.  Based on
our conversations with investors over the past several weeks, it appears that
many investors see good value in some of the wholesale energy companies and
independent power producers at current levels, but the problem is the political
uncertainty.  Emerging Markets political psychology has now become a part of
valuing these companies as it relates to the "third world" nature of the
California power system.  This is in line with what we began to warn investors
about several weeks ago with respect to this crisis, but it also could
represent an excellent buying opportunities in certain names.  We continue to
believe that somehow, someone (or something, in the case of the FERC) will
eventually lead us back from the precipice from where Governor Davis has been
taking this issue.  Alongside a potential resolution of this case through the
current settlement negotiations, strong second quarter earnings from these
companies could also provide a catalyst.

If we were to assume that the ultimate settlement figure were to be less than
this "floated figure" by Judge Wagner at the outset of this settlement process,
then on the face of it the generators would appear to be more than fully
reserved on this issue.  However, that assumes that a settlement can be reached
in the allotted 15 days, that is not more than $1 billion, and also assumes
that each companies established reserves, or lack of reserves, proves to be in
line (this last area being the most doubtful).  As an example, Enron (ENE -
Attractive Rated) has, according to the company, booked reserves on this issue
of $435 million while it claims to be owed $570 million by the CA. ISO.
However, the alleged overcharge by Enron by the CA. ISO is only $39 million.
Enron, it would appear from these numbers, could stand to make a windfall from
these settlement negotiations.  On the other hand, Reliant (REI - Not Rated)
appears to have reserved just $39 million but claims to be owed $358 million by
the CA. ISO.  The CA. ISO, however, appears to be claiming that REI overcharged
it by $750 million, although realistically the figure here we should focus on
is $378 million based on the Oct, 2000 - Feb., 2001 time period.  The problem
is of course, no one knows how the CA. ISO's figures were calculated, let along
Governor Davis has lifted his $9 billion figure from.

Breaking Down the Numbers. In the enclosed excel file we have broken down
information (where available) for the various wholesale energy companies and
independent power producers with respect to alleged overcharge by the CA. ISO,
the reported EBIT for these companies in fiscal year 2000, the amount that
these companies have claimed is owed them by the CA. ISO and the approximate
reserves each of these companies has taken with respect to this issue.  In many
cases, these are obviously not hard data points since they can't be readily
located in filings by these companies with the SEC.  Some of the figures come
from various public statements made by the heads of these companies, or are
lifted from articles where they were attributed to someone at these companies.
.  Attached File  (Please Request File Separately in the Case of First Call
Note).

The Camouflaged Canadians.  It has been interesting to read through articles
regarding the California Power crisis, and even to watch "supposedly" well-
researched documentaries that are expected to present a "balanced" thorough
account of what has been and what continues to happen in California and
throughout the Western United States.  This is a complicated subject, a
complicated chain of events which has led to this crisis, but it is still
stunning at times to see major issues missed by the press, or ignored by the
California Governor's office, in assessing this issue.  More often than not,
the hydroelectric system in the Pacific Northwest and the integral role it
plays in supplying California power during the summer doesn't get adequate
attention, nor does the hydro system of our neighbors up north.  You want to
know who has made the most money yet off the California Power Crisis - look
north.  For obvious political and legal reasons, Governor Davis in California
has pointed the finger solely and continually at Houston, Texas.  However,
perhaps Governor Davis and/or the rest of California should perhaps focus some
attention on Canada if they want to determine who gained the most from this
crisis.  Through the first three-quarters of 2000, BC Hydro's net income
increased by close to $860 million on a y/y basis.  According to info we have
seen related to the California ISO calculations regarding potential
overcharges, that appears to be the single largest amount of money made from
the California Energy Crisis (we have assumed for now in this statement that
California would deem all of the increase in profit on a y/y basis to be
illegally gained, which is admittedly an overstatement, but then again these
figures for BC Hydro don't include fourth quarter results for 2000 whereas the
Ca. ISO comparison figures do).   Fourth quarter results for BC Hydro are not
expected to be reported until somewhere on July 9-11, but we would expect the
fourth quarter to be a "whopping number".  The attached excel sheet provides
more data, but the quarterly net incomes for BC Hydro and % y/y increases were
as follows; 1Q00 - $306 million, up 147% y/y; 2Q00 - $658 million, up 306% y/y;
3Q00 - $362 million, up 100% y/y; 4Q00 - ?.

According to the information we have been able to find, it looks as if BC Hydro
announced two rebates to their Canadian customers during 2000 which look to
total around $1.5 Billion.  Canadians don't vote in California's 2002
Gubernatorial race, nor will they be allowed to vote in the 2004 Presidential
Election in this country.  And although we're not lawyers, it seems that is
would be more than a little difficult for Governor Davis to sue Canadians and
their ratepayers for a return of these rebates.  Perhaps we quibble, but it
would appear to be selective prosecution on the part of the California
politicians.  But then again, perhaps California's attorney general has a "jail
partner" in mind as well for the head of BC Hydro.

Bear Stearns may be a market maker or be associated with a specialist
that makes a market in the common stock or options of the issuer(s)
in this report, and Bear Stearns or such specialist may have a position
(long or short) and may be on the opposite side of public
orders in such common stock or options.

Bear Stearns may be a market maker or may be associated with a specialist that
makes a market in the common stock or options of the issuer(s) in this report,
and Bear Stearns or such specialist may have a position (long or short) and may
First Call Corporation, a Thomson Financial company.
All rights reserved.  888.558.2500

Note ID: 312643
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       To update your order or to receive research on other companies,
              please call your Account Manager at (800) 262-6000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Thomson Financial Investor Relations  TEL: 800-262-6000
         75 Wall Street, 18th Floor            FAX: 212-363-3971
         New York, NY  10005                   EMAIL: firstcall.notes@tfn.com

      First Call is a registered trademark of the First Call Corporation


fyi.   mcs
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 10/07/2000
18:41 ---------------------------

Sanjay Bhatnagar@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
10/07/2000 18:09
To: Wade Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark Schroeder@ECT

Subject: Re: Appreciate your help

Jane: Ditto on the views Wade expressed. On the MSEB front, I would like to
ensure that you are personally making sure that the MSEB review petition
final form goes in with ur full consent. Enlist Kohli or Gurunath's help in
this.

	enron india

	From:  Wade Cline                           07/08/2000 04:58 AM

To: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Sanjay Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark Schroeder@ECT
Subject: Appreciate your help

Jane,

I know your schedule is very busy, as is mine. This means we don't get to
talk much and catch up. I just want you to know that we really appreciate
your help on the many fronts you are fighting, including MSEB/MERC, Metgas,
LNG shipping policy, Electricity Act 2000, Derivatives trading, etc. It is a
great comfort to know that we have someone dedicated to this function who
brings so much personal history and knowledge as well as access to the larger
Enron regulatory family.

I get very positive feedback from all who interact with you, both internally
and externally. Keep up the good work.

Wade


I will tell him what I know, although I haven't looked at a food processor in some time.

Matt - I would suggest you talk to Matt Gravelle from ConAgra.  I have done him some favors over the years.  They are a big food processor with Beatrice Hunt Wesson.  He will know all the big tomato processors which are 80% of the food processing load.  Others include Tri-Valley.  I would try to get as many names and phone numbers as you can and call them up and ask them their plans.  My bet is cooler and wetter weather will result in a lower and later harvest and hence gas usage.
The fruit driers are the other 20% and they are much less concentrated and it will be hard to get a handle on their usage.

Also, what's up with EES?  Do they have any marketers anymore?  Dan Bergmann used to be very effective in getting deals done with the food processors, but they laid him off.

C

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Grigsby, Mike
Sent:	Tuesday, July 31, 2001 2:00 PM
To:	Foster, Chris H.
Subject:	Food processors

I would like to have Matt Smith, West Fundamentals, call you to discuss the food processing load in CA.  He wants to pick your brain on how to gather more information on this business sector.

Thanks,
Mike


This is a section from an internal TWC memorandum - it looks like Q4 might
make up for the quiet tropical season as far as their profits are concerned...

WEATHER CHANNEL EARNS HIGHEST RATINGS FOR ANY DECEMBER IN ITS HISTORY
Coverage of last month's "Winter Blitz"  brought The Weather Channel the
highest ratings for any December in its 18-year history and shattered
weather.com's previous December page view records. December 2000 was the
third highest-rated month ever. The Blizzard of '96 gave TWC its highest
ratings, followed by Hurricane Floyd in September 1999.
 Among the many recording-breaking weather events reported by TWC last month
were the snowiest weather ever in at least 12 cities and the coldest weather
on record in many places, including Louisville, Ky.
December's winter weather events, coupled with early wintry weather in
October and November, boosted the network to an all-time high 4th quarter
rating, despite comparatively lower averages early in the quarter due to
quieter than usual hurricane activity.
TWC's coverage of the year-end Nor'easter that blanketed New York City with
over a foot of snow achieved a 0.870 rating, delivering 679,000 households
across the country on Saturday, December 30 (6 a.m.-6 a.m.).  The top
quarter hour occurred at 10 a.m. with a rating of 2.279 reaching 1.8 million
households.  The weekend rating for Dec. 30-31 was 0.753,  representing over
a half million households tuned in at any given time, according to Nielsen
data.  This was the second highest-rated weekend in 2000 and the sixth
highest-rated weekend in TWC's history.
Consumers also turned to weather.com in record numbers. By the close of
December, weather.com delivered more than 429 million total page views,
which is 67 percent higher than the previous monthly record, and 232 percent
higher than December 1999.  At its peak, weather.com delivered a record 27.8
million page views in a single day.  More than 1.3 million Unique Visitors
frequented weather.com  per day during the two weeks prior to Christmas,
according to Media Metrix.
The average TWC rating (6 a.m.-6 a.m.) from Dec.16-31 was 0.598, delivering
an average of 464,000 households, according to Nielsen. This was 85 percent
higher than the average rating for the same two-week period the year before.
The Weather Channel's coverage of sustained winter activity, which included
a Chicago blizzard on Dec. 10-11, brought the network its highest-rated
December ever.  TWC achieved a December rating of 0.462 (6 a.m.-6 a.m.),
delivering an average of 360,000 households.

Steve


---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 12/29/99 10:58
AM ---------------------------

	From:  Susan Scott                           12/29/99 09:56 AM

To: Drew Fossum@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Red Cedar update

Since the 311 belt/suspenders approach didn't quite fit, I've had to try to
convince Mr. Hertzberg that he ought to rely on the NGA Sec. 1 exemption for
gatherers (Frank Kelly and Frazier concur with us on this, by the way).  He
is not convinced yet, although he is unable to cite any authority for his
proposition that being a shipper on TW would subject a gathering company to
FERC jurisdiction.  I pointed out that Agave, the owner and operator of an
extensive gathering system that interconnects with TW's system, has for many
years been a shipper on TW.  Also, Lindy has found that Red Cedar already has
a long-term transportation contract on another interstate system,
Transcolorado, so if Hertzberg's theory is right they are going to jail
anyway!

Red Cedar also seems to be hung up on our requirement that shippers have
title to the gas they ship.  At this point Lorraine and I believe they might
just be looking for any excuse to get out of the deal.  If anything
interesting happens I'll let you know.


Dave:
I spoke with Mark about the Federal law issue and we both feel that our
exposure is no greater than what it would be if we traded over the phone with
this counterparty.  Because they are a federal agency, there is no way around
this issue other than to not permit them to trade with us online.
Carol

	David Forster@ENRON
	05/12/2000 01:16 PM

		 To: Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Bonneville Power Administration

Carol,

- Do we really want to accept arbitration in Portland?
- What is our exposure to Federal Law?

Dave

   Carol St Clair @ ECT                05/11/2000 10:05 AM

To: David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Bonneville Power Administration

David:
Enclosed for your review is a draft amendment letter for the above
counterparty.  All of the requested chnages are driven by the fact that BPA
is a federal agency.  I look forward to hearing from you.
Carol


----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 06/11/2001 11:22 AM -----

	"Fergus, Gary S." <GFergus@brobeck.com> 05/23/2001 07:06 PM 	   To: "Richard B. Sanders Esq. (E-mail)" <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>  cc:   Subject: FW: Enron Proposals Regarding Document Subpoenas

FYI
Thanks
Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Meringolo, Peter
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 23, 2001 5:01 PM
> To:	Fergus, Gary S.
> Subject:	FW: Enron Proposals Regarding Document Subpoenas
> Importance:	High
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Fergus, Gary S.
> Sent:	Monday, October 09, 2000 9:59 AM
> To:	Meringolo, Peter
> Subject:	FW: Enron Proposals Regarding Document Subpoenas
> Importance:	High
>
> FYI.
> Thanks
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Fergus, Gary S.
> Sent:	Friday, October 06, 2000 2:57 PM
> To:	'hym@cpuc.ca.gov'
> Cc:	'MBD'
> Subject:	Enron Proposals Regarding Document Subpoenas
> Importance:	High
>
> Harvey Morris Esq.
> California Public Utilities Commission
> 505 Public Utilities Commission
> San Francisco, California   94102
>
> 	Re:   I.00-08-002  Subpoenas Served on Enron Power Marketing, Inc.
> ("EPMI"), Enron Energy Services Operations Inc. and Enron Energy Services
> Inc. (collectively referred to as "EES"), Enron Energy Marketing
> Corporation ("EEMC"), and Portland General Electric Corporation ("Portland
> General")(collectively sometimes referred to as the "Enron Entities")
>
> Harvey,
>
> 	Here are our proposals with respect to the Enron Entities'
> production of documents pursuant to the above described subpoenas issued
> by the California Public Utility Commission (hereinafter "the
> Commission").  The Enron Entities are willing to assist the Commission in
> undertaking its investigation into the problems in the California electric
> markets by producing the information specified on a timely basis.  We
> believe that the production we propose will enable the Commission to
> commence its investigation much sooner than if the parties were forced to
> litigate all of the potential objections to the requests for production,
> which are, by any standard, extremely broad and could involve millions of
> pages of documents.  We make these proposals pursuant to our email
> exchange of October 3, 2000 with the understanding that the Commission
> agrees that by cooperating, offering to produce or producing documents,
> the Enron Entities have not waived any objections or challenges to these
> subpoenas whatsoever and that any claims, defenses, objections,
> jurisdictional or otherwise or other responses have been specifically
> reserved and can be raised in the future, if necessary.   For all of these
> proposals, we exclude documents that are protected from disclosure by the
> attorney client and attorney work product privileges.
>
> 	Generally speaking, the Enron Entities propose to produce documents
> for year 2000 as noted below.  We also understand that the Commission will
> be obtaining documents from the ISO and PX and we will not attempt here to
> duplicate documents that we understand will be produced by those entities.
> As you will see in the general documents that are offered here for
> production, Enron Energy Services Operations, Inc. is the parent of Enron
> Energy Services, Inc. and does not have operating authority or engage in
> wholesale or retail purchases or sales of energy.  Thus, the documents
> offered here with respect to those two entities originates with Enron
> Energy Services, Inc. but we have designated them both as EES.  We also do
> not propose to offer duplicative documents as between the Enron Entities.
>
> GENERAL DOCUMENTS
> Requests 1 through 4
>
> 	Because of the dynamic nature of the Enron Entities' businesses, the
> burden and expense on them to locate, and produce every corporate
> organizational chart anywhere in their organizations since April 1, 1998
> is significant.   The Enron Entities will provide the Commission with
> exemplars of their current organizational charts, telephone directories
> and so called "family trees" to show its current organization.  To the
> extent that the Enron Entities can readily identify and locate exemplars
> of significant organizational charts, telephone directories or so called
> "family trees" for earlier periods they will also make those available.
> One Enron Entity, Portland General, has published books on its corporate
> history.  If a list of those books would be helpful, we can provide it.
> With respect to the other Enron Entities, to the extent that corporate
> histories can be found, they will be produced.  We anticipate producing
> these documents in the first wave on October 13, 2000.
>
> Requests 5 and 6
>
> 	The Enron Entities propose that their responses to Requests 1-4 will
> identify their relationship to affiliated companies and the Transaction
> Documents will identify its customers and suppliers.  We believe this
> information will be sufficient to illustrate these relationships for the
> staff's purposes.
>
> FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS
> Requests 7 through 11
>
> 	The Enron Entities will produce their public filings for the period
> requested with respect to financial data.  EPMI, EES, and Portland General
> will provide to the Commission electronic transaction data ( the
> "Transaction Documents") for the purchase and sale of energy delivered
> which information includes economic data.   We anticipate producing public
> filings regarding financial data on October 13, 2000 and the electronic
> Transaction Documents in the second wave of document productions.
>
> GENERATING DOCUMENTS
> Requests 12, 14 and 18
>
> 	For the Enron Entities other than Portland General, the generation
> facilities are either non-existent or limited in number and there will
> probably be limited documents available.  The Enron Entities to the extent
> they act as a scheduling coordinator or possessed the right to use or
> resell generation output, do not have the specific documents that pertain
> to each generation unit requested.  The Enron Entities, other than
> Portland General, do have documents and information for Las Vegas
> Cogeneration.  We propose to produce these documents in the second wave of
> document productions.
>
> 	 For Portland General, the production of the requested documents
> would involve a tremendous volume of documents, as Portland General owned
> twenty generating facilities of a variety of types and sizes during 2000.
> Portland General is a net importer of energy and can only generate about
> one half of its total energy demand.  As a result, we question whether the
> effort required of Portland General is warranted as its impact on the
> California wholesale market is necessarily limited.  Nevertheless,
> Portland General proposes to provide for year 2000 electronic Transaction
> Documents in summary form similar to the data being provided by other
> Enron Entities, to the extent relevant as discussed below.  We propose
> that the Commission defer requesting production of other information until
> it has reviewed the information of generators who sell a significant
> proportion of their energy into the California market.  At that time a
> more accurate assessment can be made of whether this enormous effort will
> be valuable given the limited impact of Portland General generation on the
> California wholesale market.
>
> TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS
> Requests 13, 15, 16, 17 and 19
>
> 	We understand that the Commission will be obtaining trading data for
> the purchase and sale of energy delivered in California from the ISO and
> PX.  EPMI can provide the Commission several different sets of relevant
> transaction data for year 2000 (in California and outside of California
> and Real Time) for the purchase and sale of energy delivered with the
> date, counterparty, quantity, delivery point, hours, price, and whether it
> is a purchase or a sale.   Because of the speed with which you want this
> information, it is possible that some entries will be incomplete or
> inaccurate.  For those
> transactions where EPMI served only as the scheduling coordinator, we
> understand that the ISO will show part of the transaction, but there will
> not be a corresponding transaction in the EPMI data we can provide
> quickly.  The reason is that this type of transaction is passed through to
> EPMI's customer on an accounting system rather than as part of the trading
> business.  EES can also provide similar data with respect to relevant
> wholesale and retail transactions with the proviso that with respect to
> retail transactions it will not include the specific names of its retail
> customers but instead will provide a blind customer number due to EES'
> confidentiality obligations to those customers.  We anticipate producing
> the Transaction Documents in the second wave of document productions.
>
> FERC DOCUMENTS
>
> Request 20
>
> 	The Enron Entities will produce the requests for data they received
> from FERC and to the extent that FERC has been given responses, copies of
> those responses.  We anticipate producing the FERC documents on October
> 13, 2000.
>
>
> 	Based upon discussions that we have had with the various Enron
> Entities, we believe that we could make a second wave of productions on
> Friday October 27, 2000.  It is possible that not all Enron Entities could
> make that date but we believe the bulk of the data could be available for
> production by then.
>
> 	We propose to make these productions with the understanding that if
> any entity obtains a more stringent protective order than the one
> currently in place, that all of the Enron Entities document productions
> will be protected by the most stringent protective order.  In addition,
> if, at the request of any party or nonparty to this proceeding, the
> Commission or a court of competent jurisdiction orders that the requests
> for production be limited, reduced or eliminated, the Enron Entities
> reserve the right to limit the production of documents in conformance with
> such order.
>
> 	We understand that you will consider these proposals and let us know
> if they are acceptable to the Commission.  If you have any questions or
> comments about our proposal, please do not hesitate to contact Michael Day
> or myself.
>
> Brobeck Phleger & Harrison LLP
>
> Gary Fergus
>
>
>
>
>

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

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


Steve,

Thanks a lot.

Vince


Bill

Mike Purcell referred Ryan Barnard for the Real Time Trading position.  Attached is Ryan's resume.  Please let me know how you want me to procedd with him.

Thanks,
Josie


Oh, great. Our next call will be from Steve Peace.

-----Original Message-----
From: Shapiro, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 10:54 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Kaufman, Paul; Mara, Susan; Steffes, James D.
Subject: Re: Pescetti

Next seat is a Dem. Seat.
--------------------------
Rick S.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff <Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com>
To: Kaufman, Paul <Paul.Kaufman@ENRON.com>; Mara, Susan <Susan.J.Mara@ENRON.com>; Steffes, James D. <James.D.Steffes@ENRON.com>; Shapiro, Richard <Richard.Shapiro@ENRON.com>
CC: Dasovich, Jeff <Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com>
Sent: Tue Oct 23 10:16:39 2001
Subject: Pescetti

Paul:

Got your voice mail regarding Anthony Pescetti running for a FERC seat.  Here are some quick thoughts.  Sue likely has some additional experiences and information to share.  Be happy to discuss further.

*	Republican assemblymember from the Sacramento area.
*	Was a member of the Sacramento muni utility district prior to going to the legislature.
*	Republican (minority) head of the assembly electricity oversight committee (the one that Rod Wright chairs).
*	Don't recall that he's ever seen a a pro-utility bill that he didn't like.
*	In fact, he sponsored some legislation just this past session that would have locked the utilities in to major parts of the gas industry, and specifically wold have locked out competition.  It was strongly opposed by industry and defeated.
*	When push came to shove, I can't think of a time he didn't side with the utilities.
*	Even when the Assembly Republicans were doing of good job of bottling up Davis' ridiculous bailout bills in Rod Wright's committee, Pescetti seemed to go along more to tweek the Democrats than to foster competition.
*	And even then, he followed; he didn't lead--other, more junior, members on the committee led.
*	Can't recall a time that he's been there for us.

I'd be happy to talk with him, but if we need someone at the Rick level to contact him, that's great, too.  Just let me know.

Best,
Jeff


Dear MONIKA,

Congratulations!

You have been successfully enrolled in the course
'Applied Risk Management Principles'.

Course details are provided below:

Course Type     : Instructor Led Course
Course Code     : ARMP

Session Code    : 113001
Number of Units : 0
Price           : $350.00

Location        : Doubletree Hotel

                  Dallas St.
                  Houston, TX

Meetings        :
      Start Time:  Nov 30, 2001 8:00 AM
        End Time:  Nov 30, 2001 12:00 PM
     No instructors or rooms have been assigned to this meeting.

You will receive a reminder before the session starts.

Thank you.


Good Afternoon,

Any GCP Adjustments will be highlighted in blue.  Please feel free to give me a call, if you have any questions.

Amber N Ebow x5-8331
Global Counterparty_Enron Net Works

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Lebrocq, Wendi
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 9:18 AM
To:	Bradford, William S.; Lees, Lisa; Fayett, Juana; Le, Trang; Maley, Paul; O'day, Karen; Rohauer, Tanya; Lombardi, Kelly; Lindsay, Brian; EOL Call Center; Hare, Bill D.; Heffernan, Amy; Lafuze, Molly; Clark, Danny; Panus, Stephanie; Mandola, Teresa; Ebow, Amber; Coleman, Tandra; Campbell, Lesli; Lebrocq, Wendi; Taylor, Mark E (Legal); Lauer, Kara; Banner, Kimberly; Mcquade, Jennifer; George, Fraisy; Guillory, Michael; Rajaram, Aparna; Monterrey, Maribel; Lebeau, Maria; Escamilla, Albert; Lebrocq, Wendi; Global Emerging Businesses; Lambert, Karen; Jones, Tana; Schott, Samuel; Brackett, Debbie R.; Clark, Cynthia; Enron Europe Global CounterParty,; Sever, Stephanie; Moran, Tom; Clark, Claudia; Curry, Ken
Subject:	EOL and Clickpaper Approvals for 10-25-01

Please see attached.

 << File: EOL 10-25-01.xls >>
Regards,

Wendi Lebrocq
3-3835


Cannot wait...

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Purcell, Mike
Sent:	Monday, June 18, 2001 11:37 AM
To:	Semperger, Cara; Scholtes, Diana; Fischer, Mark; Alonso, Tom; Williams III, Bill; Stokley, Chris; Purcell, Mike; Mallory, Chris; Richter, Jeff; Symes, Kate
Cc:	O'Neil, Murray P.; Belden, Tim
Subject:	Bi-weekly Enpower meeting

Dear Traders,

We will have our regular bi-weekly Enpower meeting this Wednesday at 1 PM in the CASCADE conference room (unless otherwise notified of a conference room or time change).  Please make plans to be in attendance.

Agenda items:

Update on DPR impact for each trading group

Discussion on establishing dollar threshold levels for each group

Discussion on new ideas for timely dispute resolution

The meeting should last 15 - 20 minutes. If you will not be there, please let me know in advance who will be in attendance for your group.

Thanks and see you there!

Virginia and Mike


Confidential Settlement Material under CPUC Rule 51

Gas Accord II Rule 51 List:

Attached are the electronic versions of our presentations at the October 25
and 26 Gas Accord II Workshop.

As a reminder, our next workshop is on Tuesday, November 7 and Wednesday,
November 8.  We plan to start these sessions a little earlier at 9:00 a.m.
Our topics are around:
 * Demand-Supply Forecasts
 * Supply Reliability
 * Capital Expenditure Forecasts
 * Direct Connects and Local Transmission Rate Design Options

We will also provide about two hours on each day for you to present your
views, issues and/or options.

Thank you for your participation in Gas Accord II and in the Workshops.
Please feel free to contact us with any questions, concerns or suggestions.

Frank Lindh    Ray Williams
Attorney    Director
415-973-2776   415-973-3634
frl3@pge.com   rdw0@pge.com

 <<Balancing for 10-25-00 Workshop.ppt>>  <<Transaction Information 10-25-00
Workshop.ppt>>  <<Open Season Rules 10-25-00 Workshop.ppt>>  <<Core
Procurement for 10-26-00 Workshop.ppt>>  <<Core Aggregation for 10-26-00
Workshop.ppt>>  <<Agenda 10-25&26-00 Workshop.doc>>

 - Balancing for 10-25-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Transaction Information 10-25-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Open Season Rules 10-25-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Core Procurement for 10-26-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Core Aggregation for 10-26-00 Workshop.ppt
 - Agenda 10-25&26-00 Workshop.doc


Hi, Sally,

I am an associate working for EBS. I am sorry we didn't have a chance to meet
for the mid-year PRC. Could you schedule sometime next week so that we can
meet face to face? I'd like to talk about the mid-year also. Thank you.

Jun Wang
Enron Broadband Services
Office# 713.853.0425
Fax#     713.646.3271
jun.wang@enron.net


Tana, do we have an ISDA in place with G-P ??


587415
not apb

missing deals

mark f
buy srp
217.00
25 mw
pv
on peak

holden
sell williams
24-30
102.00
25 mw
pv
off peak

holden
sell williams
24-30
100.00
50 mw
pv
off peak

tom a
buy pacificorp
200.00
23rd
25 mw
on peak

tom a
buy aep
283.00
25 mw
may
pv
on peak


Dear Market Participants:

The NYISO has decided to delay the Round 1 Sale of One-Year TCCs in the
Spring 2002 TCC Auction by one day due to the Presidents Day holiday on
Monday February 18.  No other changes to the Initial Spring 2002 TCC
Auction Time Line will result from this action.

The five days allocated for the Round 1 Sale will occur February 19-23 with
the following activities:

     Feb 19:  Market Participants submit TCC bids and offers, if
applicable.
     Feb 20-22:  ISO processes bids and conducts TCC Auction analysis.
     Feb 23:  ISO posts Auction results for Market Participant review.

NYISO apologizes for any inconvenience that this delay may cause.

Regards,
Customer Relations
518-356-6060

---
You are currently subscribed to nyiso_tie as: benjamin.rogers@enron.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-nyiso_tie-628650Q@lyris.nyiso.com


I called a meeting among Linda Robertson, Gary Fergus, Amanda Smith and RA yesterday evening to compare notes on the status of the captioned matters and determine what activities we would need to undertake going forward.  The following matters were discussed:

1.	Refund exposure / netting of purchases and sales
2.	Receivable from ISO related to business conducted in various trade months
3.	Receivable from PX related to business conducted in various trade months
4.	Receivable related to the underscheduling penalty
5.	Receivable related to the negative CTC

1.	Regarding the first matter, Gary reviewed with us the initial numbers on California exposure relating to our sales in the ISO and PX markets, and our purchases in those markets which may potentially be used to offset this exposure.  We discussed the need to update this study in view of the new data recently provided by the ISO in the proceeding.  Gary will work with Charles River to move forward on this.  The new exposure/netting numbers should be available either at the end of this week, or the middle of next week, due to demands on Charles River related to a Monday filing deadline in the Pac NW proceeding.  A "block forward" issue related to our accounting for sales and purchases, and involving the inclusion of price data related to non-physical, swap transactions, will also be analyzed by Charles River to determine its effect on the numbers that are being generated by the ISO and its impact on our refund exposure.

2.	I shared information related to money owed us by the ISO for business conducted in various trade months, developed with the help of Kit Blair.  This info takes the form of a certification by the chief financial officer of the ISO as to the correctness of various attached information, schedules and invoices generated by ISO and related to these various trade months.  Kit advises as of yesterday that we are owed $42,891,411 by the ISO.

3.	Information was also shared with regard to amounts owed us by the PX for business conducted in various trade months.  This info took the form of an EPMI account summary on PX letterhead and an overview spread sheet (with accompanying backup data) apparently provided by ISO.  The contact person on this matter is Chris Stokley.  I do not have confirmation on an up to date figure yet from Chris, but my prior notes indicate that this receivable is approximately $8MM.

4.	I also shared information on money due us by virtue of the underscheduling penalty mechanism.  Again, Kit Blair provided me this info, which consists of an ISO generated notice and schedule which indicates that EPMI is owed $33,838,246.08

5.	Finally, I shared a spread sheet obtained from Wanda Curry, as to the magnitude of the negative CTC receivable.

The deliverables coming out of the meeting were for Gary and Amanda to take the lead in updating and developing the foregoing items into evidentiary proof/affidavits suitable for use in the proceeding, coordinating with us, Dan Watkiss / Shelby Kelley and the various contacts.  A listing of the contacts to be made and potential affiants/witnesses follows:

Contact for amounts owed us by ISO- 	Kit Blair, Staff Trading Supt.
Contact for amounts owed us by PX-		Chris Stokley, Associate
Affiant for the info developed above-	Murray O'Neil, Sr. Director Trading Supt.
Contact and affiant for negative CTC- 	Wanda Curry, VP Risk Management
Offset of purchases and sales-		Undefined; possibilities- Jan Acton, Seabron Adamson, 							internal person?

I am available for the remainder of the week to help coordinate Gary and Amanda's communication with these contacts.  Alan Comes will be the primary coordinator next week during my absence; although I will be reachable on my cell should the need arise.

Thanks,  Ray


I would like to take another day of vacation this Friday.


Attached please find the Natural Gas market  analysis for today.

Thanks.

Bob McKinney
 - 6-5-01 Nat Gas.doc


Here is my timesheet for the pay period of July 15th to July 31st.  Thanks
Ben Rogers
3-7998


Please update with other info.

Jim


I hope to go, at least Friday/Saturday, assuming we have a sitter for
Michael, of course.

I met Mrs. Kerekgarto yesterday.

Chris Duerr (duerrc@spring-branch.isd.tenet.edu/).  Maybe you should ask to
visit which ever classroom Chris thinks Michael would  be in assuming he
started at VO on September 5.  Just a suggestion.  Or maybe you can visit
more than one class.  You might want to ask to visit a class during an
academic time (as opposed to when the kids are in centers).

"Neil Mann" <nmann@erac.com> on 08/24/2000 08:08:02 AM
Please respond to <nmann@erac.com>
To: "C. Kay Mann (E-mail)" <Kay.Mann@Enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Officers Meeting

I know a lot can happen in 60 days but what do you think the chances are you
will go today? I will not send anything to Rose Mary yet. NM

   TEXAS                                CURRENT MESSAGES
CCMS01-F
    To:         MANN*NEIL*                   06031    06           To:
    From:    JOSEPH*ROSE MARY*            01087    77           CC:    90327
    Subject:    Officer Mtg. Attendance                            Std
Dist:    00    00
00    00    00
    Select "X" one or multiple options:                         Emp List:
FM
          Delete           Forward            Print            Save
ECARS           Recall
date:     0/00/00
    Page:    01    of    01
8/23    14:14
TO;  Fall Officer Meeting Attendees

If your spouse will not be attending the meeting this October, please let me
know as soon as you can.  We need this information to maintain an accurate
headcount for seating at meals, the speaker session, etc.

Thanks!

Rose Mary

LAST PAGE
       Cmd1=Choose Msg              Cmd3=Exit           Cmd5=View Addressees