---------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is brought to you by CustomOffers.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

The NEW XCam2 is a tiny, yet powerful wireless video camera that's so small it fits in the palm of your hand! And since it's wireless, you can put it anywhere. Now, you can get this Amazing Wireless Camera Kit for only $79.99 + FREE VCR COMMANDER if you order TODAY!!

http://x10.ym0.net/re3.asp?C=34551&P=107531&L=0

Here's what you can do with the NEW XCam2:

- Create home videos! Capture life's moments!
- Expandable to 16+ cameras and linked together with 1 remote!
- Monitor front door visitors!
- Complete home & office surveillance!
- Supervise your children from your bedroom!
- Monitor your home via the Internet with X-Ray Vision (optional add-on)

DISCOUNT PRICE! Only $79.99 + Get a FREE VCR COMMANDER!
** That's an amazing $170 Value - Save $90! ORDER NOW!

http://x10.ym0.net/re3.asp?C=34551&P=107531&L=0

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

MOST POPULAR DEAL... GET A COMPLETE WHOLE HOUSE WIRELESS SURVEILLANCE KIT with SMART VCR taping! SAVE $218

EXCLUSIVE CUSTOM OFFERS SPECIAL! $388 Value! Now $169.99!

http://x10.ym0.net/re3.asp?C=34551&P=107531&L=0

THREE-CAMERA SUPERDEAL with FREE VCR COMMANDER!
This complete wireless 3-camera kit provides incredible video surveillance for your entire home! Manage the views of 3 tiny, wireless cameras on your TV (expandable to 16+) with the touch of a button.

SEE & RECORD... (Whether you're home or not!)
VIEW what's going on throughout your entire home/office and RECORD the action from all your cameras on ONLY ONE VCR!

* Use a Camera to view the walkway
* Use a Camera to view the backyard
* Use a Camera to view the kid's playroom
* Use a Camera to view the kid's bedroom
* Use a Camera to view the side of the house
* Use a Camera to view the kitchen

EXCLUSIVE CUSTOM OFFERS DEAL - $388 Value - Now Only $169.99!!
This is a complete kit that allows you to set up 3 cameras and link them together through any TV or VCR and it allows you to record what you want - ONLY the action - whether you're home or not, with the NEW VCR Commander! Hands FREE Surveillance!

Everything you need is included -- 3 XCam2 wireless cameras, 1 remote, 1 wireless receiver, 1 transceiver, 3 addressable power supplies, 1 VCR Commander Kit (which includes Eagle Eye Motion Sensor), and all the cables! These 3 HOT cameras are ready to go right out of the box and give you instant "Scan & VCR POWER!"

CUSTOM OFFERS EXCLUSIVE OFFER: $169.99! SAVE $218!

http://x10.ym0.net/re3.asp?C=34551&P=107531&L=0

It's Available, Affordable, Reliable and Easy to Install.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

 - Click on Links in this email for more details
 - Offers Valid in U.S. ($USD) and Canada Only
 - Offers Not Valid with Gift Certificates/Vouchers.
 - FREE Shipping for U.S. orders over $49 (including.Alaska and Hawaii); $10 for Canadian orders
 - 30-Day money back guarantee from X10.com

Thanks & Best Regards,

Brian Edwards
X10 Discount Club Manager

---------------------------------------------------------------------
*MEMBER SERVICES*
To unsubscribe from this mailing please reply to this
email with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Guys, attached you will find a preliminary agenda for the 2000 ENA Offsite.
As leaders of the organization, you have been invited to participate in a two
day offsite where business 2001 objectives and strategies for ENA will be
discussed.  It is scheduled to occur December 14th and 15th at the Venetian
in Las Vegas.

This is the forum to ensure that your point of view and ideas can be heard
and incorporated into our plans and iniatives as such I would encourage
everyone to attend and to stay for the entire period.  In particular, we
would like everyone to stay over Friday night and leave Saturday morning.

ENA public relations (Dorie) will manage all the logistics including air fare.

Final invitations, details and agenda will follow shortly.

Regards
Dave and John


i am thinking 87-90 on DIA, however you manage your own theta. if i see something that really scares me i will let you know

-----Original Message-----
From: Fenner, Chet [mailto:Chet_Fenner@bmc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 2:55 PM
To: Parks, Joe
Subject: RE: YOU CAN THANK ME LATER

Now, what I'll REALLY need you for is telling me when to bail!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Parks, Joe [mailto:Joe.Parks@bridgeline.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 2:39 PM
To: Chet Fenner (E-mail)
Subject: DIA:YOU CAN THANK ME LATER

************************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Bridgeline Holdings, L.P. and/or its relevant
affiliate(s) 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 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
Bridgeline Holdings, L.P. (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.
************************************************************************


SAVE THE DATE!

The EES Associate and Analyst Mid-year 2001 PRC will be held on June 8, 2001.

Details to follow.

Terry Bosien
HR Manager, Associate and Analyst Program
ext. 35230


Don,

Attached is the financial profile for FPLE's development pipeline utilizing
the 44 CTs.  Give me a call once you have reviewed it.

(See attached file: newco development cash flow.xls)
 - newco development cash flow.xls


---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Hernandez/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2000
03:30 PM ---------------------------

Judy Hernandez on 01/26/2000 12:14:08 PM
To: Michelle Neville/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angela Barnett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sandra R
McNichols/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shirlet Williams/HOU/EES@EES, Melba
Lozano/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maria Sandoval/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Soto/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Rose Botello/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FW: Hope you like this poem...

---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Hernandez/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2000
12:11 PM ---------------------------

Lisa Shoemake
01/26/2000 09:40 AM
To: Melissa Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amber
Limas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Cole/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stacey Duplessis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ragayle Pellum/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FW: Hope you like this poem...

---------------------- Forwarded by Lisa Shoemake/HOU/ECT on 01/26/2000 09:39
AM ---------------------------

	Cheryl Slone
	01/25/2000 03:07 PM

To: Copier Repair/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, emoses@mdanderson.org,
hapkido@freewwweb.com, coreys@ci.los-lunas.nm.us, dorothyb@ev1.net, Stephanie
Cole/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Shoemake/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jenny Phillips/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: FW: Hope you like this poem...

> Does Heaven have a phone number?
> Mommy went to Heaven, but I need her here today, My tummy hurts and I fell
> down, I need her right away, Operator can you tell me how to find her in
> this book?
>
> Is heaven in the yellow part, I don't know where to look.
> I think my daddy needs her too, at night I hear him cry.
> I hear him call her name sometimes, but I really don't know why.
> Maybe if I call her, she will hurry home to me.
> Is Heaven very far away, is it across the sea?
> She's been gone a long, long time she needs to come home now!
> I really need to reach her, but I simply don't know how.
>
> Help me find the number please, is it listed under "Heaven"?
> I can't read these big big words, I am only seven.  I'm sorry operator, I
> didn't mean to make you cry, Is your tummy hurting too, or is there
> something in your eye?
>
> If I call my church maybe they will know.
> Mommy said when we need help that's where we should go.
> I found the number to my church tacked up on the wall.
> Thank you operator, I'll give them a call.
>
> forward this to at least 7 people if you love your mom.

 - WINMAIL.DAT


Thanks for the update.  Andy Zipper is working on a structure that will allow
the brokers to access our site as you've pointed out.  I'll have Andy contact
you and John on this topic.

Jeff

Chris Glaas
11/16/2000 12:25 PM
To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: EOL and the brokers

My views are as follows:
We have lost business on what I am doing (dated brent vs frontline IPE) to
ICE. For the future we need something more to combat ICE and other systems.
Getting the brokers on our side could be the answer. The benefits I can see
are:
a. We will reach a wider crowd using the brokers. Today there are companies
who will not turn on our system despite personal visits and other marketing.
They seem to prefer speaking to brokers.
b. We could gain neutrality if the broker could transact on EOL on behalf of
the customer. The biggest problem when I speak to customers seems to be that
by dealing with Enron on EOL the customer is afraid of giving us to much of
information of what they are doing.
c. The brokers are scared for the future. They think they are about to die
out due to electronic trading. Enron should be able to strike a good deal
with the broker. Maybe even get paid ?
d. Enron would gain a free marketing force thru the brokers.

regards
chris glaas

To: Chris Glaas/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron

Subject: Re: EOL and the brokers

Get with Nowlan and talk to Andy Zipper on this.  There are a number of
options for us with brokers, and Andy has been involved in this aspect of our
business for some time.   I'd like to hear your views.  Thanks.

Jeff

Chris Glaas
11/14/2000 01:06 PM
To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT, John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris
Mahoney/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: EOL and the brokers

I have been contacted by ICAP and Man regarding different co-ops between EOL
and the services provided by these brokers. Icap wants Enron to be the market
maker for the ICAP electronic system (swap-net) , MAN wants to represent EOL
to the market and act as a principal between Enron and Man customers.

There are benefits and draw-backs using the brokers. I have my views on the
matter.

Jeff, what is our policy for EOL regarding working with the brokers?

regards
chris glaas


Subject: Energy Market Report - 01/23/02

Energy Market Report
Wednesday, January 23, 2002

*See attached pdf file.
__________________________________________________________
Western Pre-Scheduled Firm Electricity Prices($/MWh)
January 23, 2002 for January 24, 2002

Peak(Heavy)
                   Low      Change     High     Change
NW/N. Rockies     18.50      0.00     19.00      0.00
Mid-Columbia      18.50      0.00     19.00      0.00
COB               21.25      0.25     21.50     -0.25
N. California     22.50      0.00     24.50      0.50
Midway/Sylmar        NA        NA        NA        NA
S. California     22.55      1.30     24.40      0.40
Mead              21.00     -0.50     23.00     -1.75
Palo Verde        19.00     -2.25     23.00     -0.50
Inland SW         19.00     -2.25     23.75     -1.00
4-Corners         21.25      0.75     23.00      1.00
Central Rockies   19.50     -1.00     21.00     -0.25
__________________________________________________________
Off-Peak(Light)
                   Low      Change     High     Change
NW/N. Rockies     16.25      0.25     16.75      0.25
Mid-Columbia      16.25      0.25     16.75      0.25
COB               16.50      0.50     17.00     -1.00
N. California     16.50     -0.50     18.00      0.50
Midway/Sylmar        NA        NA        NA        NA
S. California     16.50      0.50     18.85      0.85
Mead              15.50      1.00     19.00      3.00
Palo Verde        14.00      0.25     16.25      0.75
Inland SW         14.00      0.25     19.00      3.00
4-Corners         14.75      0.75     15.50      0.50
Central Rockies   14.00      1.00     16.00      1.00
_________________________________________________________
Duncan Demands Immunity

Day-ahead peak power prices in the Western U.S. were mostly steady for
Thursday delivery amid weather forecasts calling for a slight increase in
temperatures and an abundance of Northwest hydropower.  However,
temperatures were expected to drop again beginning on Friday, which offered
sellers a glimmer of hope for a stronger end to the month.  Additionally,
the latest six-to-ten from the National Weather Service showed the Western
U.S. blanketed in below-normal temperatures from January 29 through February
2.  NYMEX Henry Hub gas futures were mixed in moderate trade Wednesday, with
the fronts pushed down to new lows by mostly mild U.S. weather forecasts,
and again later in the session by a bearish AGA weekly inventory report.
February Hub gas fell 3 cents to close at 2.076$/mmBtu after reaching a new
contract low of 2.04$/mmBtu shortly after the AGA report was released.
March also hit a new low of 2.06$/mmBtu, but settled 2.9 cents lower than a
day ago at 2.089$/mmBtu.  The AGA inventory report indicated that 124 bcf
were taken out of storage last week, below industry estimates and the
five-year average drop of 182 bcf.  Total U.S. inventories stood at 2.405
tcf, 1.036 tcf, or 76% above last year.  Of the 124 bcf withdrawn, 21 were
taken out of the Western Consuming Region.  Total Western inventories stood
at 379 bcf, or 75 percent full.  Inventories for the same week a year ago
were 241 bcf, and have averaged 280 bcf over the past five years.  Now for
your daily dose of Enron.  David Duncan, the fired Andersen partner who was
the lead auditor for Enron Corp, challenged Congress by stating via his
attorney that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to
testify at a hearing scheduled for Thursday unless he was granted immunity.
Committee chairman Rep. Billy Tauzin said that no immunity would be granted
Duncan without consent of the Justice Department.  "I will not provide
immunity to anyone without consent of the Justice Department who is doing a
criminal investigation.  I have not received such a green light to this
date, as to whether or not they change their mind I can't say," said Tauzin
on CNN.

Heavy load energy costs in the Northwest were unchanged Wednesday as
abundant hydro supplies satiated regional heating demand.  "It's still cold,
but we've got plenty of hydro to cushion us," said one Northwest utility
trader.  Flow forecasts for Chief Joseph were revised higher Wednesday,
coming in at 110 kcfs Thursday, 100 kcfs Friday, 75 kcfs Saturday, 65 kcfs
Sunday, 105 kcfs Monday, and 100 kcfs next Tuesday and Wednesday.  There was
no major unit news to report, but Colstrip #3 (700 MW) remained down for
generator repairs.  According to Weather Derivatives, heating demand in the
region was forecast to average 136% of normal through January 30, with the
greatest demand expected early next week.

Amid a healthy grid and concerns that weather could be slightly warmer than
expected later in the week, electricity prices were mostly steady in the
Golden State on Wednesday.  "We're chasing gas and watching the extended
forecast pretty closely, but otherwise it is a boring day," said one Western
marketer. The heavy load product at SP15 changed hands between 22.55 and
24.4$/MWh, with the bulk of deals done around 23.25$/MWh, while light load
pieces were bought and sold from 16.5 to 18.85$/MWh.  In political news, the
CPUC approved two measures necessary for SCE's return to solvency.  SCE will
be allowed to raise $1.5 billion in bridge financing, which when combined
with $4 billion cash on hand, will permit the bankrupt utility to pay off
its creditors by the end of the first quarter.  Secondly, SCE will raise
consumer rates to cover the bridge financing.  "SCE needs to pay off their
qualifying facilities, but it will be interesting to see whether they are
actually willing and able to pay the CalPX for power purchased on the
exchange, and for power purchased on their behalf by CAISO last winter.  I'm
a little skeptical, but I hope they do," commented one market analyst.  In
unit news, gas-fired Scattergood #3 (445 MW) was off the grid on Wednesday
for planned maintenance.  Highs for Thursday were predicted in the mid-60s
in Los Angeles, and low-50s at mid-state load centers.  Temperatures were
expected to remain below normal in California through Sunday.  The most
current six-to-ten called for below-normal temperatures from January 29 to
February 2.

On forecasts calling for slight warming, peak power prices in the Southwest
traded slightly lower for Thursday delivery.  "Our overnight lows are
supposed to climb back into the 40s beginning tonight, and that's much more
tolerable than the 30s," said one Phoenix-based trader.  Heavy load energy
at Palo Verde traded anywhere from 19 to 23$/MWh, though most deals went
through around the 22$/MWh mark.  There was no significant unit news to
report on Wednesday, but there was some talk of an upcoming maintenance
outage.  Sources indicated that Navajo #2 (750 MW) was coming down for
planned maintenance on February 2, and returning on February 25.

Patrick O'Neill and Jessie Norris
_________________________________________________________

Western Generating Unit Outages

Current                            Begins          Ends          Reason
CAISO units <250/7054 total          NA             NA
planned/unplanned*
Alamitos #3/320/gas               21-Jan-02         ?            planned
Alamitos #6/480/gas               20-Jan-02         ?            planned
Colstrip #3/700/coal              11-Jan-02         ?            repairs
Encina #4/303/gas                 12-Jan-02         ?            unplanned
Etiwanda #4/320/gas               21-Jan-02         ?            planned
Four Corners #5                   09-Jan-02     14-Mar-02        maintenance
Grand Coulee #19/600/hydro        10-Dec-01       March          repairs
Haynes #6/341/gas                 07-Jan-02         ?            planned
Helms PGP #2/407/hydro            01-Oct-01         ?            planned
Hyatt/Thermalito/933/hydro        02-Oct-01         ?      @506 MW,
unplanned
Morro Bay #4/336/gas              21-Jan-02         ?            planned
Moss Landing #7/739/gas           29-Dec-01         ?            planned
Ormond Beach #1/725/gas           28-Dec-01         ?            planned
Ormond Beach #2/750/gas           05-Oct-01         ?      @350 MW,
unplanned
Pittsburg #6/317/gas              22-Nov-01         ?            planned
Pittsburg #7/682/gas              21-Jan-02         ?            unplanned
Scattergood #3/445/gas            22-Jan-02         ?
maintenance*

Future
Navajo #2/750/coal                02-Feb-02     25-Feb-02
maintenance*

For unit owners refer to pdf version.
*Indicates a change from previous EMR.
______________________________________________________________________

Eastern Markets Pre-Scheduled Firm Power Prices ($/MWh)

January 23, 2002 for January 24, 2002

Peak (Heavy) in $/MWh
                 Low     Change   High      Change
Into Cinergy    15.50    -1.25    17.90     -0.60
Western PJM     21.50    -0.50    21.90     -1.05
Into Entergy    17.10    -0.60    18.00     -0.20
Into TVA        16.00     0.00    17.50     -1.75
ERCOT           17.10     0.10    17.90      0.30
___________________________________________________________
Hope of an upswing in the spot electricity market was firmly squashed
Wednesday as a bearish AGA report, incredibly warm January temperatures, and
soft gas values plagued the market, sending day-ahead power prices mostly
lower across the Eastern Interconnect.  Temperatures were expected anywhere
from 11 to 20 degrees above normal in the East on Thursday.  The AGA weekly
inventory report listed a total draw of 124 bcf, a number well below
industry estimates of around 145 bcf.  NYMEX Henry Hub natural gas futures,
already low, sunk further on the disappointing news coupled with the warm
weather pattern.  February shed 3 cents to close at 2.076$/mmBtu, while the
March contract fell 2.9 cents to end at 2.089$/mmBtu.  Both months reached
new contract lows during the day, before rebounding somewhat prior to the
close.

Heavy load energy costs slipped lower in the Mid-Atlantic on Wednesday.
"The dailies were pretty lame today, with the extremely mild temperatures
and the soft real-time prices.  Prices were a little erratic early, on a
possible unit outage, but demand is too weak for even a large curtailment to
matter," summed up one PJM trader.  Market players remained uncertain as to
which unit shut Wednesday.  Western PJM goods for Thursday delivery traded
between 21.5 and 21.9$/MWh, while the February contract lost about 15 cents,
trading mostly around 23.5$/MWh.  LMPs remained low on Wednesday, after
showing a little strength around 10:00 EST, and averaging 20.68$/MWh through
15:00 EST.  Daytime highs were expected to hit 62 degrees in D.C. on
Thursday, while other PJM load centers also expected warm temperatures, with
highs in the mid-50s.  The most current six-to-ten projected no relief in
sight, as above-normal temperatures were forecast from January 29 to
February 2.

Amid mild weather conditions and little else, peak electricity prices shed
value in the Midwest on Wednesday.  Into Cinergy goods opened at the day's
highest levels, and fell off steadily through the session, trading between
15.5 and 17.9$/MWh.  According to traders, February was actively traded,
bouncing between 19.4 and 19.55$/MWh.  Temperatures were expected to reach
highs in the low-50s on Thursday across ECAR.  The latest six-to-ten called
for above-normal temperatures from January 29 to February 2.

Day-ahead power prices tanked in the Southeast on Wednesday, weighed down by
bearish fundamentals.  Into Entergy deals were done between 17.1 and
18$/MWh, with the bulk of transactions heard near 17.75$/MWh.  February saw
action from 18.3 to 18.4$/MWh.  High temperatures across SERC were expected
in the spring-like upper-60s to low-70s on Thursday.  Texas power prices
bucked the trend on Wednesday, rising on cooler weather for Thursday.  The
most current six-to-ten called for above-normal temperatures in the
Southeast from January 29 to February 2.
___________________________________________________________

California ISO Congestion Index in $/MWh

                         Path                 Peak   Off-peak
for 24-Jan-02         NW1 to NP15             0.00     0.00
                      NW3 to SP15             0.00     0.00
                      AZ3 to SP15             0.00     0.00
                      LC1 to SP15             0.00     0.00
                      SP15 to NP15            0.00     0.00

OTC Forward Peak Electricity Contracts in $/MWh

                    Mid-C              PV              SP-15
                Bid      Ask      Bid      Ask      Bid      Ask
BOM             NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
February        NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
March           NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
April           NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
Q2 '02          NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
Q3 '02          NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
Q4 '02          NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
Q1 '03          NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA
Cal '03         NA       NA       NA       NA       NA       NA

Represents the most recent bid/ask spread obtainable
by the Energy Market Report.

Alberta Power Pool Index (C$/MWh)

                    Peak(14)   Peak(16)   Off-Peak    Flat     Change
for  22-Jan-02       39.46      39.24      19.60      33.29      6.90

BPA's Offer for 01/25/02 and 01/26/02.

Hours        Amount          NW delivered        COB/NOB delivered
7-22         200MW           Market Price*          Market Price*

*Market price will be determined at time of request.

NYMEX Henry Hub Gas Futures in $/mmBtu

                 Close        Change
        Feb      2.076        -0.030
        Mar      2.089        -0.029

Natural Gas Spot Prices in $/mmBtu

                  Low          High
Sumas             2.01         2.06
So. Cal Border    2.12         2.17
San Juan          1.96         2.01
__________________________________________________________

Economic Insight, Inc. - 3004 SW First, Portland, Oregon 97201,
Telephone (503) 222-2425, Internet e-mail emr@econ.com -
Copyright, Economic Insight, Inc. 2002.


Kay -- Just some housekeeping questions:

Do you want hand-written or e-mail comments going forward?

Do you want more comments from Origination and Services now, or do you want us to wait until you turn the doc?  As I said yesterday, I am in the process of sorting out the "Costs" definition so that it works better with the other parts of the doc.

MDEA is willing to extend the ILA two weeks if we want to.  Their next Board meeting (after tonight's Board meeting) is June 12 , and they desperately need to have our contract finished in time to get signing approval at that meeting.  We probably need something to bridge us from the end of May until their Board votes on the full agreement.  The other option is to get done this week and have them call a special Board meeting.  They have done this in the past, but we have not asked them if it's logistically possible to do this by May 31.

Thanks -- David


I'm gonna GETCHA


It looks great, Nadine. I entered a couple different deals and played around
with them a bit, and I don't see any changes. So from my end you can go ahead
and move this version to production.

Thanks for all the hard work.

Kate

From: Nadine Costanzo@ENRON on 01/12/2001 02:46 PM CST
To: Kim S Theriot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Corry Bentley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey W
White/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Duong Luu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kroum Kroumov/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Laura
Aldis/NA/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Deal Entry:  New Version

Hi Everyone,

There is a new version of Deal Entry (Ver. 2.6.6.58)  in stage that needs to
be User Acceptance Tested.

The changes were actually for Australia (wrong date/time showing, problem
with EOL) and London (fix to default settings).
These changes should actually be invisible to Houston so you should see no
difference between the way it was working before and now.

Please test the application (as you would normally use it) and let me know
(by way of email or phone call) if Deal Entry is working well, and can be
migrated to Production.  We are hoping to release it to Prod by this evening,
(January 12, 2001).

Thanks,
Nadine Costanzo (713)853-9863.
.


Is there an Icon I can send to Marcus to get into the ENA Legal Online
Database.
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 03/20/2001 03:04 PM -----

	ARSystem <ARSystem@mailman.enron.com>
	03/20/2001 02:28 PM

		 To: "tana.jones@enron.com" <tana.jones@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Request Closed: Access Request for marcus.nettelton@enron.com

The request has been completed with all resources requested either completed
or rejected. You can view the details of the  request by clicking
http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000024480&Page=
MyReq.


-----Original Message-----
From: 	"Saldivar, Jesse JG SHLOIL" <JSaldivar@shell.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Saldivar+2C+20Jesse+20JG+20SHLOIL+22+20+3CJSaldivar+40shell+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Tuesday, May 29, 2001 2:47 PM
To:	Weldon, V. Charles
Subject:	Jesse

Hey this is my new info

713-241-0566
email:  jsaldivar@shell.com

Take Care,
Jesse


Conal Tackney
Enron Canada Corp.
Ph.   (403) 974-6711
Fax  (403) 974-6706
Cell  (403) 803-3194

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shirley.VanDenBosch@alliance-pipeline.com@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, June 07, 2001 6:16 PM
To:	AllianceShippers@alliance-pipeline.com
Subject:	AOS for weekend (9,10,11) = 10%

The Windfall outage is now over, as of 1800 CCT all receipt stations were
asked to commence flowing.  Alliance would like to thank all parties for
their patience during the outage.

AOS will be 10%.  Shippers may begin packing their accounts to alleviate any
draft positions incurred during the outage.

In the office on Friday:
7AM  Terri
8AM  Cathie, Andy, Sherral, Nasser
1PM  Shirley

For the weekend:
Saturday AM, Sunday PM - Terri
Saturday PM, Sunday AM - Shirley


Louise,

The attached, with some minor revisions to be discussed by ENA's business team today, is the return draft that we intend to send to AIG and their counsel before the end of the day.  As discussed in Friday's meeting, I have arranged a lawyers only conference call for this afternoon (2:00p.m.) to apprise AIG counsel (Jay Grushkin at Milbank Tweed) of the NASD Rule that likely prevents ENA from collecting its brokerage fee in the manner contemplated by the LOI.  I'll apprise you of those discussions later today.

Steve

Steve Van Hooser
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith
EB3877
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-7238
----- Forwarded by Steve Van Hooser/HOU/ECT on 04/23/2001 08:42 AM -----

	"Jay Sonnenberg" <jsonnenberg@bracepatt.com> 04/22/2001 01:56 PM 	   To: <Heather.Kroll@enron.com>, <ozzie.pagan@enron.com>, <steve.van.hooser@enron.com>  cc: "Clark Thompson" <cthompson@bracepatt.com>  Subject: SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT (AIG).doc

I have attached a black-lined version of the above agreement, marked to show changes against the version that Milbank prepared.  We look forward to discussing this with you on Monday.

Best regards,

Jay

Jay Sonnenberg
Bracewell & Patterson, L.L.P.
711 Louisiana St., Suite 2900
Houston, TX  77002-2781
(713) 221-1417 (Ph)
(713) 221-2158 (Fax)

 - #1269388 vRED - SECURITIES PURCHASE AGREEMENT (AIG).doc


Did we get sign off from Jim Petrie?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Forster, David
Sent:	Tuesday, January 22, 2002 1:33 PM
To:	Kitchen, Louise
Subject:	FW: Final PA and ETA

Louise,

I was doing a last pass through these documents, when I noticed that the last sentence of the 2nd to last paragraph contains something similar to what you had removed from the ETA: "UBS may give Counterparty's name to potential product providers as a prospective counterparty". This wording was changed in the PA in Sept. so was not redlined in the changes you and I reviewed earlier.

I'm OK with this staying in. Please let me know if you want it removed.

Dave

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Carter, Carl
Sent:	Tuesday, January 22, 2002 11:40 AM
To:	Taylor, Mark E (Legal); Forster, David; Shults, Bob
Cc:	Shah, Kal; Bess, Erica; Mandola, Teresa; Lees, Lisa
Subject:	Final PA and ETA

Please review the attached PA and ETA. These are the final versions of the documents that we plan on using. The PA might go out to the top 50 customer as early as this afternoon. We are preparing the UBSWenergy 'splash page' and will upload this version of the ETA unless otherwise advised.
The entity is officially named UBS AG, London branch (collectively "UBS") and the Website is UBSWenergy.com. If you are not in agreement with this, please advise ASAP.
I encourage everyone to read both of these documents very carefully. I have looked them over several times and everything looks to be in order but your 'fresh' review is appreciated.
Thanks.
Carl
 << File: UBS AG - PA.doc >>  << File: UBS AG - ETA.doc >>

Carl M. Carter
EnronOnline LLC
713-345-3854 (Tel)
713-504-0963 (Cell)
713-646-2126 (Fax)
carl.carter@enron.com


Sara is prepared to speak with you both at 11:00 a.m. Monday morning (Tokyo
time)/9 p.m. Sunday evening (Houston time). Please call her at home. Her home
number is 713-664-3207. Sara has also touched base with John Suttle of Credit
after reading the e-mail thread (and comments) forwarded by you yesterday.

Sara: John's office number is 011-813-5219-4578; Jane's is 011-813-5219-4553.

Regards.


sara -- you would LOVE this.  ryan told me that he in fact has NOT approved
the language in the avici deal.  he has kicked the issue up to rick causey.
if rick wants to change it, we will do it.  but who knows what he will do?!
apparently EBS is adament that it must be done today.

ben has also signed the confirm.  i have it with me.  will get you the
original when i have LJM's signature as well.


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 11/06/2000
04:55 PM ---------------------------

Benjamin Parsons
10/17/2000 12:22 PM
To: Vasant Shanbhogue/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amitava Dhar/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vince J
Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven Leppard/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: EnronCredit pricing models

Attached below is an overview of the proposed pricing system we intend
building by Dec 1.
---------------------- Forwarded by Benjamin Parsons/LON/ECT on 17/10/2000
18:25 ---------------------------

Mike Mumford
17/10/2000 08:17
To: Benjamin Parsons/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: External Write-Up File


I'm in Stan's office
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


Bill Williams asked me to forward the attached execution form of the LM-6000
purchase contract.

The second attachment is to be inserted as Exhibit H-2 in the contract.  I
understand that we received it from GE, and that it is available only in pdf
format.

Thanks.


Eric Shaw's team has learned that an investigation has been initiated by the
Turkish military to expose and eliminate corruption in the Turkish energy
sector.

On January 6, the military took seven energy sector bureaucrats into custody.
In the following days, other officials from TEA? (the electricity generation
monopoly) and the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources (MENR) and
executives from a number of Turkish companies were also taken into custody.

While many of the bureaucrats and executives have been released, a leaked
report from the military investigators suggests that the operation is wide
ranging and may ultimately target the Minister of Energy and Natural
Resources and other senior energy sector bureaucrats and businessmen.

Enron Implications

Trakya - One Turkish newspaper has reported that Enron,s  478 MW Trakya power
project was being investigated.  This has not been reported anywhere else.
Because the power price at Trakya has been the target of criticism in the
past, we are not surprised by this report. Although an investigation is
always a possibility, other than the one newspaper report, there has been no
indication, official or otherwise, that an investigation is planned or
underway.

GAMA - It has also been reported that the wife of Gorkhan Yardim, the General
Manager of BOTA? (the natural gas monopoly), works at GAMA, our Turkish
partner in the Trakya project, and that his expensive car was a gift from
GAMA. GAMA has told us, and Yardim has defended himself publicly by saying,
that his wife has been working at GAMA since 1993, long before Yardim had
risen to his current position of power at BOTA?, and that the car was not a
gift from GAMA. It is worth noting, however, that there have been a number of
newspaper reports questioning GAMA,s role in a controversial gas marketing
deal being undertaken by their TurRusGas joint venture with Gazprom and BOTA?.

Outlook

It is still not clear how or when this investigation will end. In the medium
and long term, this will be good news for Enron and other reputable Turkish
or foreign companies which have found it difficult to do transparent energy
deals in Turkey in the past. In the short term, however, it is likely to
result in a marked decrease in meaningful activity in the Turkish energy
sector, as worried bureaucrats, innocent and guilty, lay low.

We will continue to monitor developments, especially with regard to the
Trakya project, and report as necessary.


---------------------- Forwarded by Amy Fabian/Corp/Enron on 08/14/2000 02:32
PM ---------------------------

RAISLERK@sullcrom.com on 08/11/2000 12:09:12 PM
To: clong@enron.com
cc:

Subject: Memo

----------------------------------

This e-mail is sent by a law firm and contains information
that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and notify us
immediately.

 - Update on Last Week.doc


Tom Burns
knowledgeman1300@hotmail.com

To Mr. Ken Lay,

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Tom Burns


As I mentioned, I think the "new and improved" versions are better starting
points, but here's what we used.

I don't recall whether the concept of a development fee has been vetted with
the accountants, as it wasn't applicable to the Intergen deal.

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 03/01/2001 01:10
PM ---------------------------

"Campbell, Carolyn" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com> on 01/02/2001 09:07:05 AM
To: "'Kay.Mann@enron.com'" <Kay.Mann@enron.com>
cc: "Keffer, John" <JKeffer@KSLAW.com>

Subject: RE: CA Energy Development LLC documents

 <<2R6L18!.DOC>>  <<2RM309!.DOC>>  <<2RLS10!.DOC>>  <<2R6K13!.DOC>>
<<2RSW04!.DOC>>

Kay:

Electronic copies of execution drafts of the following documents are
attached:

 1.  Letter Agreement for CA Energy Development I LLC;
 2.  Letter Agreement for CA Energy Development II LLC for the
turbine;
 3.  Letter Agreement for CA Energy Development II LLC for the
transformer;
 4.  First Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement
for CA Energy Development I LLC; and
 5.  First Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement
for CA Energy Development II LLC.

The originals of these documents were forwarded by courier to your office on
Friday.  I will deliver the original Guaranty Agreements to you today.  Let
me know if you need anything else.  Thank you.

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

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Kay.Mann@enron.com [mailto:Kay.Mann@enron.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 8:40 AM
  To: Campbell, Carolyn
  Subject: CA documents

  Hi Carolyn,

  Please email me the execution version of the documents
signed last week, as
  well as the current version of the other documents.  Were
the originals put
  in the mail?  My assistant isn't here, so I can't tell what
I have yet.

  Thanks,

  Kay

                    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.

 - 2R6L18!.DOC
 - 2RM309!.DOC
 - 2RLS10!.DOC
 - 2R6K13!.DOC
 - 2RSW04!.DOC


FYI - other market participant comments.

---------------------- Forwarded by Jean Ryall/NA/Enron on 02/14/2001 06:15
PM ---------------------------

"Knox, Jeffrey" <jknox@sel.com> on 02/14/2001 05:20:50 PM
To: "'vpriestley@newenergy.com'" <vpriestley@newenergy.com>,
sbertin@newpower.com, rkittel@enron.com, lorraine.bucci@exeloncorp.com,
pkeene@enron.com, mcarroll@texas.net, kmagrude@newpower.com,
gillan.taddune@greenmountain.com, "Weller, Andrea" <AWeller@sel.com>,
jean.ryall@enron.com, "Knox, Jeffrey" <jknox@sel.com>,
stevedavisconsulting@austin.rr.com
cc: Ron.McNamara@enron.com

Subject: RE: Enron's View on the ERCOT Structure

Vanus,

I sent an email to Marianne that I thought I'd Cc'd to everyone (evidently
not).  I am (that is "we" are, at the mighty Strategic Energy) in agreement
with Enron as well.  The ability to "cover" in the hour-ahead or "spot"
market is not only desirable, but an important option when managing a
portfolio like most of us will.  A good spot market helps to set the numbers
for the rest of the short term trading (dailies, bal. week, bal. mo), and
lets each participant decide on, and be accountable for, their own plan of
action.  And frankly, the more flexibility we can have as far as covering
load or even wholesale transactions the better.  I'd like to be able to
decide if I want to go long, short or flat next hour rather than HOPE for a
good Balancing Market clearing price.
Options good, take what you get..bad.
Sorry Marianne you had to hear it twice.

Go ARM!
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: vpriestley@newenergy.com [mailto:vpriestley@newenergy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 5:08 PM
To: sbertin@newpower.com; rkittel@enron.com;
lorraine.bucci@exeloncorp.com; pkeene@enron.com; mcarroll@texas.net;
kmagrude@newpower.com; gillan.taddune@greenmountain.com;
aweller@sel.com; jean.ryall@enron.com; jknox@sel.com;
stevedavisconsulting@austin.rr.com
Cc: Ron.McNamara@enron.com
Subject: Enron's View on the ERCOT Structure
Importance: High

I've thought it over some and I have to agree with Enron and their view on
the Spot market.  Their may be a devil in the details, but having a liquid
transparent spot market can only help us in a number of different ways:

1.   It will give us leverage (or at least information) when negotiating
bilateral    contracts,
2.   It will reduce the prices for ancillary services and load following
3.   It will allow us to use scheduling more effectively to control our
costs,    and
3.   It will give us another option in purchasing generation.

Enron's fear is that the imbalance and ancillary service market will be
shallow and illiquid.  I believe that fear is reasonable.  A healthy
robust spot market can mitigate any damage that a short ancillaries market
can do.  It will also provide information and induce transparency which
does not exist in a market that is solely bilateral.

Conceptually, NewEnergy supports Enron in trying to develop a spot market.
 I would like to hear whether we all can support Enron in this endeavor.

VP


I think these guys are trying to create a $35M line ($15M Collateral
Threshold from the ISDA Credit Support Annex and a separate $20M line for the
Global agency trading).  All trading with Cargill will be subject to the ISDA
Master Agreement and Credit Support Annex.

Wendi and I discussed briefly and we'll call you later.  It seems that Wendi
has spoken with Mark Rubenstein who handles credit and there is some
confusion.

Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
sara.shackleton@enron.com

	Caroline Abramo@ENRON
	03/02/2001 10:46 AM

		 To: Wendi LeBrocq/Corp/Enron, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: RE: POA/ Cargill line...

what do you think?
---------------------- Forwarded by Caroline Abramo/Corp/Enron on 03/02/2001
11:44 AM ---------------------------

Joe_Lardy@cargill.com on 03/02/2001 10:39:03 AM
To: Caroline.Abramo@enron.com
cc: dlm@globaladvisors.co.uk, Sara.Shackleton@enron.com,
Wendi.LeBrocq@enron.com

Subject: RE: POA/ Cargill line...

Currently Cargill and Enron have a 15MM collateral threshold.  If
possible, I think the cleanest way to run this biz would be to put a
box around the prime broker biz.  We would still operate under the
master isda but could set up a mutually agreeable credit support annex
for this biz.  We would still keep the 20,000,000 line referenced in
Schedule B of the POA agreement.  The line in the POA is a seperate and
distinct measure from the daily collateral.  The 20 mill reflects gross
exposure.  Let me know if you think this is reasonable and workable.
We too, are open to suggestion as the Global and Enron relationships
are very important and a high priority to us.

Thanks
Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: Caroline.Abramo@enron.com [mailto:Caroline.Abramo@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 7:26 AM
To: lardy, joe /xtwn
Cc: dlm@globaladvisors.co.uk; Wendi.LeBrocq@enron.com;
Sara.Shackleton@enron.com
Subject: POA/ Cargill line...

Joe-  a few things regading the POA/ Cargill line..

I am going to find out how much line we currently have available... you
probably already have this.  We should allocate a piece to Global which
would solve the problem of other Cargill people using the line, putting
us
over the limit, without me knowing...

We could change the language of the POA to this... we will not go over
Global's piece of the Cargill line...I think this would solve our main
concern...

Please let me know... we are eager to keep trading with Global and
yourselves...

Regards,
Caroline


whatever, are you saying that my evite skills aren't up to par?
i am planning on going sunday. what time?  i think michael is coming with me.

everything else is good, i got my year-end review and compensation stuff.

how about you and the fam?

Danielle Samson <DanielleS@JonesGranger.com> on 02/02/2000 05:30:33 AM
To: Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: RE:

I was sick on Sunday, so that wasn't very fun.  I saw the last few minutes
of the game, or the whole game for that matter.  I couldn't reply to your
evite because it was sent wrong......... sorry.  So, are you still planning
on making an appearance on Sunday?  Don't worry, I won't know half of the
people either!:-)  how's everything else?


Put this meeting on my schedule.  Mark
----- Forwarded by Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT on 03/19/2001 03:27 PM -----

	John Schwartzenburg@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	03/19/2001 12:42 PM

		 To: Mark E Haedicke@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Vicki Sharp@EES
		 cc: Rob Walls/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
		 Subject: Details on All Employee Meeting

FYI, more background.

JWVS
----- Forwarded by John Schwartzenburg/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 03/19/2001 12:42
PM -----

	Keith Dodson & Ken Bean
	Sent by: Marilyn Oliver
	03/19/2001 11:49 AM

		 To: EECC Announcements -- Houston Notes Users, Dag Adolfsson/HOU/EES@EES,
Jonathan Ago/HOU/EES@EES, Nikki Bass-Cavanaugh/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Bickings/HOU/EES@EES, Thomas Callaghan/HOU/EES@EES, John Cates/HOU/EES@EES,
Scot Chambers/HOU/EES@EES, Gus Eghneim/Corp/Enron@Enron, Ashley
Faz/HOU/EES@EES, Howard Harvey/HOU/EES@EES, Dianna M James/HOU/EES@EES, Dirk
Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, John Krupski/HOU/EES@EES, David Kwok/HOU/EES@EES,
Stephan Laroche/HOU/EES@EES, Charon Little/HOU/EES@EES, John
Manning/HOU/EES@EES, Karl Masani/HOU/EES@EES, Kelly Merritt/HOU/EES@EES,
Sheila Miller/HOU/EES@EES, Dave Miller/HOU/EES@EES, Ross Newlin/HOU/EES@EES,
Mike Oehrle/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Penkwitz/HOU/EES@EES, Chaundra
Perry/HOU/EES@EES, Cecilia Ramirez/HOU/EES@EES, Rocsie Sanchez/HOU/EES@EES,
William Simpson/HOU/EES@EES, Rachael Venable/HOU/EES@EES, Cheryl
White/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Whyte/EU/Enron@Enron, scott.watson@enron.com,
Yaser Tobeh/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mike
Stefanik/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
		 cc: Kenneth L Bean/HOU/EES@EES
		 Subject: Details on All Employee Meeting

On Thursday afternoon, March 22, at 2:30PM in the Doubletree La Salle
Ballroom, we will have an All Employee Meeting to discuss Enron Engineering
and Operations Services (EEOS).  Mark Frevert and Dan Leff will join Brian
Stanley, John Gillis, and the two of us for this discussion.  Led by Mark and
Dan, we have been on a corporate journey to determine the best method to
provide a resource base for the building , operating, and maintaining of our
existing and planned major assets. The discussions evolved around two major
issues. First,  most of the engineering and project management resources were
concentrated in the former EE &CC, but operational resources were spread
among several groups.  OEC provided operational support to some, but not all
Enron assets.  Second, the clear need for both the engineering and
operational resources was in Wholesale not Retail (EES).  There will be some
need to help EES bridge into Industrial clients, but this need is minor
compared to the requirements of Wholesale.  As a benefit of the time Mark and
Dan plus other Executive Committee Members put into the decision  to form
EEOS, we believe we are correctly positioned to effectively address Enron's
major project needs.  Our Thursday meeting is an open forum to discuss these
and other issues you might have with our new or perhaps more clearly defined
position.

We look forward to seeing you on Thursday.

Keith Dodson
Chief Operating Officer - EEOS

Ken Bean
Vice President - Operational Energy Corp.


Kate what is the status of this deal because I just called Bloomberg again
and they do not recognize this deal.

Thanks!!

---------------------- Forwarded by Evelyn Metoyer/Corp/Enron on 04/09/2001
09:00 AM ---------------------------

Evelyn Metoyer
04/06/2001 04:23 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: 4/6 Checkout

BLOOMBERG

deal 573083
Mark Fischer
Is this a good deal with Bloomberg because they haven't sent a confirmation
yet.

PREBON
All are o.k.

AMEREX WEST
All are o.k.


Bob, can you also check the names Kimble, Peluso, Cullen and Bailey?
---------------------- Forwarded by Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT on 05/12/99 07:35 AM
---------------------------
From: Mike D Smith@EES on 05/11/99 05:51 PM EDT
To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Washington County, OH purchases

Wait--how about CMB Investments, Stanley Kimble, Verende Peluso, Michael
Cullen or Donney Bailey?

Dan J Hyvl @ ECT
05/11/99 05:44 PM

To: Mike D Smith/DUB/EES@EES
cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Washington County, OH purchases

Mike,
 Jeff has forwarded your request to me.  A search of our data base has failed
to identify the named wells or any contracts with the named individuals.  Can
you provide any other information?
---------------------- Forwarded by Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT on 05/11/99 04:33 PM
---------------------------
From: Jeffrey T Hodge on 05/11/99 04:02 PM
To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mike D Smith/DUB/EES@EES
Subject: Washington County, OH purchases

Dan, could you look into this and coordinate with Mike?
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT on 05/11/99 04:01
PM ---------------------------
From: Mike D Smith@EES on 05/11/99 04:57 PM EDT
To: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Washington County, OH purchases

I understand you may be able to shed some light on this.  I have received a
complaint naming ECT as a defendant, filed by Jeff Brown, dba M&J Energy.
The allegation is that his partner, Mr Buckey is diverting payments for gas
purchased from  wells owned by Brown, Buckey and others.  The wells are
described in the complaint as Rea #1 and #2 and Cullen #1 and $2 in
Washington County, OH (Marietta).  ECT is named b/c ECT is buying the gas
from the well and allegedly paying the wrong person for the gas (I can't see
how that gives rise to any claim, but that's beside the point).

I can't find where EES is buying gas from this well, so that leaves you.  Is
this ECT's gas?  MDS
---------------------- Forwarded by Mike D Smith/DUB/EES on 05/11/99 04:46 PM
---------------------------

	Enron Energy Services

	From:  Mike D Smith                           05/10/99 12:17 PM

To: James T Javins/DUB/EES@EES, Louis P Bonasso/DUB/EES@EES, Christina
Finelli/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Washington County, OH purchases

Do any of you know anything about wellhead purchases in Washington County
from Jeff Brown, M&J Energy, CMB Investments, James Buckey, Samuel Buckey?
Thanks


Attached, in WordPerfect format are the following documents, marked against
the previous draft circulated::

Closing Checklist (258185)
Series Certificate (258191)
Series Supplement (258196)
Drawdown Request (258198)
Total Return Swap Confirmation (258201)
Put Option Agreement (258202)
Put Option Assignment (258215)
Notice of Put Option Assignment (258218)
Second Amended & Restated LLC Agreement of McGarret IV (258239)
Second Amended & Restated LLC Agreement of Big Island IV (258206)
Receipt of Trust (258270)
Independent Auctioneer Letter Agreement (258302)
Am. No. 1 to Sale & Auction Agreement (258307)
Direction Letter to Owner Trustee (260012)

PLEASE NOTE THAT, AT THE REQUEST OF SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE WORKING GROUP, I
AM ALSO SENDING THESE DOCUMENTS MARKED AGAINST MCGARRET C.

Please call or e-mail if you have any questions.

Muriel C. McFarling
Andrews & Kurth L.L.P.
1717 Main Street, Suite 3700
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 659-4461
(214) 659-4784 (fax)

Muriel C. McFarling
Andrews & Kurth L.L.P.
1717 Main Street, Suite 3700
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 659-4461
(214) 659-4784 (fax)

 - 260012.wpd
 - 258191.wpd
 - 258196.wpd
 - 258198.wpd
 - 258201.wpd
 - 258202.wpd
 - 258215.wpd
 - 258218.wpd
 - 258239.wpd
 - 258260.wpd
 - 258270.wpd
 - 258302.wpd
 - 258307.wpd
 - 258185.wpd


With regard to working out a convenient date to meet with  you, Rosalee has
suggested that your week of September 4 is pretty well  booked-up. Would
either September 11 or 13 work? After that I have to join Norm  Blake at the
Olympics in Sydney. While all of this can de done by phone, as  deputy to the
chairmen, I'm making every effort to meet (albeit briefly) with  each
Committee member. If you are willing to host a meeting in Houston, I want  to
make every effort to have Paul Newman in  attendance.


Things are crazy, busy, hopefully I 'll have more time to chat soon.
Thanks for thinking of me.
-andi

------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
Originally From: "Shankman, Jeffrey A." <Jeffrey.A.Shankman@ENRON.com>
Subject:
Date: 10/10/2001 03:31pm

Hi there,

are you working wiith this anthrax thing?

Jeff

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


Kay - I have asked Dale to get with you and Lisa Bills to arrange a meeting
in Houston to have a sit down and get this bugger done.  I propose Thursday
or Friday of next week.  The same would go for ABB.  Let me know what Dale
has arranged, and what you think of the idea.  The basic concept is to get in
a room for 1-2 hours, and get this document done.  I'll let you guys decide
on Peter Thompson or whatever is to be used for outside legal.

Regards

Bill Williams
 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:39 AM
To: Williams, Bill; Rasmussen, Dale
Subject: turbine torture

Hi there,

I need to get with Lee Johnson on another deal, and I know he will ask about
LV CoGen.  Anything I should tell him?

Thanks,

Kay


Tana,

This has made the circle to me.  Did they say what kind of trade there is
between Diashowa and NBC.  My expectation is a currency hedge.

bobc

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Rohauer, Tanya
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 4:21 PM
To: Crane Jr., Bob
Subject: FW: Daishowa

I am guessing we would take assignment of the deal if we purchased the
company who had this contract.  Do you know about it?

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Jones, Tana
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 3:13 PM
To: Bradford, William S.; Brackett, Debbie; Rohauer, Tanya; Reves, Brant;
Ngo, Tracy; Campbell, Lesli; Espinoza, Veronica; Radous, Paul; Lebrocq,
Wendi; Diamond, Russell; Moran, Tom; Sacks, Edward; Mendoza, Nidia; Conwell,
Wendy; Vanek, Darren; Johnson, Rudwell
Subject: Daishowa

I got a call from National Bank of Canada and they said that we purchased the
referenced company and what did we intend to do with the trade between NBC
and Daishowa?  Anyone know anything about this?


As most of you are aware, the FERC mediator yesterday submitted his
recommendation to the agency, culminating a 15-day mediation process. Among
the mediator's recommendations is that FERC convene an evidentiary hearing,
to close within 60 days, to determine the offset or refund liability of
suppliers of energy, including Enron, into the California's spot markets.  I
expect FERC to act on the recommendation early next week and issue an order
directing that a hearing be convened within possibly a week or less.
Accordingly, getting organized is an imperative.

Several of us participated in a conference call yesterday to discuss whether
Enron should retain Seabron Adamson of Frontier Economics to serve as Enron's
expert in the hearing.  The decision was made to retain Seabron for this
purpose.  Seabron has informed me that he can come to Washington to start
preparing discovery and developing a theory for Enron's case.  The discovery
that Enron pursues will obviously need to be coordinated with litigation
counsel representing Enron in the various California civil litigations and
investigations.

The mediator's recommendation largely ignores two of the issues that were set
for mediation (moving CA power supply to the forward markets and restoring
creditworthiness of CA purchasers) and instead deals exclusively with the
third issue:  Did any supplier overcharge for post-October 1, 2000,
short-term (24 hrs or less) sales into the PX and ISO and, if so, should the
supplier refund the overcharge or have it offset against amounts owed the
supplier?

The mediator did not find a specific overcharge amount. Instead, he opined
that, while not the $8.9 billion claimed by the CA delegation, overcharges
"do amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, probably more than a billion
dollars in an aggregate sum."

Per the mediator's recommendation, the evidentiary hearing should address the
details of a methodology for determining how much each supplier overcharged.
The "single" methodology recommended by the mediator is a modified,
retroactive application of the price ceiling that FERC ordered imposed
prospectively on the entire west in a June 19 order.  That methodology
classes as an overcharge any amount charged between October 2, 2000, and May
28, 2001, that exceeded the operating cost of the least efficient gas-fired
turbine dispatched in CA in an hour plus an adder for O&M, a credit premium
and NOx.  The recommended methodology deviates from the prospective price
ceiling in several respects, including that it would be applied in all hours,
without discount, and would reflect actual heat rates and separate actual
hourly natural gas prices for southern CA and northern CA, resulting in two
separate proxy prices.

The mediator recommends that this methodology be applied to all suppliers,
even those that did not supply power wholly from gas-fired turbines.
Nevertheless, in a contradictory passage, the mediator goes on to recognize
that his recommended methodology "may not be appropriate for all sellers,"
but that any sellers advocating a different methodology "should bear the
burden of demonstrating that their costs exceeded the results of the
methodology recommended herein over the entire refund period.."  (emphasis
added).

Assuming that the agency largely follows the recommendation of the mediator,
then it appears Enron, working through Seabron, can pursue one or two basic
theories.  First and most simply, Enron can accede to the mediator's
methodology and work with the large generators (Duke, Reliant, Dynegy,
Mirant) to force up the proxy price (and lower the overcharge amount) that
the mediator's methodology produces.  Alternatively, in addition to trying to
force up the proxy price, Enron can try to develop a theory that the
mediator's methodology either should not apply to power marketers or should
apply differently to them.  This second approach will likely be joined by
other non-thermal generator suppliers, such as PowerEx.  The obvious risk in
pursing this second approach is that Enron might become exposed to discovery
into the cost basis of its book over the entire refund period..

Those of you who will need or want to discuss the issues with Seabron, please
respond by letting me know as between Wednesday, Thursday or Friday of next
week, which works better for you for a meeting in Washington or a
teleconference.


Sara,
Maybe every other week.... or when we have a specific agenda item we want to
cover in between (e.g. debt confirmations).
I would include Laurel who is probably impacted more than anyone.
Sheila
---------------------- Forwarded by Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT on 04/14/2000 12:28
PM ---------------------------

Sara Shackleton
04/14/2000 11:54 AM
To: Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Lotus Notes

I am hoping to have Lotus Notes available to you in about two weeks.  The
initial view will include Master Swap Agreements and I am working on "Other
Agreements" which will include brokerage and repos.  On a slightly different
note, do you think we should schedule a regular [weekly] meeting to review
work in progress, issues, products, etc.?  If so, who should be included?
Thanks.  Sara


The amendment was defeated

	Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	03/14/2001 11:11 AM

		 To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Chip Schneider/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment

----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 11:10 AM -----

	Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com>
	03/14/2001 11:02 AM

		 To: "'Jean Munoz'" <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com>, Katie Kaplan
<kaplan@iepa.com>, "'Andy Brown (E-mail)'" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, "'B Brown
Andy (E-mail)'" <andybrwn@earthlink.net>, "'Baker Carolyn (E-mail)'"
<cabaker@duke-energy.com>, "'Bob Escalante (E-mail)'"
<rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>, "'Bob Weisenmiller (E-mail)'"
<rbw@mrwassoc.com>, "'Curtis Kebler (E-mail)'"
<curtis_l_kebler@reliantenergy.com>, "'Douglas Kerner (E-mail)'"
<DKK@eslawfirm.com>, "'Greg Blue (E-mail)'" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, "'Jan
Smutny-Jones (E-mail)'" <smutny@iepa.com>, "'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'"
<Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>, Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com>, "'John Larrea
(E-mail)'" <john.g.larrea@williams.com>, "'John Stout (E-mail)'"
<John_H_Stout@reliantenergy.com>, "'Julee Malinowski-Ball (E-mail)'"
<jmball@ns.net>, Kassandra Gough <kgough@calpine.com>, "'kent Palmerton
(E-mail)'" <kent.palmerton@williams.com>, "'Kristin Vellandi (E-mail)'"
<kvellandi@pstrategies.com>, "'Lynn Lednicky (E-mail)'" <lale@dynegy.com>,
"'Marty Wilson (E-mail)'" <mwilson@pstrategies.com>, "'McNally Ray (E-mail)'"
<rmcnally@mcnallytemple.com>, "''Nam Nguyen' (E-mail)'"
<nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, "'Norton Kelli (E-mail)'"
<knorton@mcnallytemple.com>, "'Paula Hall-Collins (E-mail)'"
<paula.hall-collins@williams.com>, Jack Pigott <jackp@calpine.com>, "'Richard
Hyde (E-mail)'" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, "'Rob Lamkin (E-mail)'"
<rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, "'Roger Pelote (E-mail)'"
<roger.pelote@williams.com>, "'Stephanie-Newell (E-mail)'"
<stephanie-newell@reliantenergy.com>, "'Sue Mara (E-mail)'"
<smara@enron.com>, "'Theo Pahos (E-mail)'" <tpahos@ppallc.com>, "'Tom Ross
(E-mail)'" <tross@mcnallytemple.com>, "Carol H Hudson (E-mail)"
<Chudson@iepa.com>, steven kelly <steven@iepa.com>, "'Anne Kelly (E-mail)'"
<kelly@hnks.com>, "'Chuck Cole (E-mail)'" <ccole@advocation-inc.com>,
"'Delany Hunter (E-mail)'" <dhunter@smithandkempton.com>, "'DJ Smith
(E-mail)'" <djsmith@smithandkempton.com>, "'Hedy Govenar (E-mail)'"
<hgovenar@acom2.com>, mmoretti@mccabeandcompany.net, "'Maureen OHaren
(E-mail)'" <Oharen@hmot.com>, "'Mike Monagan (E-mail)'" <mrmonagan@aol.com>,
"'Phil Isenberg (E-mail)'" <isenberg@hmot.com>, "'Robert Ross (E-mail)'"
<robbiz@cwo.com>, "'Ron Tom (E-mail)'" <Rtom@govadv.com>, "'Scott Govenar
(E-mail)'" <sgovenar@govadv.com>, "'Susan Mccabe (E-mail)'"
<sfmccabe@mindspring.com>, rtemple@mcnallytemple.com,
megan.beiser@edelman.com, tracy.fairchild@edelman.com,
deborah.fiorito@dynegy.com, tcwillia@duke-energy.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment--URGENT

The Wyden Amendment to the Bankruptcy Bill is being debated on the Senate
floor as we speak. If it passes,the QF's in California will be severly
imnpaired ina bankruptcy proceeding. I hope that you have contacted your
Congressional representatives. Feinstein is fighting this and Boxer has
suppoted, then opposed it, and may be supporting it again. EPSA and EEI
opposed the Amendment. Jan--has IEP weighed in yet?
-----Original Message-----


Gentlemen

I wanted to provide you an update on the status of the Refco private label platform deal.  We have had several meetings since I first presented the idea to you all.  Unfortunately, Refco's headquarters was in One World Financial Center which was severely damaged by debris from the World Trade Center collapse.  They suffered no human losses from the disaster, but their offices are off limits and all their computers and paper files are inaccessible for the time being.  They are up and running out of a Jersey City location with some back up capability.

To briefly summarize the discussion so far, ENW would build a Refco branded platform similar to EOL that would be accessed by Refco's customers.  Enron would provide transactable prices to the site with wider spreads and potentially smaller minimum volumes.  Refco customers would transact on the site with Refco as their counterparty and Refco would sleeve the transactions to Enron allowing us to consolidate our credit risk to a singular credit, Refco.   The products contemplated include various Nymex look-a-like products and other liquid swaps in oil, natural gas, and electricity.  Revenue would come to Enron in the form of license fees for the platform, transaction fees, and origination from the additional volume create by the wider margin products.  Revenue would come to Refco in the form of transaction fees.  Refco has a similar arrangement in place for FX with Dresner bank and have announced a similar platform for bonds and securities with Cantor Fitzgerald/E-speed.

All that being said, they are anxious to move the discussion forward and we have planned a visit for them to come to Houston in 2 weeks.  Attending will be Gary Weiss, SVP Refco Group Ltd. LLC and President & CEO of Refco F/X Ltd LLC, and Joe Murphy, CEO Refco Futures Ltd. LLC.  The purpose of this visit is for them to give us a presentation on the Refco Group of companies, discuss the products and estimations of revenue streams based on their current futures business, and discuss the possible structure of the deal.  The meeting is scheduled to begin at 2:30pm Thursday Oct 4 and expected to last the balance of the day and possibly into the next morning.  I will approach you all individually to get your feedback on how you would like to interact with them and when.  I realize there are significant issues to be addressed.

Refco currently has some 175,000 collateralized customer accounts ranging from Institutional Investors & locals down to individuals.  We have put these into 2 buckets which have different profiles.  Phase 1 would include the Top 2000 accounts which are largely substantial institutional investors, locals, and high net worth individuals.  If this proves successful, phase 2 would be rolled out with products designed to attract activity from the smaller investors.  The idea would be to automate the products as much as is practical.

Mark Tayor in Legal has already spoken with their counsel and is comfortable that they have reviewed all the legal angles thoroughly.  Refco advises that if the have accounts back up by collateral guaranteed by them, they become Eligible Contract Participants (ECPs) able to execute derivatives.  So, they believe that the majority of the 175,000 accounts they have could be ECPs for the purposes of this deal.  Credit is reviewing the Refco financials and we plan to discuss this thoroughly during their visit.

Please do not hesitate to contact me at x36413 if you have any questions or comments and I will be getting in touch with you early next week to get your feedback.

Regards

John Cummings


Mr. Pye -

Ken Lay would only be available on December 4, 2000 as we have an Enron Board
dinner on Monday, December 11.

Thanks.

Rosalee

"WalterPye" <WalterPye@email.msn.com> on 07/12/2000 03:47:45 PM
To: <jim_braniff@ajg.com>, <rodc@insource.com>, <tcarey@crc-evans.com>,
<ecockrell@Cockrell.com>, <mfc-mca@worldnet.att.net>, <jddec@insync.net>,
<posres@aol.com>, <bdussler@palmetto-partners.com>,
<richarde@centurydev.com>, <bbh@group1auto.com>, <mnk@caller.infi.net>,
<klay@enron.com>, <savoycap@msn.com>, <hjp@pappasrestaurants.com>,
<pway@wayholding.com>
cc:
Subject: December Christmas Couples Dinner

TO:          WPO FORUM MEMBERS

FROM:    H. WALTER PYE, JR.

RE:          December Christmas Couples Dinner

We are in the process of planning our December Christmas Couples Dinner and
we have two possible dates.

Please advise by email which of these dates will better fit your schedule.
(Please indicate both dates if you are available for both dates.)

                            Monday, December 4, 2000    ________________

                            Monday, December 11, 2000  ________________

Thank you.

WalterPye@email.msn.com


Love you too.  I wrapped Mom's present.  It is ready for you ton pick up.
Gave Mom your allowance this morning.  Sorry I forgot o9ver the weekend.
Dad


---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT on 02/07/2000 10:37
AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Rebecca W Cantrell                           01/10/2000 03:27 PM

To: John Hodge/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine L
Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Neal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barend VanderHorst/HOU/EES@EES,
Carrie Hollomon/HOU/ECT@ect, Robert Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Colleen
Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: New CNG Facilities to Replace Tennessee Agreement

CNG TRANSMISSION FILES APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE TO BUILD NEW PIPELINE AND
COMPRESSION FACILITIES AS SUBSTITUTE FOR TENNESSEE'S LOOP SERVICE

01/06/2000
Foster Natural Gas Report
7
(c) Copyright 2000, Foster Associates, Inc.

On December 29 CNG Transmission Corp. (CP00-64) submitted a certificate
application to FERC
requesting authorization to construct facilities in Pennsylvania and New York
in order to substitute its own
transportation capacity for market area service entitlements that CNG
currently holds on Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Co. pursuant to terms of an expiring contract. CNG's contract with
Tennessee has a primary term
until 11/1/2000 with a one-year notification requirement to terminate. Acting
quickly on terms of a
settlement (RP00-15) approved by the Commission on 12/21/99, which capped
CNG's upstream costs
and freed CNG to build its own facilities to replace capacity currently
purchased from Tennessee, CNG
proposes to construct approximately 13 miles of 30-inch pipeline (TL474x2), a
loop of its existing pipeline
in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania; to install approximately 13,250 horsepower
of additional compression
in three Pennsylvania counties and approximately 7,000 hp of compression at
Brookman Corners Station,
in Montgomery County, New York; to construct and operate approximately 800
feet of 30-inch pipeline,
known as the Connector Line (TL-510), between TL-474x2 and lines LN-26 and
LN-380 in Armstrong
County; and to abandon approximately 12.9 miles of a 12-inch diameter
pipeline in Armstrong County
known as LN-9 (CNG's existing parallel pipeline, LN-19, purportedly is
sufficient to maintain existing
services to the markets served by this part of CNG's system). These
facilities are designed to re-create
south-to-north delivery capacity on the CNG system to substitute for looping
service that has been
purchased from Tennessee.

In support, CNG claims, first, its proposal results in near-term and
long-term savings to its existing firm
service customers, without degrading service. Second, by not requiring
assignees to maintain firm
upstream entitlements to service on the Tennessee system, the project will
reduce the fixed cost burden for
consumers downstream of CNG's LDC customers. Third, CNG's proposal eases the
constraint for
deliveries on CNG's system from southern receipt points to northern delivery
points, across the Valley Gate
Junction located in central Pennsylvania. CNG, thus, will be able to
eliminate its "standing must-flow"
operational flow order. After placing the proposed facilities in service, CNG
will modify its tariff to eliminate
the requirement that customers with "North of Valley" receipt points --
primarily CNG's interconnection with
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. at Leidy, Pennsylvania -- can be
directed to use their capacity to
tender quantities of gas to CNG throughout the Winter Period. Fourth, the
proposed construction will
enable CNG to meet its existing market commitments. During the first three
years after the projected
in-service date of this project, less than 15% of CNG's firm transportation
capacity will be eligible to expire.
Fifth, to the extent that markets can be served in the future either by CNG's
own facilities or by the
turned-back capacity that Tennessee accrues in its Zones 3 through 5, the CNG
construction presents a
competitive alternative.

Background: CNG's long-haul contract with Tennessee provides for delivery of
natural gas from the Gulf of
Mexico, plus reliance on an operational loop of CNG's system, operated by
Tennessee, that allows CNG to
offer more storage and transportation capacity than CNG could provide on its
own. In the aftermath of
Order No. 636, however, CNG unbundled its storage and transportation services
and exited the merchant
function. CNG, which no longer required a significant portion of the
Tennessee capacity from the Gulf to
Tennessee's interconnections with CNG in Tennessee Zone 3, agreed to assign
its upstream capacity on
Tennessee from the production area to a Zone 3 transfer point (South
Webster), while retaining the
capacity from South Webster to delivery points interconnecting with CNG in
Tennessee Zones 4 and 5 to
facilitate dispatching and no-notice service to CNG's customers.

In conjunction with CNG's restructuring settlement, one transaction on the
Tennessee system thus was
separated into two parts, with CNG and its assignees paying Tennessee
reservation and usage charges
for the capacity as if Tennessee had a single customer from the Gulf to the
market area. Tennessee
charged CNG's converting customers the applicable Zone 3 delivery rate for
transporting gas from Zones 0
and 1 to West Virginia and the South Webster transfer point. CNG, in turn, is
charged an incremental rate
for transporting gas from South Webster to CNG's delivery points in Zone 4
and 5, determined by
subtracting the maximum reservation and usage rates applicable to Tennessee's
Zone 3 (including
applicable surcharges) from the maximum reservation and usage rates
(including surcharges) for the haul
rate from the Gulf to either Zone 4 or 5. The incremental rate is
approximately one-third of Tennessee's
maximum tariff rates for Rate Schedule FT-A service from Zones 3 to 5 or
Zones 4 to 5, respectively.

In negotiations to examine the fate of the expiring contract, Tennessee
conveyed to CNG that, in order to
preserve revenue neutrality, the assigned upstream contract that feeds the
CNG/Tennessee market
contract (No. 3919) must match exactly the maximum daily quantity (MDQ) of
the downstream contract. Any
mismatched quantities will be priced to CNG at Tennessee's maximum tariff
rates for FT-A service. Unless
CNG were to require all assignees to continue to hold upstream capacity on
the Tennessee system,
therefore, CNG would no longer qualify for the incremental rate on Tennessee
on the mismatched capacity
retained by CNG. Meanwhile, as CNG's assignees have elected to turn back
upstream Tennessee
capacity, CNG's costs would go up unless CNG chooses to turn back an equal
quantity of service
downstream of South Webster. The cost increase on CNG to its customers, if
all assignees turned back,
would be approximately $27 million per year.

CNG notified Tennessee on November 1 that it will extend only a portion of
its current contract for a
one-year period in order to accommodate a new CNG construction schedule. The
initial termination dates
for CNG's customers' upstream contracts (all assigned from CNG's original
contract with Tennessee) were
the same. Absent the termination notice, the contract provides for an
automatic extension for a primary
term of five years.

Proposal to Build Facilities: Given the circumstances, CNG proposes to build
the facilities needed to serve
its existing market without having to rely on Tennessee for the traditional
looping service provided under
this contract. Thus, CNG's customers would avoid the anticipated Tennessee
cost increase that would
result if CNG renewed the contract at Tennessee's maximum rates. Instead,
CNG's customers will
experience an annual cost decrease as a result when compared to the
transportation costs approved by
the Commission in CNG's Docket TMOO-1.

CNG proposes to roll the costs of this project into CNG's general system
transportation rates. Such
treatment, the applicant argued, is supported by the projected cost decrease
to existing customers as well
as by the system-wide benefits that will result. The benefits outweigh any
adverse impacts on the affected
interests, as examined pursuant to FERC's policy (PL99-3). No subsidies exist
under the circumstances,
as the facilities actually will prevent a cost increase to existing
customers. The proposed construction "also
makes certain cost reductions possible for all of the CNG customers that took
assignment of upstream firm
services on Tennessee during CNG's restructuring proceeding . . . ."
Accordingly, CNG has met the
Commission's policy threshold requirement to establish that its project
satisfies the public convenience
and necessity standard.

Pursuant to the Transportation Cost Recovery Adjustment (TCRA) terms in the
settlement approved by the
Commission on December 21, CNG will continue to collect its TCRA at agreed
levels, a specified portion
of which will be attributed to the costs of the project. The annual cost of
this project to CNG's firm
transportation customers will be $19.8 million, which corresponds to the
incremental payment that CNG
had been making to Tennessee for Zones 3-4 and 3-5 firm transportation
services through the TCRA.

CNG related that turnbacks are due to state retail unbundling initiatives
that reduce the LDCs' need to
maintain pipeline capacity in support of a merchant role. In addition,
increased liquidity in the commodity
market, largely because of Commission policies supporting market centers, has
increased opportunities
to purchase gas in the market area. These developments, coupled with the
potential for significant
fixed-cost savings, motivated CNG's assignees to want to terminate upstream
capacity contracts.
Therefore, while CNG could have required its assignees to maintain upstream
Tennessee capacity, the
proposed construction offers a more effective long-term mechanism to enable
CNG to manage the risk of
future cost increases for its customers.

The applicant said a recognized potential adverse impact on the captive
customers of Tennessee (who
might face cost shifting) is outweighed by the public benefits of CNG's
proposal. Moreover, Tennessee
need re-market only a portion of the former CNG market-area capacity in order
to recoup CNG's
contribution to Tennessee's revenue requirement. Tennessee also has expressed
confidence in its ability
to secure markets for this newly available capacity.

In order to avoid unnecessary construction, CNG indicated it conducted a
reverse open season for two
weeks during October, 1999, in which CNG solicited customer interest in
turning back firm service
entitlements through an announcement on its electronic bulletin board. No
customer sought to turn back
service entitlements in support of the proposed project. To address potential
landowner concerns, CNG
plans to construct this pipeline adjacent to an existing natural gas pipeline
right-of-way, for which CNG
already holds easement agreements. CNG has also directly contacted each
affected landowner and
secured landowner authorization to conduct both engineering and environmental
studies on 100% of the
proposed right-of-way.

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


----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 08/21/2000 09:09 AM -----

	Tom Moran
	08/18/2000 05:28 PM

		 To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheri
Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David
Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Gillette/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G
Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe Global Contracts and Facilities, Enron
Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley
Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lesli
Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 08/18/00

The EOL approvals for 08/18/00 are attached below.

Regards,
tm


Lynn, the Commodity invoices are due on 12/24.  I believe Sandy King meant 12/24 rather than the 23rd.  However, I will be watching for the payment!

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Blair, Lynn
Sent:	Monday, December 17, 2001 10:38 AM
To:	Forbish, Sherry
Subject:	RE: City of Duluth, #106706

	Sherry does it matter that 12/23 is on a Sunday?  Thanks. Lynn

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Forbish, Sherry
Sent:	Monday, December 17, 2001 9:18 AM
To:	Valley, Lisa; Zadow, Raetta; Carr, James; Barry, Mike
Cc:	Blair, Lynn
Subject:	City of Duluth, #106706

Just heard from Kurt -- he signed off on these a couple of weeks ago, and Sandy King advises these are set to be paid with the next run (12/23) SO, it appears we will be able to clear these invoices with no difficulty.

Nice way to start a Monday!

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Forbish, Sherry
Sent:	Friday, December 14, 2001 1:47 PM
To:	Valley, Lisa
Cc:	Zadow, Raetta; Carr, James
Subject:	City of Duluth, #106706

Lisa, per our telecon this morning, I left a voicemail for Kurt Batenhorst (BP Canada) to determine the status of the payments for the PPAs for December 2000 through April 2001.  Kurt is in Calgary this week and will be returning to the office on Monday, the 17th.

Will update as soon as I talk to him on Monday.  The total is $5,443.08.


I dont know what any of this stuff is and this is the first time I've seen any $$s.

I dont even see gas trading vision (maybe its the 'global trading vision').
Operational capacity, System Main, Fundamentals, Global Val, and Peoples all have other business sponsers. I cant image what 'IT Commer. Coord' is.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:06 AM
To:	Killen, Faith; Storey, Geoff
Cc:	Colwell, Wes; Perlman, Beth
Subject:	RE: 2002 IT Systems Development Allocations

Geoff

This cannot be right - its millions I thought we were about $5mm all in including the secret Zhei project

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Killen, Faith
Sent:	Monday, October 01, 2001 8:21 PM
To:	Storey, Geoff
Cc:	Kitchen, Louise; Colwell, Wes; Perlman, Beth
Subject:	2002 IT Systems Development Allocations
Importance:	High

Geoff,
Please review the attached listing and advise if you agree to the projects and amounts listed as billings that Enron North America will receive in 2002 for support of these efforts. I'm at x30352 if you have any questions. Thanks!		 << File: Gas Projects.xls >>


Looks good.

RTellis@milbank.com on 03/17/2000 11:19:43 AM
To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Waste Management Letter

Richard, attached is a draft letter that we plan to send to Waste
Management's counsel concerning the Case Management Conference.

 <<3_8Q201!.DOC>>

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

 - att1.htm
 - 3_8Q201!.DOC


I'm so sorry it's taken me this long to get back to you. It's been truly
chaotic around here with the California situation, and the lawyers are
obviously preoccupied, so Christian hasn't gotten back to me yet. I finally
went back to Chris Mallory, and we determined that the language in this
confirm is fine as long as it matches the confirm language for the original
deal - 459996. This was the sale to Constellation at index + $1, but now that
we're trying to clear all our positions with the California Power Exchange,
we had to buy it back at index + $3. Does that make any sense, or am I just
rambling? It's been a long day. Check the confirm for 459996, and make sure
485446 matches up. Otherwise, call me.

Thanks for your patience,
Kate

	From:  Kimberly Allen                           01/17/2001 11:11 AM

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

Subject: Re: #485446

Kate, did we ever find out if this language for Price on the the
Constellation confirms was o.k.?

KI
---------------------- Forwarded by Kimberly Allen/HOU/ECT on 01/17/2001
01:11 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Kimberly Allen                           01/10/2001 10:45 AM

To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: #485446

Man what planet did you come from:) Your awesome!

KI

   Kate Symes                01/10/2001 10:34 AM

To: Kimberly Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: #485446

Thanks! I handed off the fax to Christian, who said he was extremely busy
today but would try to get to it this afternoon. In the meantime, I've been
told by Chris Mallory that the most important issue is that all
index-forwards get uniform confirmation language. As far as what that
language is, I'm not sure. Is this different than the confirm letters you've
received in the past? Let me know if you need me to expedite the process and
get someone else's opinion.

Thanks,
Kate

	From:  Kimberly Allen                           01/10/2001 06:57 AM

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

Subject: Re: #485446

Kate, I just faxed over the Constellation confirm just in case you need to
view it.

Thanks,

Kimberly

   Kate Symes                01/09/2001 06:51 PM

To: Kimberly Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: #485446

I've forwarded this message onto Christian Yoder, one of our lawyers. Chris
Mallory and Jeff Richter suggested I check with Christian first on the
language of these confirms. I'll get back to you first thing tomorrow.

Thanks,
Kate

	From:  Kimberly Allen                           01/09/2001 01:48 PM

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

Subject: #485446

Kate,
I received and index trade into NP15 that Chris Mallory did. For Price the
confirmations states:

The average day ahead, post congestion price for the Constrained Price as
published by the California Power Exchange for the on in the period of
delivery stated herein plus 3.00.

Is this language o.k. to accept on the confirmation.

Thanks,

Kimberly Indelicato
33031


Transwestern held its Transport Options Workshop on August 31.   Commercial
and regulatory representatives of BP-Amoco, Burlington, Conoco, Coral,
Dynegy, Phillips and Reliant attended.  After a brief overview of the
proposed filing, TW opened the floor for questions and comments.  Here is a
summary of the comments.

Marketing affiliate concerns.  BP's regulatory representative expressed
concern that TW's marketing affiliates would be able to use options to game
the system.  In BP's example, since TW and ENA are both Enron companies, ENA
could purchase an "out of the money" call option essentially cost free, since
its affiliate (TW) would have the ability to buy the option back.  Proceeds
from ENA's ability to then "move the market" through the establishment of the
long basis position would go directly to Enron's bottom line.  BP suggested
that TW's marketing affiliates be banned from purchasing options, or that the
marketing affiliate be required to credit 100% of the option proceeds to
other shippers.  Although BP admits that Transwestern's prior dealings with
ENA have not been suspect, BP fears that TW's filing will set a precedent for
other pipelines to offer a similar service.  Since TW will be the first
pipeline to offer such services, BP wants TW's program to be as restricted as
possible.  Dynegy echoed BP's concern regarding possible affiliate abuse, but
rather than shelve the program entirely, Dynegy reiterated an earlier
suggestion that Transwestern be required to credit back the difference
between the option fee paid by an affiliate and the next highest bidder, if
the affiliate's bid exceeds the next highest by a certain percentage.

TW's response was that while actual abuse of an options program by a
marketing affiliate may be a legitimate concern, owing to its unassailable
record in this area, TW should be entitled to a presumption that it has
complied and will continue to comply with Commission policy covering the sale
of capacity to marketing affiliates, and was not inclined to voluntarily
include any limitations on the options program.  If BP and others have
serious concerns regarding the Commission's overall policy on marketing
affiliates, those issues should be raised in a separate proceeding that
applies to all interstate pipelines.

Right of first refusal.  Burlington asked whether options would replace the
right of first refusal.  TW's  response was that ROFR will still be available
pursuant to the terms and conditions of our tariff.

Negotiated rate.  BP's representative claimed that option contracts will
constitute a negotiated rate and that each deal will need to be filed as
such.  TW did not respond to this or discuss it further.  However, TW's
position at this point is that since the option fee is part of the
transportation rate, transportation deals that include the option amendment
will only be considered negotiated rate deals if the total rate including the
option fee exceeds the maximum transport rate.

Hoarding capacity.  Using the recent large block sale of capacity on El Paso
as an example, several customers expressed concern that the options program
would make it easier for a shipper to hoard capacity.  It was not clear why
some of the workshop participants thought that the sale of options would
create more opportunity for hoarding capacity than already exists.  Perhaps
because the option fee is a lesser cost than the transport rate for the
underlying capacity, their perception was that options would simply make
hoarding cheaper and easier.  TW acknowledged that the potential for
withholding capacity from the market is one reason for FERC's current policy
against reserving capacity for shippers.  Although TW did not commit to
placing any limits on the either the quantity of capacity or options for
capacity that any one shipper may own, it is possible that FERC may require
TW to do so in a final order.

Our plan is to meet with PG&E and SoCalGas in California the week of
September 11 to go over details of the program, and to finalize the FERC
filing by mid-September.

	From:  Susan Scott                           09/01/2000 11:31 AM

To: Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Draft: Summary of TW Options Workshop

Jeff -- since most of Teddy's comments were over my head yesterday, I could
use your help on that part of the discussion.

***
Transwestern held its Transport Options Workshop on August 31.   Commercial
and regulatory representatives of BP-Amoco, Burlington, Conoco, Coral,
Dynegy, Phillips and Reliant attended.  After a brief overview of the
proposed TW Options filing, we opened the floor for questions and comments.
Here is a summary of the comments.

Marketing affiliate concerns.  BP's regulatory representative expressed
concern that TW's marketing affiliates would be able to use options to game
the system.  For example, since TW and ENA are both Enron companies, if ENA
buys a call option it is essentially a free option.  ENA could buy a call out
of the money and we could buy it back from them, with the proceeds going to
Enron's bottom line.  BP suggested that TW's marketing affiliates be banned
from purchasing options, or that the marketing affiliate be required to
credit the call money to other shippers.  BP's concern is that TW's filing
will set a precedent for other pipelines to offer a similar service, so they
want TW's options program to be as restricted as possible.  Dynegy reiterated
its suggestion that the marketing affiliate be required to credit back the
difference between the option fee paid by the affiliate and the next highest
bidder's bid, if the affiliate's bid exceeds the next highest bid by a
certain percentage.

Our response was that while actual abuse of an options program by a marketing
affiliate would be a concern, we feel that TW is entitled to a presumption
that it has complied and will continue to comply with the rules on sale of
capacity to marketing affiliates.  At this point we are not inclined to
voluntarily include any limitations on the options program.  If BP and others
have issues regarding Commission marketing affiliate policy in general, those
issues should be addressed in a different proceeding that pertain to all
interstate pipelines.

Right of first refusal.  Burlington asked whether options would replace the
right of first refusal.  Our response was that ROFR will still be available
pursuant to the terms and conditions of our tariff.

Negotiated rate.  BP's representative claimed that options will constitute a
negotiated rate and that each deal will need to be filed as such.  We did not
respond to this or discuss it further.  However, TW's position at this point
is that since the option fee is part of the transportation rate, the deals
will only be negotiated rate deals if the total rate exceeds the maximum
rate.

Hoarding capacity.  Several customers expressed concern that the options
program would make it easier for a shipper to hoard capacity.  It was not
clear why they thought that options would create more opportunity for
hoarding than already exists.  Their perception was that options would simply
make hoarding cheaper and easier.  We acknowledged that the potential for
withholding capacity from the market is one reason for FERC's current policy
against reserving capacity for shippers.  Although we did not commit to
placing any limits on the quantity of capacity for which a shipper may
purchase an option, it is possible that FERC may require us to do so.

Our plan is to meet with PG&E and SoCalGas in California to elicit their
comments, and finalize the FERC filing by mid-September.


Sally,
overview of programme elements as requested. Let me know if you have any
questions or want further details.

Tim

VALUE AT RISK

The Value at Risk (VaR) seminar is designed to introduce participants to this
important concept.  An understanding of VaR is rapidly becoming an integral
business need.  The first session of this seminar provides participants with
a comprehensive review of statistics, these being the primary building block
of VaR itself.  The program then moves on to identify examples of the context
in which clients are using VaR in their business decisions.  Participants
will gain an understanding of the interrelationship of the many factors that
make VaR a dynamic and strategic tool.  The program ends with a "hands on"
experience of making a simple VaR calculation.

Participants attending this seminar will be able to:

Give a precise definition of Value at Risk
Describe how VaR is changing the way companies evaluate risk in their
businesses
Discuss how these changing views of risk will impact the use of hedging
products
Recognize why companies are implementing VaR
Explain the key factors in calculating VaR
Understand the need to categorize risk into "Risk Buckets"
Define the standardizing practice of Risk Mapping
Illustrate a simple VaR model and accurately discuss the modeling
process
Calculate a simple two product VaR number
Demonstrate the difference between the Historical, Monte Carlo and Risk
Metrics  approaches to VaR
Evaluate the impact of correlation on the calculation of VaR
Understand the application and importance of stress testing


The above referenced meeting has been cancelled per Julie Gomez, however Ed
Gottlob would like to still meet with you during this time.

Wednesday, September 20th
3:00 - 4:30 pm
EB38c2

Please call me if you have any questions/problems.

Laura Harder
Ext 3-1994

---------------------- Forwarded by Laura Harder/Corp/Enron on 09/18/2000
01:15 PM ---------------------------

Laura Harder
09/18/2000 01:14 PM
To: Pat Clynes/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve
Hotte/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Savita Puthigai/NA/Enron@Enron, Jackie
Morgan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dale Neuner/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Jennifer deBoisblanc Denny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Colleen Sullivan/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Heather Choate/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rita Houser/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Kim
Weldon/Corp/Enron@Enron, Cecilia Olvera/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: EOL Transaction Walk-Thru Meeting

Please be advised that the above referenced meeting, scheduled for this
Thursday 9/20 from 3::00-4:30, has been cancelled and will be rescheduled at
a later date.  We apologize if this causes you any inconvenience.

Laura
Ext 3-1994