Here is the other cite.

----- Forwarded by Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT on 07/06/2000 03:53 PM -----

	LEXIS(R)/NEXIS(R) Print Delivery <lexis-nexis@prod.lexis-nexis.com>
	07/06/2000 03:30 PM

		 To: gerald.nemec@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: LEXIS(R)-NEXIS(R) Email Request (59:0:11094435)

108CKF

Print Request:   LEXSEE

Time of Request: July 6, 2000  04:30 pm EST

Number of Lines: 661
Job Number:      59:0:11094435

Client ID/Project Name:

Research Information:

Lexsee 69 FERC P61,145

Note:

,
PAGE 1

                             LEXSEE 69 FERC P61,145

                           Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc.

             Docket Nos. CP92-217-000, CP92-217-001 and MT94-2-000

               FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION - Commission

                     69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340

                Order Issuing Certificates and Denying Rehearing

                                November 2, 1994

PANEL:
 [*1]

   Before Commissioners: Elizabeth Anne Moler, Chair; Vicky A. Bailey, James
J.
Hoecker, William L. Massey, and Donald F. Santa, Jr.

OPINION:

   On December 3, 1991, Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc. (Texas-Ohio) filed an
application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts
157
and 284 of the Commission's regulations for certificates of public convenience
and necessity to operate its facilities in interstate commerce and to perform
open-access transportation services on existing facilities known as the Hunter
Pipeline in Garrard County, Kentucky. Texas-Ohio also requested a temporary
certificate to operate the Hunter Pipeline on an interim basis pending
issuance
of a permanent certificate.

   On January 15, 1992, the Commission issued Texas-Ohio a temporary
certificate
authorizing service to existing customers utilizing the Hunter Pipeline; the
temporary certificate is to expire upon issuance of a final Commission order
on
the request for a permanent blanket certificate. n1 On February 14, 1992,
Industrial Energy Services Company (IESCO) sought rehearing of the January 15
order.

   n1 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 58 FERC 61,025 (1992).

   We will grant Texas-Ohio [*2]  a case-specific certificate pursuant to Part
157, subpart A of the Commission's regulations to operate the Hunter Pipeline
in
interstate commerce and a blanket transportation certificate pursuant to Part
284, subpart G of the Commission's regulations. These authorizations are made
subject to compliance with the conditions set forth in this order. For the
reasons set forth below, IESCO's request for rehearing is denied.

Notices and Interventions

   Notice of Texas-Ohio's application was published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 1991 (58 Fed. Reg. 64,507). Algonquin Gas Transmission Company,
CNG
Transmission Corporation, Elizabethtown Gas Company, Endevco Oil and Gas
Company
(Endevco), Enron Gas Marketing, Inc., Equitrans, Inc., IESCO, O&R Energy, Inc.
(O&R Energy), Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and Texas Eastern
Transmission Corporation (TETCO) filed timely, unopposed motions to intervene.
,
PAGE 2
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *2

n2 Endevco, O&R Energy, and TETCO support Texas-Ohio's application. IESCO
protests the application and requests an evidentiary hearing.

   n2 Timely, unopposed motions to intervene are granted pursuant to Rule 214
of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. 385.214. [*3]

   On December 26, 1991, Texas-Ohio filed an answer to that portion of IESCO's
protest opposing the issuance of a temporary certificate. IESCO responded to
Texas-Ohio's answer on January 14, 1992. n3

   n3 Pursuant to section 385.213(2) of the Commission's regulations, 18
C.F.R.
385.213(2), an answer to a protest is not permitted unless the Commission
orders
otherwise. In order to have as complete a factual record as possible in this
proceeding, we will accept the December 26, 1991 and January 14, 1992 filings
of
Texas-Ohio and IESCO, respectively.

   On February 3, 1992, Energy Marketing Exchange, Inc. filed a petition for
leave to intervene out of time. For good cause shown, and since the late
intervention will not prejudice any party to this proceeding or otherwise
delay
the proceeding, we will grant Energy Marketing's motion to intervene out of
time.

Background

   The Hunter Pipeline is an interconnection between facilities of Tennessee
Gas
Pipeline Company (Tennessee) and TETCO. It consists of two 1,000 horsepower
compressors and approximately 600 feet of above-ground 10-inch diameter gas
pipeline. The Hunter Pipeline is capable of transporting 60,000 Mcf per day of
natural gas.  [*4]

   Texas-Ohio constructed the Hunter Pipeline pursuant to a certificate issued
by the Kentucky Public Service Commission (Kentucky PSC) on November 19, 1990.
This authorization designated Texas-Ohio as an intrastate pipeline operating
as
a transporting utility. However, because Texas-Ohio did not hold an
open-season
prior to commencing transportation operations, only Texas-Ohio Gas, Inc. and
its
sales customers acquired capacity on the Hunter Pipeline. n4 After
constructing
the facilities, Texas-Ohio filed an application with the Commission in Docket
No. PR91-5-000 seeking approval of rates under section 311(a)(2) of the
Natural
Gas Policy Act (NGPA). The Commission instituted rate proceedings on April 29,
1991 to determine whether Texas-Ohio's rates were fair and equitable. n5

   n4 Texas-Ohio is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Texas-Ohio Gas, Inc. (TOG), a
Houston-based marketer that ships Gulf Coast gas to northeastern industrial
end-users via Tennessee and TETCO. Prior to construction of the Hunter
Pipeline,
TOG faced separate bottlenecks on the Tennessee and TETCO systems during the
winter heating season; the location and capacity of the Hunter Pipeline was
selected to avoid these bottlenecks.

   n5 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 55 FERC 61,137 (1991).
 [*5]

   On June 3, 1991, Texas-Ohio suspended transportation service through the
Hunter Pipeline upon discovering that the gas being moved through those
facilities was not produced in Kentucky and, therefore, that it was engaged in
,
PAGE 3
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *5

the interstate transportation of natural gas without authorization under NGA
section 7 or NGPA section 311. Subsequently, the Commission instituted an
investigation into the construction and operation of the Hunter Pipeline. That
investigation determined that from the first day of operation on December 1,
1990 through its voluntary shut-down on June 3, 1991, the Hunter Pipeline
transported gas in interstate commerce. n6 On October 19, 1993, the Commission
approved a stipulation and consent agreement in which Texas-Ohio agreed to
pay a
$ 125,000 civil penalty and to implement a program to comply with the NGA and
NGPA. n7

   n6 Texas-Ohio received all the gas that flowed through the Hunter Pipeline
from Tennessee's interstate facility. Texas-Ohio then redelivered the gas to
TETCO's interstate facility.

   n7 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 65 FERC 61,069 (1993).Proposal

   Texas-Ohio requests authorization to operate its facilities in interstate
[*6]  commerce and perform open-access transportation service. Texas-Ohio
proposes to charge firm shippers a transportation rate consisting of a
reservation charge of $ 1.4813 per MMBtu and a commodity charge of $ 0.0103
per
MMBtu.

   Interruptible shippers would pay a transportation rate consisting of a
commodity charge of $ 0.059 per MMBtu. n8n8 The proposed initial rates are the
same as those which Texas-Ohio was authorized to charge during the
effectiveness
of the temporary certificate. Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 58 FERC 61,025 at
61,059 (1992).

   Texas-Ohio states that operation of the Hunter Pipeline will permit
shippers
to avoid bottlenecks on the systems of Tennessee and TETCO. TETCO's bottleneck
is located at a point near the Kentucky-Tennessee border. Due to this
constraint, TETCO has historically curtailed the interruptible transportation
of
natural gas from receipt points located south of the Kentucky- Tennessee
border
that is destined for delivery to points north during the winter heating
season.
During the past three winter seasons, TETCO has curtailed interruptible
transportation for gas originating upstream of its Mt. Pleasant compressor
station [*7]  in Tennessee that is scheduled for delivery downstream to Zones
C
and D.

   The bottleneck on Tennessee's system occurs in Mercer County, Pennsylvania.
As a result, gas produced and transported from receipt points south of Mercer
County cannot be transported to points north of Mercer County during certain
periods of the year. During the past four winter seasons, Tennessee has
curtailed gas moving on an interruptible basis from points upstream of
stations
219, 237, and 313 to locations downstream of those stations.

   Texas-Ohio's facilities are positioned to avoid both bottlenecks. In this
regard, Tennessee typically has interruptible transportation capacity for
deliveries to Texas- Ohio's facilities, but has bottlenecks downstream of its
interconnection with Texas-Ohio. Conversely, TETCO has a bottleneck upstream
of
Texas-Ohio's facilities, but has capacity for the movement of interruptible
transportation volumes downstream of its Mt. Pleasant compressor station. As
such, Texas-Ohio's facilities can be utilized to alleviate bottlenecks on two
different pipeline systems and thereby move gas to markets in the Northeast.
,
PAGE 4
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *7

Discussion

   The Commission finds that by utilizing the Hunter [*8]  Pipeline shippers
located upstream of the TETCO bottleneck can utilize Tennessee's system to
move
gas to Texas-Ohio for redelivery to TETCO and continued transportation
downstream. Shippers upstream of Tennessee's bottleneck, but downstream of
Texas-Ohio's facilities, can, by displacement, utilize Texas-Ohio's system to
access the TETCO system for continued transportation downstream. This
arrangement will avoid both the upstream and downstream bottlenecks and allow
continued delivery of gas to various northeast markets located off both the
TETCO and Tennessee systems. We find that the public convenience and necessity
requires issuance of a certificate pursuant to Part 157, subpart A,
authorizing
operation of Texas-Ohio's Hunter Pipeline.

   The Commission also finds that Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff generally
complies with the requirements for a Part 284 blanket transportation
certificate. Accordingly, we will grant Texas- Ohio's application for a Part
284
blanket transportation certificate, subject to the conditions set forth herein
to ensure Texas-Ohio's full compliance with the conditions of Order Nos. 636,
497, and 566. Texas-Ohio's Part 284 blanket certificate will become effective
[*9]  upon Texas-Ohio's full compliance with these conditions.

I. Rates

   Texas-Ohio proposes to charge the initial rates that were approved in the
temporary certificate. Under this proposal, firm shippers would pay a
transportation rate consisting of a reservation charge of $ 1.4813 per MMBtu
and
a commodity charge of $ 0.0103 per MMBtu. Interruptible shippers would pay a
transportation rate consisting of a commodity charge of $ 0.059 per MMBtu. The
proposed rates are based on the modified fixed variable rate design (MFV), 100
percent equity capitalization, a 15 percent return on equity, and a 10 percent
depreciation. The reservation and usage charges are based on 100 percent of
the
system design capacity.

A. Rate Design

   Order No. 636 requires pipelines to use the straight fixed variable (SFV)
rate design methodology. n9 Texas-Ohio has not provided any evidence which
would
support an exception to this requirement. Accordingly, we find that Texas-Ohio
should be required to use the SFV rate design methodology. Additionally, since
Texas-Ohio's cost of service does not include any variable costs, we will
require it to use $ 0.0000 as the minimum FTS usage and ITS rates. n10

   n9 See 18 C.F.R. 284.7(d).

   n10 See Gateway Pipeline Co., 55 FERC 61,488 (1991). [*10]  B.
Capitalization
and Rate of Return

   Texas-Ohio proposes a capitalization consisting of 100 percent equity. We
find that it is appropriate to use a hypothetical capital structure consisting
of 57 percent debt and 43 percent equity; this structure is based on the 43.18
percent average equity ratio held by a group of seven major investor- owned
interstate pipelines at the end of 1993.
,
PAGE 5
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *10

   We have generally used recent rates for Baa-rated public utility bonds to
set
the debt costs on similar projects since Baa is the prevailing rating for
pipeline bonds. The rate for Baa utility bonds averaged 8.40 percent for the
six
months ending July 31, 1994, with a one month average of 8.80 percent for July
1994. We find it appropriate to utilize a cost of debt of 8.50 percent.

   Texas-Ohio's proposed 15 percent rate of return on equity is excessive
considering the prevailing cost of capital. We find acceptable a rate of
return
derived from a range of returns based upon an analysis of recent interest
rates
and a discounted cash flow (DCF) study. The lower end of the range is
determined
by the prevailing Baa rating for public utility bonds; as discussed above, we
will use a figure of 8.50 percent for [*11]  the most recent six months. Since
equity is riskier than debt, 100 basis points should be added to the bond
rate,
thus bringing the lower end of the range to 9.50 percent.

   The upper end of the range is determined by a DCF analysis of a proxy group
of seven publicly held natural gas transmission companies. n11 This proxy
group
is used because the DCF methodology requires market price data as an input in
the estimation of investor-expected equity returns. The DCF analysis for the
proxy group results in a range of equity returns of 10.77 percent to 13.41
percent, with a median return of 12.19 percent.

   n11 Coastal Corporation, El Paso Natural Gas Company, Enron Corporation,
Panhandle Eastern, Sonat Inc., Transco Energy, and Williams Companies, Inc.

   This analysis uses dividend yields and forecasts of long- term growth rates
as follows. For the first five years, the Institutional Brokerage Estimate
System (IBES) estimates of five year growth in earnings per share was used.
For
longer-term growth (for the years 2000-2010), estimates taken from DRI/McGraw
Hill (Energy Review, Spring-Summer 1994) for growth in the natural gas
industry
were used. A growth rate for each company in the [*12]  proxy group was
determined by averaging the two growth rates. Combining the bottom and top
figures establishes a range of 9.50 percent to 13.41 percent. The midpoint of
this range is approximately 11.50 percent.

   The Hunter Pipeline went into initial operation in 1990 and faces no
construction risk. Accordingly, we find that the company's risk is no higher
than that of the average pipeline. Therefore, we will require a rate of return
on equity of 11.5 percent, which is equal to the midpoint of the range of
reasonableness.

C. Depreciation

   Texas-Ohio proposes a book depreciation rate of 10 percent calculated on
the
straight-line method which supports an economic life of 10 years. We believe
that the economic life of the Hunter Pipeline will depend upon gas reserves
connected to the Tennessee system and the future demand for natural gas
downstream of those facilities. We are confident that market demand and
operation of Tennessee and TETCO to service downstream markets in the
Northeast
States will continue for the next 25 years. We also believe that the Hunter
Pipeline will operate on a permanent basis and play an important role in the
delivery of gas, especially during high demand [*13]  periods. Based on these
factors, we find that an economic life of 25 years should be used to
calculate a
depreciation rate of four percent for the Hunter Pipeline facilities.
,
PAGE 6
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *13

D. Conclusion

   We will require Texas-Ohio to modify its rates as follows. For
interruptible
service, the minimum rate shall be $ 0.0000; the maximum rate shall be $
0.0518.
For firm service, the minimum reservation charge shall be $ 0.0000; the
maximum
reservation charge shall be $ 1.5749. The usage charge for firm service shall
be
$ 0.0000. n12 The rates approved herein are initial rates under NGA section 7;
their approval does not constitute approval of any underlying rate
methodology,
principle, or concept to be used in any general rate change filed pursuant to
NGA section 4. These initial rates will remain in effect until such time as
Texas-Ohio files an NGA section 4 general rate proceeding. At that time, any
party or the Commission staff may propose new rates based on different
methodologies, principles or concepts.

   n12 All rates are expressed per MMBtu.

   II. Pro Forma Tariff

Texas-Ohio has applied for a blanket transportation certificate under section
284.221 of the Commission's regulations. It  [*14]  proposes to provide both
firm and interruptible transportation service. To commence service under a
blanket certificate, Texas-Ohio must file and place into effect rates, terms,
and conditions that are consistent with Part 284 of the regulations.
Texas-Ohio
has not made a tariff filing in this proceeding; it has, however, filed pro
forma tariff sheets which indicate the form its tariff will take. Generally,
the
pro forma tariff conforms to the Commission's requirements. As discussed
below,
however, certain provisions are either inconsistent with the Commission's
policies or are not adequately justified. Certain specific changes that we
will
require to be made to Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff are set forth in an
appendix
to this order.

A. Order No. 636

   Review of Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff indicates a number of changes that
must be implemented to satisfy the requirements of Order No. 636. To implement
those changes, Texas-Ohio must make a tariff filing within 45 days of the date
of the issuance of this order. Also, Texas-Ohio is reminded that while certain
provisions of Order No. 636 may not apply at this time, future changes in its
operations may require tariff revisions to satisfy [*15]  the requirements of
that Order.

1. Equality of Service/Open Season

   Pipelines that offer open-access transportation service must provide those
services on a basis that is equal in quality for all gas suppliers, whether
the
gas is purchased from the pipeline or from another seller. Section
284.14(b)(iv)
of the Commission's regulations, 18 C.F.R. 284.14(b)(iv), requires a
pipeline's
tariff to reflect the principle of equality of service for all gas transported
under each rate schedule.

   Texas-Ohio performs only unbundled transportation service; it does not
provide pipeline sales service. Texas-Ohio does, however, provide
transportation
service for its affiliated marketers, TOG and Texas-Ohio West, Inc. Original
Sheet No. 6, section 3.2, of Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff provides that
,
PAGE 7
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *15

customers with an already executed firm transportation contract for service on
the Hunter Pipeline as of the effective date of the tariff shall have a
priority
over customers executing a service agreement at a later date. Service is
otherwise offered on a first-come, first-served basis. We find that this
provision gives preferential treatment to selected customers. It is unduly
discriminatory and must be [*16]  removed from the tariff. Further, we find
that
Texas-Ohio has never held an open-season or otherwise provided for the
non-discriminatory allocation of system capacity prior to initiating service.
Accordingly, we hold that Texas-Ohio must implement an open season within 30
days of the date of issuance of an order in this proceeding to ensure non-
discriminatory allocation of system capacity.

2. Pregranted Abandonment and Right of First Refusal

   Section 284.221(d) of the Commission's regulations, 18 C.F.R. 284.221(d),
authorizes pregranted abandonment of interruptible and short-term firm
transportation at the end of the contract. A short-term contract is one with a
term of less than one year. For long-term transportation with a term of more
than a year, section 284.14(b)(1)(xiii) requires the pipeline to establish
right
of first refusal procedures for use upon expiration of the long-term contract.
Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff does not comply with these requirements; it is
directed to amend its tariff accordingly.

3. Capacity Release and Electronic Bulletin Board

   Section 284.243 of the Commission's regulations, 18 C.F.R. 284.243,
requires
interstate pipelines offering firm transportation [*17]  to establish a
capacity
release mechanism that allows firm shippers to release all or part of their
firm
transportation capacity rights to any person who wants to obtain that capacity
by contracting with the pipeline. The release may be temporary, permanent, or
subject to conditions (i.e., on an interruptible basis). The pipeline must
allocate released capacity to the person offering the highest rate (not over
the
maximum rate) and offering to meet any other terms and conditions of the
release.

   Order No. 636 requires pipelines to provide timely and equal access to any
and all information necessary for buyers and sellers to arrange gas sales and
capacity release, including information regarding the availability of capacity
at receipt and delivery points, and whether capacity is available from the
pipeline directly or through capacity releasing. This information must be
posted
on an electronic bulletin board (EBB).

   Texas-Ohio's proposed tariff lacks these provisions. It must amend its pro
forma tariff to provide a capacity release mechanism and establish an EBB.

4. Upstream Capacity

Section 284.242 of the Commission's regulations, 18 C.F.R. 284.242, provides
that an interstate [*18]  pipeline that offers transportation service on a
firm
basis under subparts B or G of Part 284 must offer, without undue
discrimination, to assign to its firm shippers its firm transportation
capacity,
including contract storage, on all upstream pipelines. Texas-Ohio does not
appear to hold any upstream capacity. In the tariff filing it is required to
make to comply with the requirements of Order No. 636, Texas-Ohio should state
whether it holds any capacity on upstream pipelines. If it does, Texas-Ohio
must
,
PAGE 8
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *18

revise its tariff to comply with Order No. 636.

5. Transition Costs

   Texas-Ohio's filing predates Order No. 636 and consequently makes no
comment
regarding incurrence of transition costs. Accordingly, we will not make a
determination at this time with respect to Texas-Ohio's level of transition
costs. III. Docket No. MT94-2-000 Pursuant to our order of December 23, 1993,
Texas-Ohio filed revised tariff sheets in Docket No. MT94-2-000 to comply with
the requirements of section 250.16(b), 18 C.F.R. 250.16(b). n13 With the
exception of the items discussed below, we find that Texas-Ohio's filing
complies with those requirements. n14

   n13 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 65 FERC 61,387 (1993). Section 250.16 of the
Commission's regulations requires interstate natural gas pipelines that
transport natural gas for others pursuant to subparts B, G, H, or K of Part
284,
and that are affiliated in any way with a natural gas marketing or brokering
entity, to file certain information relevant to that relationship.

   n14 On June 17, 1994, Order No. 566 modified section 250.16(b) effective
August 1, 1994 by, among other things, eliminating the requirement that
pipelines (1) receive certain information from shippers in requests for
transportation service, (2) log and post on the EBB complaints made by
shippers,
and (3) include procedures to communicate pricing and capacity information.
 [*19]

   The tariff sheets filed by Texas-Ohio do not set forth the information
required to be filed in a transportation request. Texas-Ohio contends that
since
it is operating under a temporary certificate and is prohibited from providing
transportation service to new customers pending further action on its
application, that information is not applicable.

   While Order No. 566 eliminated certain information previously required to
be
provided in the transportation request form, it still requires pipelines to
maintain a log of data used to allocate capacity. Texas-Ohio must comply with
this provision and file a transportation request form as specified.

   Texas-Ohio can address this deficiency by either revising existing tariff
provisions, including its FTS and ITS request form, or by incorporating the
changes into Section 16 (Order No. 497 Compliance Procedures) of its proposed
tariff. Texas-Ohio must make a compliance filing within 45 days of the
issuance
of this order incorporating all information required by Order Nos. 497 and
566.
Additionally, since the tariff sheets Texas-Ohio filed in Docket No.
MT94-2-000
are not pro forma, Texas-Ohio should filed corrected tariff sheets in a form
[*20]  acceptable to become effective upon issuance of an order in this
proceeding.

IV.Environmental Matters

   On August 22, 1990, Texas-Ohio notified the Commission that it intended to
commence construction of the Hunter Pipeline and that the facilities would be
used for the transportation of natural gas under NGPA section 311(a)(2). This
notice provided the environmental information required by section 157.206(d)
of
the Commission's regulations.

,
PAGE 9
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *20

   To ensure that operation of the Hunter Pipeline compressors complies with
the
noise requirements of section 157.206(d)(5), Texas-Ohio must perform a
post-construction sound survey of the compressor station. This survey must be
performed not later than 30 days after the date of issuance of this order. n15
Texas-Ohio's application for a Part 157, subpart A certificate to operate the
Hunter Pipeline and a Part 284, subpart G blanket transportation certificate
relies solely on the use of existing facilities; no additional construction
authorization is requested or granted. Accordingly, subject to Texas-Ohio's
compliance with section 157.206(d)(5), we conclude that approval of the
instant
application is not a major Federal action significantly affecting [*21]  the
quality of the human environment.

   n15 Section 157.206(d)(5) provides that the noise attributable to any
compressor facility shall not exceed a day-night sound level of 55 dB(A) at
any
existing noise-sensitive areas.V. IESCO's Protest

   In its protest and request for an evidentiary hearing, IESCO charges that
Texas-Ohio's jurisdictional status must be determined as a precondition to the
issuance of a certificate.

   IESCO states that if Texas-Ohio was not a interstate pipeline for the
period
from November 1990 through June 3, 1991, it could not legally offer NGPA
section
311(a)(2) service and competing sellers of gas (such as IESCO) could have been
unfairly deprived of their markets.

   The Commission's January 15, 1992 order issuing Texas-Ohio a temporary
certificate to operate the Hunter Pipeline laid to rest concerns regarding
Texas-Ohio's jurisdictional status. Further, Texas-Ohio agreed in the
settlement
approved in the Commission's October 18, 1993, order to comply with the NGA,
NGPA, and the Commission's regulations. This order issues Texas-Ohio a case-
specific certificate pursuant to subpart A of Part 157 and a blanket
transportation certificate pursuant to subpart G of [*22]  Part 284. No
questions remain as to the jurisdictional status of Texas-Ohio.

   IESCO then complains that Texas-Ohio should have held an open-season during
which prospective shippers would have an opportunity to obtain services on the
Hunter Pipeline. As discussed above, the Commission has investigated
Texas-Ohio's operation and determined, among other things, that Texas-Ohio
notified only its marketing affiliate and the marketing affiliate's customers
of
the availability of capacity prior to construction of the Hunter Pipeline. The
Commission's policies require Texas-Ohio to use a non-discriminatory method of
selecting customers for both firm and interruptible transportation service
when
operating under Part 284. n16 As noted above, we are holding that Texas-Ohio
must hold an open season prior to commencing service under its Part 284
blanket
certificate. This approach will ensure that prior notice of firm capacity is
made available to all interested parties on a contemporaneous basis and in a
non-discriminatory manner. n17

   n16 18 C.F.R. 284.8(b) and 284.9(b).

   n17 See, e.g., Pacific Gas Transmission Co., 54 FERC 61.035 at 61,154
(1991);
ANR Storage Co., 51 FERC 61,114 at 61.304 (1990). [*23]

   IESCO next asserts that Texas-Ohio's proposed tariff does not assure that
nondiscriminatory service will be provided. We disagree. Acceptance by
,
PAGE 10
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *23

Texas-Ohio of the blanket transportation certificate authorized by this order,
and as conditioned herein, will subject Texas-Ohio to the full range of the
Commission's requirements, including those prohibiting discriminatory
practices.

   IESCO states that Texas-Ohio must be required to comply with the provisions
of the Affiliated Marketer Rule. As we noted in the order issuing a temporary
certificate, Order Nos. 497 and 497-A apply to all interstate pipelines with
affiliated marketers. Upon acceptance of the temporary certificate Texas- Ohio
became subject to the conditions of those orders. n18 Texas-Ohio's standards
of
conduct implementing Order No. 497, filed in Docket No. MG93-5-000, have been
accepted by the Commission. n19 When Texas-Ohio complies with this order's
directions, Texas-Ohio will be in full compliance with Order No. 497.

   n18 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 58 FERC 61.025 (1992).

   n19 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 65 FERC 61,387 (1993); Texas- Ohio Pipeline,
Inc., 67 FERC 61,149 (1994). [*24]

   IESCO asserts that Texas-Ohio's proposed rates have not been shown to be
required by the present or future public convenience and necessity. It is
particularly concerned with the fact that Texas-Ohio seeks to depreciate its
facilities over a ten-year period. As discussed above, we agree that
Texas-Ohio's proposed rates and ten-year depreciation period are
inappropriate,
and we have required adjustments to those figures as appropriate.

   IESCO also raises in its protest issues relating to Texas- Ohio's
application
for a temporary certificate. Those issues were addressed in our January 15,
1992
order issuing a temporary certificate. Issues raised by IESCO on rehearing of
that order are discussed below.

   In view of our disposition of the issues raised by IESCO, we find that
there
are no disputed material issues of fact and, therefore, no need for an
evidentiary trial-type hearing. n20

   n20 See Arkla Gathering Services Co., 67 FERC 61,257 (1994).VI. Request for
Rehearing

   On February 14, 1992, IESCO filed a request for rehearing of the
Commission's
January 15, 1992 order issuing Texas-Ohio a temporary certificate. IESCO
contends first that issuance of the temporary [*25]  certificate to Texas-Ohio
was unlawful on three grounds: (1) the Commission acted beyond its statutory
authority because it improperly determined that an emergency existed; (2) even
if an emergency existed, the Commission failed to make adequate findings
supported by substantial evidence; and (3) the Commission failed to resolve
jurisdictional and tariff issues in connection with issuance of the temporary
certificate.

   NGA section 7(c)(1)(B) provides that "the Commission may issue a temporary
certificate in cases of emergency, to assure maintenance of adequate service
or
to serve particular customers without notice or hearing, pending the
determination of an application for a [permanent] certificate . . . ." The
order
issuing a temporary certificate expressly found that an emergency exists
within
the meaning of section 7(c)(1)(B) of the Natural Gas Act and section 157.17 of
the Commission's regulations, and that the public convenience and necessity
required the issuance of a temporary certificate authorizing Texas-Ohio's
,
PAGE 11
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *25

operation of the Hunter Pipeline in order to continue service to existing
customers who had been relying on that service. n21 In support thereof, the
order referenced [*26]  the fact that: (1) Raritan River Steel Company, the
largest employer in Perth Amboy, New Jersey would be forced to purchase gas
at a
higher price and might have to close its plant with disastrous impacts on the
community; and (2) a number of entities, including the Philadelphia Housing
Authority, the Dartmouth Finishing Corporation, and various schools indicated
that they are operating under strained budgets and that the inability to
transport gas on Texas-Ohio would result in severe fiscal restraints.

   n21 Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 58 FERC 61,025 at 61,059 (1992).

   Under these circumstances, we believe that an emergency situation was shown
to exist within the standard established by NGA section 7 and that this
conclusion is appropriately supported by the evidence relied upon in the
order.
n22

   n22 See generally, Penn-York Energy Corp., 37 FERC 61,109 (1986);
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 34 FERC 61,402 (1986).

   With regard to its assertion that the Commission failed to resolve certain
jurisdictional and tariff issues prior to the issuance of the temporary
certificate, IESCO complains that:  [*27]  (i) the Commission issued a
temporary
certificate without making a finding that Texas-Ohio is a "natural gas
company"
subject to the Commission's NGA jurisdiction; (ii) the failure to resolve the
jurisdictional issue leaves unresolved the question of whether a certificate
of
public convenience and necessity is needed for the construction of the Hunter
Pipeline; and (iii) the Commission has left unresolved the question of whether
an open-season is required to assure non-discriminatory access to Texas-Ohio's
facility, thus precluding shippers who were denied service from any
opportunity
to obtain service during the period that the temporary certificate is in
effect.

   IESCO's arguments misapprehend the function of a temporary certificate. By
its very nature, issuance of a temporary certificate precedes decisions on
matters related to issuance of the permanent certificate. The issues raised by
IESCO are appropriate for decision in connection with the issuance of a
permanent certificate and we have addressed them above. n23

   n23 We in fact noted in the January 15, 1992 order that the issues raised
by
IESCO relating to the jurisdictional status of Texas-Ohio and the provision of
service on a nondiscriminatory basis would be resolved upon consideration of
the
application for a permanent certificate. We stressed at that time that "the
grant of a temporary certificate is made to allow the resumption of service by
specific customers previously utilizing Texas-Ohio's facilities to prevent
hardship." Texas-Ohio Pipeline, Inc., 58 FERC 61,025 at 61,060 (1992). [*28]

   IESCO also asserts that the Commission improperly refused to order an
evidentiary hearing before issuing the temporary certificate. IESCO alleges
that
efforts in Docket No. PR91-5-000 to determine the original and ultimate
destination of gas transported by Texas-Ohio were unsuccessful. It also states
that the proceedings in Docket No. PR91-5-000 and the instant docket have been
plagued by uncertainty over the identity of Texas- Ohio's customers and the
nature of the services rendered.

   We disagree that an evidentiary hearing was required prior to the issuance
of
,
PAGE 12
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *28

the temporary certificate. NGA section 7(c) does not require either notice or
hearings in conjunction with the issuance of a temporary certificate. Even
where
the statute requires an evidentiary, trial-type hearing, it is necessary only
where material issues of fact are in dispute that cannot be resolved on the
basis of the written record. n24 The matters raised by IESCO are speculative
or
immaterial to the decision to issue a temporary certificate to allow the
resumption of specific services to specific customers. Finally, IESCO alleges
that the Commission failed to attach conditions needed to prevent abuse of the
temporary [*29]  certificate. IESCO states that the temporary certificate
should
have been expressly limited to serving customers previously served through the
Hunter Pipeline and that it should have included a condition for potential
refunds.

   n24 Arkla Gathering Service Co., 67 FERC 61,257 (1994).

   Our January 15, 1992 order specifically provided that the temporary
certificate is not a blanket authorization, but is limited to only those
customers with whom Texas-Ohio has existing transportation agreements. n25 The
order further specified that the grant of a temporary certificate is made to
allow the resumption of service by specific customers previously utilizing the
Hunter Pipeline. n26 Thus, the temporary certificate expressly limited service
to existing customers. Finally, the NGA does not provide for making initial
rates subject to refund.

   n25 Id. at 61,059.

   n26 Id. at 61,060.The Commission Orders:

   (A) Upon the terms and conditions of this order, a certificate of public
convenience and necessity is issued to Texas-Ohio pursuant to subpart A of
Part
157 of the Commission's regulations, as amended from time to time, authorizing
it to operate the Hunter Pipeline [*30]  in interstate commerce.

   (B) The certificate issued in Order Paragraph (A) above is conditioned upon
Texas-Ohio's compliance with Part 154 and paragraphs (a), (c)(3), (e), and (g)
of section 157.20 of the Commission's regulations.

   (C) Upon the terms and conditions of this order, a blanket certificate of
public convenience and necessity is issued to Texas-Ohio authorizing it to
perform the activities specified in subpart G of Part 284 of the Commission's
regulations, as amended from time to time. The certificate issued to
Texas-Ohio
in Ordering Paragraph (A) above is conditioned upon Texas-Ohio's acceptance of
this blanket certificate.

   (D) Upon the terms and conditions of this order, permission for and
approval
of the abandonment by Texas-Ohio of the services authorized in subpart G of
Part
284 of the Commission's regulations, as amended from time to time, are
granted.

   (E) The certificate issued in Ordering Paragraph (C) above, the abandonment
authorized in Ordering Paragraph (D) above, and the rights granted thereunder
are conditioned on Texas-Ohio's compliance with the applicable Commission
regulations under the NGA, including Parts 154, 157, and 284, and paragraphs
(a)
and (e)  [*31]  of section 157.20 of the Commission's regulations.

   (F) Texas-Ohio must make a filing within 45 days of the date of issuance of
,
PAGE 13
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *31

this order revising its tariff to implement the requirements of Order No. 636.

   (G) Texas-Ohio must make a filing in Docket No. MT94-2-000 within 45 days
of
the date of issuance of this order revising its tariff to comply with Order
Nos.
497 and 566.

   (H) Texas-Ohio must conduct an open-season to allocate capacity on its
system
to initiate Part 284 transportation within 30 days of the date of issuance of
this order.

   (I) Texas-Ohio shall conduct a noise survey of its compressor station to
comply with 18 C.F.R. 157.206(d)(5) not later than 30 days after the date of
issuance of this order.

   (J) IESCO's protest and request for a hearing is denied. (K) Energy
Marketing
Exchange's petition for leave to intervene out of time is granted.

   (L) The motions of Texas-Ohio and IESCO to file answers dated December 26,
1991 and January 14, 1992, respectively, are granted.

APPENDIX:

   APPENDIX

   Pro Forma Tariff Analysis: Specific Comments

1. Rate Schedules FTS and/or ITS

   Section 1 - Availability

In this section, Texas-Ohio reserves the right, in its sole judgement
(exercised
on a reasonable [*32]  and non-discriminatory basis) to decline service
whenever
it would be contrary to good operational practices or detrimental to other
customers. Texas- Ohio should revise this section to set out the specific
criteria or detrimental actions that would trigger this clause.

   Section 1.(iii) of Rate Schedules FTS and ITS requires shippers to provide
Texas-Ohio with "acceptable" evidence of, among other things, gas supply,
market, and other transportation services. The term "acceptable" is vague and
subject to unduly discriminatory interpretation. Texas-Ohio must set forth
specifically the evidence required to be "acceptable".

   Section 2- Applicability and Character of Service

Section 2.4 of Rate Schedule ITS states that transportation will be "subject
to
curtailment or interruption as deemed necessary in Texas-Ohio's discretion."
The
provision is vague and could result in unduly discriminatory application of
curtailment procedures. Texas-Ohio must modify the provision to detail the
specific operational characteristics and criteria used to determine the
conditions and need for curtailment.

   Section 3 - Priority and Interruption of Transportation Service

,
PAGE 14
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *33

Section 3.2 of Rate Schedule  [*33]  FTS provides for firm service on a first
come, first served basis. However, Texas-Ohio retains a priority for customers
with existing FTS agreements. This provision is unduly discriminatory and must
be removed from the tariff.

   Section 3.4 of Rate Schedule FTS provides that Texas-Ohio can curtail
service
due to reasons of force majeure "or any other operational considerations to be
reasonably determined by Texas- Ohio". Texas-Ohio must set forth the specific
operational considerations it would rely upon in exercising this authority.

   In Section 3.5 of Rate Schedule FTS and Section 3.3 of Rate Schedule ITS,
Texas-Ohio proposes to suspend service if a shipper's account is unpaid for 30
days. Texas-Ohio can suspend service without prior Commission approval if a
customer fails to pay a billed amount within 30 days of the due date, but only
where 10 days notice is given and the shipper neither pays the bill nor
provides
guarantee of payment. Texas-Ohio must modify these provisions to provide for a
10 day notice period.

   Section 4 - Requests for Transportation

Section 4.1 of Rate Schedules FTS and ITS states that a shipper must complete
a
FTS or ITS Request Form; however, no request  [*34]  form is included.
Texas-Ohio must establish a request form as part of its tariff. That form must
comply with the requirements of Order No. 497 as set forth in section
250.16(b)
of the Commission's regulations.

   Section 5 - Operating Conditions

Section 5.1 of Rate Schedules FTS and ITS requires shippers to provide
Texas-Ohio with estimates of gas to be transported and such other operating
data
as Texas-Ohio may require. This section should be amended to specify what
other
operating data may be required of shippers.

   Section 5.4 of Rate Schedules FTS and ITS specifies that Texas-Ohio will
not
provide service on any day for which all necessary upstream and downstream
arrangements cannot be confirmed. This clause should be amended to state that
any action will be taken on a non-discriminatory basis.

   Section 6 - Rates

Section 6.2 of Rate Schedule FTS defines the monthly reservation and commodity
(usage) charge. Texas-Ohio should insert the word "maximum" in the second
sentence prior to "monthly commodity charge" and "unit commodity rate(s)".

   Section 9 - Waivers

Section 9 of Rate Schedule FTS provides that Texas-Ohio may waive any rights
hereunder or any obligations of a customer on [*35]  a basis which is not
unduly
discriminatory.  This language creates the impression that Texas-Ohio retains
the discretion to waive default by the shipper of any provision in the tariff.
This would give Texas-Ohio excessive latitude in operating under its tariff
and
provide an opportunity for undue discrimination among shippers. Waiver
provisions are permissible, but they must serve a functional purpose and
operate
under a specific and clearly defined set of circumstances. Texas-Ohio must
specify the criteria it will use in determining whether to waive a particular
,
PAGE 15
                 69 F.E.R.C. P61,145; 1994 FERC LEXIS 2340, *35

provision.

   2. General Terms and Conditions

Texas-Ohio's pro forma tariff contains no scheduling or imbalance penalties.
Pipelines are permitted, but not required, to impose penalties to maintain
control of their system. If scheduling or imbalances become a problem in the
future, Texas- Ohio can make a tariff filing to propose appropriate penalties.

   Section 2 - Transporter Receipt Point(s)

   Section 2.2 provides that Texas-Ohio's obligation to receive and deliver
gas
shall never exceed the total daily volume Shipper is able and willing to
receive. Texas-Ohio must remove the words "and willing" from this provision.
The
phrase [*36]  is vague and could lead to discriminatory activities.

   Section 5 - Nominations and Balancing Deliveries

Section 5.1 provides that a shipper will inform Texas-Ohio daily, "or on some
other basis as Transporter may reasonably require pursuant to such other
procedures as may be established and published by Transporter from time to
time
. . . ." of the daily gas quantity. The phrase is vague and should be replaced
with language specifying what other basis for notification is required (e.g.,
phone, fax, or telecopy).

   Section 5.2 requires shippers to give Texas-Ohio notice 24 hours in advance
"or as Transporter may designate from time to time" of any change in the daily
quantity. Texas-Ohio should specify what alternative time frame would meet its
requirements or delete this phrase.

,
108CKF
**********  Print Completed  **********

Time of Request:   July 6, 2000  04:30 pm EST

Print Number:      59:0:11094435
Number of Lines:   661
Number of Pages:   15
,


Please forgive me, I lied!  The PEP system can only be accessed through the
Enron INTRANET by dialing into the system  if you are not in the office.

Thanks.

Mollie
---------------------- Forwarded by Mollie Gustafson/PDX/ECT on 11/15/2000
03:46 PM ---------------------------

Mollie Gustafson
11/14/2000 05:45 PM
To: Portland West Desk
cc:
Subject: PEP System

The PEP system may be reached via the internet from any computer (home!) at
the following address:
http://pep.corp.enron.com.

Happy reviewing!

Mollie


Roberto,

See attached. Let's discuss.

Paul


Kate,

Geir is out of the office until Monday, I will change the counterparties in
the deals for him.  If Houston asks again, you can let them know that it is
taken care of.

Thank you for the heads up...

Bill


Our crack marketing team (cary & tony) are at the norther border shipper
meeting.  I will get them to start looking for more harper or Northern
Border - manhatten gas when they return.  Attached is a spreadsheet showing
tony's deals done to date.  I believe that we left harper at Vent +.06 and
NB-manhatten at chicago + .04.


Please review MEH presentation and send comments to MEH by 5:00 p.m.  May 12,
1999 via notes mail.

Thank you,

Sylvia T. Sauseda/MEH


Greg,

I wanted to forward this letter to you that I received from a good friend of
mine who is interested in discussing global steel trading oppotunities with
Enron.  If you don't mind, I would like to have Chase Belew call you to
possibly set up a meeting.

I work on the west gas trading desk.  You can reach me at x37031.  Thank you
for your assistance.

Sincerely,
Mike Grigsby

---------------------- Forwarded by Mike Grigsby/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 12:17
PM ---------------------------

Chase Belew <cbelew@e-steel.com> on 09/05/2000 04:01:46 PM
To: "'mike.grigsby@enron.com'" <mike.grigsby@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Meeting with Enron Networks

Mike,

As per our conversation, I would appreciate your help to arrange a short
meeting with executives from Enron Networks and a group from our company.

e-STEEL (www.e-steel.com) has become the preferred marketplace as well as
the recognized technological and collaborative commerce leader for the
$800billion global steel market. We have financial backing from Goldman
Sachs and Kleiner Perkins and have alliance contracts with companies
throughout the steel supply chain, including U.S. Steel and Ford Motor
Company . Because we consider Enron another leader in the development of
electronic marketplaces, we feel that there may be areas for mutual
cooperation. The purpose of our meeting is strictly exploratory.

Our group will consist of myself and Mr. Russ Carleson (Vice President,
Sales) from our headquarters in New York. We would like to propose a lunch
meeting next Thursday, September 14th, if possible. I will call you this
week to follow up.

Thanks,

Chase Belew
Account Manager
e-STEEL Corporation
440 Louisiana, Suite 440
Houston, TX 77002
(713) 236-7701
cbelew@e-steel.com


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Gerry, Robert
Sent:	Friday, January 18, 2002 1:02 PM
To:	Herndon, Rogers; Schneider, Bryce
Subject:	friday equity report

Johnson and Johnson (JNJ) will come out with earnings on Tuesday.

JNJ is currently trading high in its 30 day trading range.
The 30 day high is 60.18.
The 30 day low is 56.23.
JNJ with two hours to close of market is now at 59.85.

JNJ has trended up and in the opposite direction of the Dow in the recent market selloff as investors have moved to safety.

I look for JNJ to swing down from here in its tight 30 day range.

I look to short JNJ now and cover a little under 59.

JNJ is not volatile.
This is a mediocre trade at best and only good for 1 to 1.5 points.
If JNJ continues rallying I look to continue shorting and wait for the 2 to 3 point downswing that will follow.

Yesterday's recommendation of a short MSFT position was a much stronger idea.
But this is Friday's report.

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

Harley Davidson (HDI) released strong earnings last night.

The stock rallied to as high as 55.50 (up 1.20) and has since retrenched to 54 (down 0.30).

Harley is a strong short candidate at any point over 55.
It trades down from there into its 30 day range.


______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
Subject: 27  things you wish you could say at WORK
Author:  Lettie Favela at frb-branch-2
Date:    11/10/00 5:22 PM

> THE 27 TOP THINGS YOU WISH YOU COULD SAY AT WORK
> 1.   I can see your point, but I still think you're full of shit.
> 2.   I have plenty of talent and vision. I just don't give a fuck.
> 3.   How about "never"? Is "never" good enough for you?
> 4.   It sounds like English, but I can't understand a word you're saying.
> 5.   I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
>      public.
> 6.   Ahhh, I see the fuck-up fairy has visited us again.
> 7.   You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
> 8.   Stop, I'm already visualising the duct tape over your
       mouth.
> 9.   The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.
> 10.  Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh nervously and change the
>      subject.
> 11.  I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you.
> 12.  I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard to
>      pronounce.
> 13.  Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.
> 14.  I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid.
> 15.  What am I? Flypaper for freaks!?
> 16.  I'm not being rude. You're just insignificant.
> 17.  Thank you. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of
>      view.
> 18.  It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.
> 19.  Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
> 20.  No, my powers can only be used for good.
> 21.  I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me.
> 22.  You sound reasonable......time to up my medication.
> 23.  I'll try being nicer if you'll try being smarter.
> 24.  I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.
> 25.  I don't work here. I'm a consultant.
> 26.  Who me? I just wander from room to room.
> 27.  My toys! My toys! I can't do this job without my toys.
       So just leave them alone before you make them want to
       leave as well.

> Useful Expressions for those HIGH STRESS days
> 1.   Well, aren't we just a ray of fucking sunshine?
> 2.   Not the brightest crayon in the box now, are we?
> 3.   Do I look like a fucking people person?
> 4.   This isn't an office. It's Hell with fluorescent lighting.
> 5.   I pretend to work. They pretend to pay me.
> 6.   You!!! Off my planet!!
> 7.   Practice random acts of intelligence & senseless acts of
>      self-control.
> 8.   I like cats too. Let's exchange recipes.
> 9.   Did the aliens forget to remove your anal probe?
> 10.  And your crybaby whiny-assed opinion would be...?
> 11.  How many times do I have to flush before you go away?
> 12.  Aw, did I step on your poor little itty bitty ego?
> 13.  How do I set a laser printer to stun?
> 14.  I'm not tense, just terribly, terribly alert.
> 15.  When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.
> 16.  Earth is full, please go home.
>
>
>


Vince,

Mr. Catanese is not ready yet.  His statistics is rusty, and he only finishes
11 Chapters of John Hull  (18 Chapters  are minimal
to be serious).

Zimin


Sue et al---as we discussed last week, Scott Bolton and I had a conference
call on Friday with a coalition that is forming to promote national broadband
infrastructure policies.  The members are currently Global Crossing (Michael
Freedman), Level 3 (Jim Pribyl), Williams and Quest.

The preliminary game plan of the coaltion is to target this policy initiative
in states where 1) there are currently problems or impediments such as bad
legislation or strong pushes for franchise fees for broadband 2) states with
opportunities 3)states where we collectively have heavy presence such as west
coast/east coast.  The intent is to have only a few companies involved--about
5 or 6, with a commitment of time from the members and probably some
financial commitment in the $25,000 to $50,000 range over time (I'm thinking
12-18 months)

I will be seeing a few of these guys at the RGA meeting in Tampa at the end
of the week, and there will be another formal meeting in the next 3 or 4
weeks which Scott is going to try to attend.

I'd appreciate if if we could discuss at our EBS conference call on Monday
morning if there is time.


Please activate all draft products in finswaps, and nontx phys and phys index
(all terms) including restricted SJ.  Thank you very much.  Please call me
when they are activated.

Mike Grigsby
x37031


The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete.  Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein.  Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author.  As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates.  ? 2001 Carr Futures

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

Crude     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/crude22.pdf
Natural Gas     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/ngas22.pdf
Distillate     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/hoil22.pdf
Unleaded     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/unlded22.pdf

Nat Gas Strip Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/StripmatrixNG22.pdf
Nat Gas Spread Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/SpreadmatrixNG22.pdf

Crude and Products Spread Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/SpreadmatrixCL22.pdf

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


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 04/04/2001
03:27 PM ---------------------------

Ben Parsons
04/04/2001 08:47 AM
To: Iris Mack/ENRON@enronXgate
cc: Vasant Shanbhogue/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott
Salmon/EU/Enron@Enron, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, Nigel Price/LON/ECT@ECT,
Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Enron Credit Model Docs

Iris

Vasant informed me that you would be helping the quant efforts of Enron
Credit, with the first job to be compiling model documentation to be sent to
Darrell Duffie. I've attached below a pretty complete set of current docs we
have produced, in no particular order:

Nigel's doc on FMC curve generation (he claims it is out of date now though):

FMCMATHS.DOC

My doc on general theory we're using for pricing and default probability
generation:

CREDIT PRICING 2.1.DOC

My doc on asset swap calculation (there is one error to correct)

ASSET SWAP DFIS.PDF

My doc on Placement Model (a second version of the model incorporating
ratings has yet to be documented)

PLACEMENT MODEL 1.0.1.DOC

George's doc on the neural network placement model:

NEURAL NETWORK 1.0.DOC

My doc on the VAR model used for credit:

VAR MODEL 1.0 .DOC

and Kirstee's which preceded it:

CREDITVAR2.DOC

Nigel's doc on the portfolio model used for CDOs and basket trades:

SYNTHETICCDOS.DOC

Katherine's doc on correlations:

CORRELATIONS.DOC

Let me know if you need any more information about these models and their
applications.

Regards

Ben

PS I've had to zip the files up as they were too big:


Tana,

Thanks for the note.

Yes, this is a form GTC developed and approved by me for lumber physical
trades.

	Tana Jones
	10/19/2000 05:29 PM

		 To: Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diane Anderson/NA/Enron@Enron, Tiffany
Williams/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Re: Lumber GTC

Harry,

I believe this is yours...
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 10/19/2000 05:28 PM -----

	Mary Cook
	10/19/2000 04:47 PM

		 To: Tiffany Williams/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Diane Anderson/NA/Enron@Enron, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Lumber GTC

The attached GTC should not be used in relation to any financial product.  It
reads as if it is to apply to physical lumber deals.  However, by copy of
this memo to Tana, I ask that she verify that it has been an approved
document for physical online lumber.

Enron North America Corp.
Mary Cook
1400 Smith, 38th Floor, Legal
Houston, Texas   77002-7361
(713) 345-7732 (phone)
(713) 646-3490 (fax)
mary.cook@enron.com

	Tiffany Williams@ENRON
	10/19/2000 03:04 PM

		 To: Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Lumber GTC

Mary,

Should the following document be attached to all lumber deals?  Recently,
there was a clickpaper deal for lumber; the online GTC was attached to the
confirmation.  But, a question on this document has since been raised.

Please advise.

Thanks,

Tiffany


yep


Charlene,

Which dates are the Super Saturday weekends for Associates?  I'm trying to
get Whalley committed for an Associate Super Saturday.

Many Thanks,

Liz Taylor

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Charlene Jackson @ ENRON                           10/24/2000 09:20 PM

Sent by: Enron Announcements@ENRON
To: All Enron Employees North America
cc:
Subject: Super Saturday Changes

The recruiting season has officially begun.  The first Super Saturday weekend
is the weekend of October 27th and 28th.  We have undergone a rigorous
interview process on campus, which will allow us to focus on &selling8
candidates that are invited to Houston for Super Saturday.  Students will
arrive on Friday afternoon and will depart on Sunday morning.  We have
activities planned for the entire weekend.  The goal is to implement a Super
Saturday process that allows for consistent and meaningful hiring decisions
while also allowing the candidates exposure to a greater number of Enron
employees.  To that end, we have made the following changes:
Friday Evening Dinner.    The dinners will be held at the same restaurant.
We will provide transportation for all candidates.  We will continue to have
small tables of six individuals that will include two (2) Enron employees and
four (4) students.  There will be a group cocktail hour at the restaurant
before the dinner.  This will enable the Enron employees to meet and evaluate
more students.  It will also give the students broader exposure to Enron
employees.
Saturday Interviews.   Interviewers will receive their interview packages
(schedules and resumes) at breakfast on Saturday morning. This will
facilitate last minute cancellations of interviewers and/or candidates.  We
have allowed time to review resumes before the interview process. To
facilitate the completion of the evaluation form on each student, the
interviewers will remain in an assigned interview room and the students will
rotate.
In prior years, the interviewers have interviewed eight (8) candidates.
Interviewers will now interview only five (5) candidates.  The remainder of
the time will be spent in the decision-making meeting. It is essential that
all interviewers attend the decision-making meeting and that all evaluation
forms are completed and input prior to the meeting.
Decision-Making Meeting.   Rather than asking the interviewers to return on
Monday afternoon, we will hold the decision-making meeting on Saturday
following the interviews and lunch.  The meetings are scheduled from 1:30 PM
to 3:30 PM and will be facilitated by members of Enron,s executive management
team.  Dave Delainey will facilitate the October 28 meeting.  Kevin Hannon,
Jeff Shankman, John Lavorato, Rick Causey and Dan Leff will facilitate
subsequent meetings.
Need for interviewers.  There has been a tremendous response to the call for
dinner participants; however, we are still in need of interviewers for each
of the Super Saturdays.  Please respond with your willingness to interview
at:  http://axis.enron.com/notice/ssinvite.asp
(When selecting dates please avoid selecting to interview candidates who
attend the schools for which you are a team member).
We thank you in advance for your participation and support of the program.


Good job Rodney - keep me up to speed and let me know where I can help.

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 07/18/2000
11:48 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Rodney Malcolm                           07/18/2000 10:08 AM

To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Are we finding value in outsourcing? - GE Plastics

I believe you would be the grief master on this subject at least in terms of
"you better start delivering on this stuff".  By the way the pitch to
Colonial pipeline went okay yesterday.  Good news - Bill Scott CEO said we
were the only company that could deliver exactly what he asked for.  Bad news
is that he thought it should be 25% lower.  I believe his reaction is simply
a gut reaction from a former trader and we are following up with information
to get him better educated as to why this is a good deal for him.  We have
$20 - $30mm in the deal and this creates roughly $70mm of value or savings
(depending on your assumptions) for Colonial.  I believe we can get to a
trade with them.  I'll keep you updated.

Thanks,
Rodney

David W Delainey
07/17/2000 11:19 PM
To: Rodney Malcolm/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Are we finding value in outsourcing? - GE Plastics

Rodney, interesting title- is someone giving you grief on this strategy?

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 07/17/2000
11:13 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Rodney Malcolm                           07/16/2000 11:08 AM

To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: James A Ajello/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Are we finding value in outsourcing? - GE Plastics

This week we will begin discussions on structure and pricing with GE
Plastics.  At the risk of getting committed to earnings delivery I thought it
would be helpful to give a range of value to us & GE at least before the
economics start to deteriorate in negotiations.  Currently the proposal would
require GE to step up to ten year fixed price positions that would create the
following split up of economics:

Savings to GE $33MM PV
Value to Enron $15MM with $10MM of this value in bookable mark to market
$40 MM in capital invested in the Demand Side Management Projects.

I think that this suggests there should be value in our outsourcing efforts.

Thanks,
Rodney


Jim---FYI (did not see your name on the address list).  This would be Dynegy's release.

-----Original Message-----
From: 	Palmer, Mark A. (PR)
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 6:23 AM
To:	Kean, Steven J.; Koenig, Mark; Denne, Karen; Tilney, Elizabeth; McMahon, Jeffrey; Bowen Jr., Raymond; Rogers, Rex; Hiltabrand, Leslie
Subject:	FW: Final release as of 604EST

 here's the latest draft.  We got some movement on the headline and the lede.  Still working on the banks.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From:	Deborah.Fiorito@dynegy.com [mailto:Deborah.Fiorito@dynegy.com]
Sent:	Monday, November 26, 2001 6:06 AM
To:	Steve Lipin; mpalmer@enron.com
Subject:	RE: Final release as of 604EST

with some cosmetic fixes...


Several agreements with PG&E entities as you might imagine, none with this particular entity - Old agreement  (12/99) with PG& E Corporation re ENA acquisition of PG&E affiliates PG&E Gas Transmission, Texas Corporation and its subsidiaries and PG&E Gas Transmission Teco, Inc. and its subsidiaries expires 12/2001 - contained a no-hire provision which expired 12/2000.

	Several with PG&E National Energy Group relating to purchase and/or sale of generating assets, but each is transaction specific and contains no restrictive provisions.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nemec, Gerald
Sent:	Tuesday, July 10, 2001 9:39 AM
To:	Young, Kay
Subject:

Kay, Please see attached.

 << File: PGTData.DOC >>


Mr Wick,

Attached for your review and comment is the HPL-Chevron Compression Agreement
we recently discussed.  Your requested changes have been implemented into the
document.  If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to reach
me at the number below or Gerald Nemec at 713.853.3512.  It was a pleasure
working with you.

Thanks,

Eric Gillaspie
713-345-7667
Enron Building 3886


Julian Rose
15 Greenwich Hills Drive
Greenwich, CT 06831

Phone:  (203) 531 0691 (h)
 (203) 829 9300
 Debbie Parker (203) 625 7970


Agenda

CMS Account Report
(a/k/a Prospect List)

CMS Deal Report

Conference Call Details
Dates	Every Thursday starting on November 16, 2000
Time	11:30 am (CST)
Phone	(800) 991-9019
Passcode	6207248
Conference Room 	EB 751


AGENT JH/SS BOOKING REF
ZDJCNC

                                          KEAVEY/PETER

  ENRON
  1400 SMITH
  HOUSTON TX 77002
  PETE KEAVEY X37277

  DATE:  MAY 11 2001                   ENRON

SERVICE               DATE  FROM           TO             DEPART
ARRIVE

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES  26JUL HOUSTON TX     NEW YORK NY    1058A   328P
CO 1969    V          THU   G.BUSH INTERCO LA GUARDIA
                            TERMINAL C     TERMINAL M
                            SNACK                         NON STOP
                            RESERVATION CONFIRMED         3:30 DURATION
                  AIRCRAFT: BOEING 737-800
                            SEAT 06D NO SMOKING CONFIRMED KEAVEY/PETER

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES  29JUL NEW YORK NY    HOUSTON TX     259P    558P
CO 1975    V          SUN   LA GUARDIA     G.BUSH INTERCO
                            TERMINAL M     TERMINAL C
                            SNACK                         NON STOP
                            RESERVATION CONFIRMED         3:59 DURATION
                  AIRCRAFT: BOEING 737-300
                            SEAT 10A NO SMOKING CONFIRMED KEAVEY/PETER

      AIR FARE 241.86       TAX 26.64           TOTAL USD
268.50

                                        INVOICE TOTAL USD
268.50

PAYMENT: CCCA5490850070001643/1103/A211782

RESERVATION NUMBER(S)  CO/MVG8PL

KEAVEY/PETER                             TICKET:CO/ETKT 005 7028381411

CO  FREQUENT FLYER COWH845429
**CONTINENTAL RECORD LOCATOR: MVG8PL
THIS IS A TICKETLESS RESERVATION. PLEASE HAVE A
ICTURE ID AVAILABLE AT THE AIRPORT. THANK YOU
***********************************************
NON-REFUNDABLE TKT MINIMUM $100.00 CHANGE FEE
                  THANK YOU FOR CALLING VITOL TRAVEL

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


Dr. Kaminski:

Please see our attached paper.

Thank you,
Jed Howard, Brian Nelson, and
Stuart Hamel
(713) 218-8903

 - winmail.dat


missing deals for mike

buys idaho
230.00
25 mw
Q2 01
palo

sell idaho
200.00
25 mw
Q2 01
sp15

buy powerex
jan
mid c
550.00
25 mw
off peak


FYI:  our NWPL out of balance is the Canadian desk not keeping up.
PSCO and WIC are the Denver office.

Thanks


here is your payback.  Martin, Bruce's trader-made fun of his haircut last
week - woody woodpecker.  Steno over here for him and play it.
PL

---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT on 04/18/2001
08:10 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Martin Cuilla                           04/06/2001 08:07 AM

To: Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:

Phillip - Please do us a favor and play this often!


I set up the following new TU deals for May 1

759849 St 30 to Z6 New York
759876 St 45 to Z6 New York
759877 St 65 to Z6 New York
760097 Ragley to Z6 New York

759992 St 45 to St 65


Greetings Jeffrey:

I'm pleased to tell you that VentureWire can now be sent
to you every business day in HTML format. This new
edition will save you time, and there are new features
you'll likely find useful.

First, it's easier to navigate--clicking on a headline
that interests you takes you right to the story, then
clicking on the up arrow takes you back to the headlines.

Second, the VentureWire team has added three features
to enable faster scanning--an index of companies, an
index of investors, and a link to the table of contents--so
it's simpler now to use our service to monitor specific
firms or funds, or to find news about new financings,
executive changes, or other topics.

To see the improved VentureWire, visit:
http://venturewire.net/html/daily.htm

Because the new edition is so handy, we'll assume you want
it unless you tell us otherwise. (Of course, you can switch
back to the plain-text version of VentureWire at any time.)

IF YOU WANT HTML MAIL:
Do nothing.  You'll begin receiving the HTML version on
Friday, November 17.

IF YOU DON'T WANT HTML MAIL:
Click on this link:
http://venturewire.net/html/?i=91736

This will let us know you'd prefer to receive plain text.
If you follow this link before Friday, November 17, the
text version of VentureWire will continue arriving in
your e-mail box without interruption.

Undecided?  You'll likely prefer the HTML edition if
you're using an HTML-capable mail client such as
Microsoft's Outlook and Outlook Express, or Netscape's
Communicator and Messenger.

But there are reasons not to switch.

1) Your desktop mail reader is older and doesn't handle
HTML properly.

2) You read VentureWire out of the office on a Blackberry,
as do many venture capitalists and other frequent travelers.
In this case, the HTML edition is worse, not better.

3) You receive VentureWire via America Online. In our
experience, AOL doesn't always display HTML mail correctly.

4) You've had trouble with HTML mail in the past. For
reasons unknown such mail doesn't always get through
your mail system.

Thanks for your continued interest, and as always, let us
know at venturewire@venturewire.com if you have any other
thoughts, concerns, or suggestions about how we can make
VentureWire more useful to you.

Brian O'Connell
Publisher
VentureWire


The following is a clean version of the tax characterization clause just
dispatched that reflects the comments of Lou Stoler.  Best regards.
---------------------- Forwarded by Stephen H Douglas/HOU/ECT on 05/31/2000
01:23 PM ---------------------------

Morris Richard Clark
05/30/2000 07:24 PM
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Stephen H Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Language for the Confirmation

Tana,

The language in the Schedule should reflect what is in our Form#3, whereby
"Enron Re:" is the U.S. entity and "Swiss RE - EFR" is a Barbados entity.
Also, the tax form requested should be a W-8.

In addition, the following language should be added to the confirmation:

United States Federal Income Tax Characterization and Reporting.  The parties
recognize and intend that, for United States federal income tax purposes, any
payment by the Counterparty of the Fixed Amount will be treated as a payment
pursuant to a guaranty by the Counterparty of the obligations of Bob West
Treasure, LLC to make payments under a Loan Agreement between Bob West
Treasure, LLC and Royal Bank of Canada.  The parties agree that to the extent
either of the parties is required to report any item of income, gain, loss,
deduction or credit relating to the Transaction for United States federal
income tax purposes, such party shall report such item consistent with the
characterization set forth above and shall not take any position on any tax
return or report relating to United States federal income taxes which is
inconsistent with such characterization.  The parties recognize that the
manner in which they have agreed to characterize the Transaction for United
States federal income tax purposes may be inconsistent with the manner in
which the Transaction is characterized for non-United States federal income
tax purposes and for accounting, regulatory or other purposes.  The
provisions of this Section are not intended to affect the manner in which the
parties report the Transaction for such other purposes, or the interpretation
of the provisions of the Confirmation and the rights and obligations of the
Parties arising hereunder, for any purposes.


Gerald, FYI I understand that Exxon/Mobil is paying its 1st year summer
clerks
$7,500 per month and that Compaq is paying $30 per hour. Thanks, Bruce.

>>> Gerald.Nemec@enron.com 04/27/01 04:42PM >>>
Bruce,

Enron North America Corp.  selected 4 candidates for interview for
summer
clerkship positions from the resumes you forward.  Two were made offers
with both accepting the offers.  The two clerks we have working this
summer
are:

Alisha Mahabir - South Texas College of Law
Nabil Nachawati - University of Houston Law Center

Nabil will be working the 1st half of the summer and Alisha will be
working
the 2nd half of the summer.  Thanks for all your help with this process.
If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to call me
at
(713) 853-3512.

Gerald Nemec


---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 04/24/2001
10:30 AM ---------------------------
From: Veronica Espinoza/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/24/2001 09:47 AM
To: Janie Aguayo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diane Anderson/NA/Enron@Enron, Derek
Bailey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jean Bell/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Patricia Boulanger/CAL/ECT@ECT, Bob Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie
Brewer/NA/Enron@Enron, Lesli Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Celeste
Cisneros/NA/Enron@Enron, Sharon Crawford/CAL/ECT@ECT, Richard
Deming/NA/Enron@Enron, Russell Diamond/ENRON@enronXgate, Cindy
Feldman/CAL/ECT@ECT, Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT, Veronica
Gonzalez/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Walter
Guidroz/ENRON@enronXgate, Larry Joe Hunter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kam
Keiser/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT, Errol
McLaughlin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Nidia Mendoza/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Bianca Ornelas/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie
Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Dianne Seib/CAL/ECT@ECT,
Linda Sietzema/CAL/ECT@ECT, Kim S Theriot/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ellen
Wallumrod/NA/Enron@ENRON, Melinda Whalen/CAL/ECT@ECT, Tiffany
Williams/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Credit Report--4/24/01


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/31/2001
09:52 AM ---------------------------

ERisk <eRisks_news@email.eRisks.com> on 03/30/2001 11:24:31 AM
Please respond to <info@erisk.com>
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: ERisk Essentials

		www.erisk.com
		What's New at ERisk.com - 30 March 2001

	This week's ERisk  Essentials is supported by Enron Credit, providers of
market-driven  credit information on thousands of companies worldwide. Enron
Credit recently  released their new website at www.enroncredit.com.  The site
now features a robust portfolio section that contains detailed  company
profiles, credit cost indices, graphing capabilities and more.  For more
information, visit www.enroncredit.com.

Weekly
Review	This  week's economic, banking and P_insurance news, from an
enterprise  risk management perspective. Read it here...

Analysis
	?  The Basle Committee's report on hedge funds: interesting reading for
commercial  bankers?
	? Demand for captive insurers booms, but are owners and domiciles overlooking
 their risks?
	? How good banks can stand out from the bad: telling shareholders  about risk
management

Viewpoint	In  this month's CRO  Profile, Robert Nimmo, chief risk officer of
First Union, talks  exclusively to ERisk's Duncan Wood about the challenges
of risk managing  the bank's changing strategic direction - from managing
asset quality to  controlling operational and business risks. Still
available: Ian  Bremmer on why political scientists will join physicists on
Wall Street

Feature
	The  treatment of operational risk is one of the more controversial, and
poorly  understood, elements of Basle's proposed revisions to the Capital
Accord.  Penny Cagan of Zurich IC Squared explains  what the Basle Accord
proposals mean for most banks, where there's room  for improvement and how to
get started. Still available: How Wachovia,  Swiss Re New Markets and SEB use
RAROC

iConference	Do  economic capital equations tie you in knots? Attend our
iConference "Practical  Considerations in Measuring Economic Capital" on
April 11. Read  more about it and register  for the iConference.
	Access the slides and a summary of last week's Credit  Derivatives iConference

		Thousands  of risk managers read and respond to this message every week.
Interested  in reaching them?

		____________________________________
		The ERisk  Essentials is published every Friday by ERisk.com.
		To subscribe to this newsletter, please register on our website.
		To unsubscribe, access your account. Your username  is the email address
where you received this message.
		To be reminded of your password, or to reset it, follow this link.


Hey guys.  Mark and I spoke at length this morning.  He's got other critical
things going on this afternoon, and may or may not be able to join us.  Let's
plan on a 3:00 p.m. CDT time, and even if Mark can't join us, I'll detail you
on what he and I talked about this morning.


that is correct
thxs dave


---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Hernandez/HOU/ECT on 08/10/2000
09:02 AM ---------------------------

Angela Barnett
08/09/2000 07:51 AM
To: Regina Blackshear/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra R McNichols/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy
Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nikki Johnson/NA/Enron@Enron, Angela
Gill/NA/Enron@Enron, Warren Perry/Corp/Enron@Enron, Derick
Jones/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eve Puckett/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jorge
Olivares/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Diane Salcido/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Fwd:

---------------------- Forwarded by Angela Barnett/HOU/ECT on 08/09/2000
07:49 AM ---------------------------

Mary Westbrook <kittenkid_65@yahoo.com> on 08/08/2000 03:01:58 PM
To: kttn0965@aol.com
cc:
Subject: Fwd:

Note: forwarded message attached.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
X-Apparently-To: kittenkid_65@yahoo.com via web701.mail.yahoo.com
X-Track: 1: 40
Received: from modem1.nwebs.com  (EHLO mail.nwebs.com) (216.88.91.10)  by
mta112.mail.yahoo.com with SMTP; 08 Aug 2000 12:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.nwebs.com from localhost    (router,SLMail V4.1); Tue, 08
Aug 2000 14:48:10 -0500     for <kittenkid_65@yahoo.com>
Received: from proclaim18 [216.88.93.120] by mail.nwebs.com [216.88.91.10]
(SLmail 4.1.3395) with SMTP id 9F605F188BF54108AB5B0613FA328918 for
<kittenkid_65@yahoo.com>; Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:48:09 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.20000808145142.006b37d8@mail.proclaimamerica.com>
X-Sender: pa7@mail.proclaimamerica.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:51:42 -0500
To: kittenkid_65@yahoo.com
From: Mary <mary@proclaimamerica.com>
Subject:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-SLUIDL: 67333451-D9CC4A5D-B7FD912E-25254AE9
Content-Length: 11882

Read, sign and send on...-PLEASE READ & SIGN AT THE BOTTOM

  "I went to a party, Mom"

  I went to a party,
  and remembered what you said.
  You told me not to drink, Mom
  so I had a sprite instead.

  I felt proud of myself,
  the way you said I would,
  that I didn't drink and drive,
  though some friends said I should.

  I made a healthy choice,
  and your advice to me was right
  as the party finally ended,
  and the kids drove out of sight.

  I got into my car,
  sure to get home in one piece,
  I never knew what was coming, Mom
  something I expected least.

  Now I'm lying on the pavement,
  And I hear the policeman say,
  The kid that caused this wreck was drunk,"
  Mom, His voice seems far away.

  My own blood's all around me,
  as I try hard not to cry.
  I can hear the paramedic say,
  This girl is going to die."

  I'm sure the guy had no idea,
  while he was flying high,
  because he chose to drink and drive,
  now I would have to die.

  So why do people do it, Mom
  Knowing that it ruins lives?
  And now the pain is cutting me,
  like a hundred stabbing knives.

  Tell sister not to be afraid, Mom
  tell daddy to be brave,
  and when I go to heaven,
  put "Daddy's Girl" on my grave.

  Someone should have taught him,
  that its wrong to drink and drive.
  Maybe if his parents had,
  I'd still be alive.

  My breath is getting shorter, Mom
  I'm getting really scared.
  These are my final moments,
  and I'm so unprepared.

  I wish that you could hold me Mom,
  as I lie here and die.
  I wish that I could say I love you, Mom
  So I love you and good-bye.

  We are hoping to get 5,000 signatures on this email and then
  send it to
  the
  president.

  PLEASE SIGN.
  IF YOU GET THIS PLEDGE AND DELETE IT, YOUR SELFISHNESS KNOWS NO
  BOUNDS...
  SUCH A SMALL PROMISE TO MAKE. PLEASE READ THIS STORY AND THEN
  SIGN THE
  PLEDGE! SIGN IT AND ADHERE TO IT:

  Copy the entire e-mail and paste it into a new e-mail. Then send
  it to
  everyone you know. Don't forget to add your name to the bottom!
  Please!!!!

  1. Adam Ross Kalesperis
  2. Deanne Peruse
  3. Raphal Nash
  4. Courtney Easter
  6. Tracy Lamont
  7. Traci Arbisi
  8. Faye Hollenbeck
  9. Devin E. Davis
  10. Starla Shaver
  11. Theresa Brehm
  12. Lisa Brehm
  13. Courtney Barnett
  14. Erika Hurst
  15. Kym Moschgat
  16. Michael Hansen
  17. Matt Weston
  18. Laura Bunch
  19. Daniel Lawson
  20. Ashley Byrd
  21. Brian Chadwell
  22. Bonnie Morrical
  23. Susan S
  24. Michele Zader
  25. Denise Marie Haines
  26. Keshia Marie Siders
  27. Amy Sue Tresenrider
  28. Tracie Balthaser
  29. Diana Kaufman
  30. Brooke Newkirk
  31. AARON BLACKBURN
  32. Christina M.B.
  33. Crystal Mckenzie
  34. Kate Laroche
  35. Callie Firman
  36. Christy Turner
  37. Rebecca Turner
  38. Elena Thomas
  39. Missy Burke
  40. Erin McCalla
  41. Lindsay Potrafke
  42. Jenny Eckel
  43. Cassandra Duggan
  44. Amy Liebisch
  45. Eric Widmeyer
  46. Alisa Huth
  47. Pam Augustine
  48. Leanne Trdinich
  49. Megan LeDonne
  50. Kristen Kennedy
  51. Maura Bennardo
  52. Lisa Wilt
  53. Amanda Pietz
  54. David DiCosol
  55. Connie Carozza
  56. Jaime Jacoby
  57. Erin Edmunds
  58. Erin Berecek
  59. Becky Porter
  60. Alana Miller
  61. Carrie Vermillion
  62. Susan Spearing
  63. Gaye Sougstad
  64. Lynn Snider
  65. David Shores
  66. Carol Conway
  67. Natalie Fair
  68. Alissa Lloyd
  69. Rebecca Wheeler
  70. Lisa Riedel
  71. Eric Vaughan
  72. Danielle Seaman
  73. Elizabeth Ambrose
  74. Katy Mahannah
  75. Susan Hall
  76. MIRANDA CUNDY!!
  77. Meg Kells-Murphy
  78. Samantha Kaiiher
  79. Travis Lincoln
  80. Randy
  81. Chris Vargoshe
  82. Matthew Bursell
  83. Crystal Dambowsky
  84. Kyle freaken McEneany
  85. Krystal Scharn
  86. Laura Rothrock
  87. Bethany Bucci
  88. Amy Satkevich
  89. Christine Rich (ween
  90. Courtney Reilly
  91. Lauren Tighe
  92. Jackie White
  93. Liz Farrell
  94. Kathryn M.
  95. Heather Anne Lowery
  96. Katie Jo
  97. Cara Brenner
  98. Emily Green
  99. Emily Harris
  100. Emily Chen
  101. Sarah Schererm
  102. Eric Eisenberg
  104. SlickDan Goldstein
  105. Abby Kimmelman
  106. Alyssa Lee
  107. David Hoffman
  108. Celia Kather
  109. Susan Ginn
  110. Carly Smith
  111. Anna Karis
  112. Alison Deffenbaugh
  113. Litzi Paredes
  114. Teresa Eldridge
  115. Stephanie Reese
  116. Jamie Turner
  117. Jenny Showalter
  118. Meg Wooldridge
  119. Kevin T$chai
  120. Loan Nguyen
  121. Elizabeth Yorns
  122. Katie McGowan
  123. Angie Henderson
  124. The Troyfish of VT
  125. Natalie Corrigan of VT
  126. Dyanis Conrad
  127. Vasil Popov
  128. Marie Huitt
  129. Jessi McMahan
  130. Courtney Kelly
  131. Tracy Smith
  132. Jenny Fisher
  133. Sally J. James-in memory of William Burden and James
  Chandler.
  134. Rachael Harness
  135. Jan E. Conley
  136. Kari M.Fellers
  137. Dawn Love
  138. Staci Smith
  139. Douglas Blair
  140. Brooke Rhea
  141. Rachel Hammons
  142. Brian Gallion
  143. Ben Morrow
  144. Jimmie McKinley
  145. Erica M. Smothers
  146. Jason Wilchie
  147. Frank Smith
  148. Kevin Rider
  149. Matt Masley-In memory of Alison, killed by a drunk driver
  1/9/1998.
  150. Deepak Deean
  151. Liz Dedrick
  152. Jessa
  153. Maureen (MO
  154. Dawn O.
  155. Paul M.~Peewee
  156. Vanessa R.~Venus
  157. Ryan Cabral(stangman)
  158. Rachel Miller
  159. Christy Fairlie
  160. Julie Snyder
  161. Alex La
  162. Mariah Reyes
  164. Brandon Castrejon
  165. Ashley L
  166. Jeffrey Yamauchi
  167. Lois Kuo
  168. Priscilla Kuo
  169. Mei W.W
  170. Gennie W. Alasagas
  171. P.J. R. Alasagas
  172. Charina Gonzales
  173. Nieves M. Ague
  174. Calley Redd
  175. Alexandra Hart
  176. Lisa Peterson
  177. Amber Neil
  178. Mandy Cox
  179. MICHELLE REQUA
  180. Meghan Anne Meyer --- In memory of James and Kendall died
  from a
  drunk
  driver January 1,1996.
  181. LAUREN BUTTLAR
  183. Brandie Thomas
  184. Lorianna Moreno
  185. Kris Jensen-In memory of Pat Byrd,killed by a drunk driver
  on January
  1, 1999.
  186. Katie Essig
  187. Jenny Haney-In memory of Shane Moore and Anthony Saucedo
  killed July
  9th when they were driving drunk
  188. Kim Jones
  189. Sarah Bellamy
  190. Jon McInturff
  191. Elizabeth Price
  192. Lesley Kuras
  193. Kellyn Blossom
  194. Jenna Cullinane
  195. Katherine Gritter
  196. Ben Thompson
  197. Andrea Durell- In memory of the choad car...
  198. Erin Rae Lengkeek....ditto " " " " " '
  199. Tiffany Megan Lott
  200. Carrie Deathriage
  201. Melissa Mao
  202. Emily Leong
  203. Jill Burkholder
  204. Meghan Cloud
  205. SLS
  206. Karen Roy
  207. Kasey Kniffin
  209. Tom Miyashiro this is for u joe...
  210. Jesse Jet Bellefleur
  211. Pamichic
  212. Fionaap281
  213. Ann McDermott
  214. Gina Cerrito
  216. Melissa Coleman
  217. Morgan Saltsgiver
  218. Erin Warrner
  219. Jennifer Warrner
  220. Kayla JOY McKenzie
  221. Alison L.
  222. Denise M. Malagari
  223. Amber Lynn Chesebrough
  224. Holly Chesebrough
  225. Daryl DuLong
  226. Diana Lupa
  227. Todd J. Pipitone
  228. Eric W. Davies
  229. Kristin Landis
  230. Dave Woods
  231. S.Whitney
  232. Christina Sweeder
  233. Sanam de Lorme
  234. Lindsey Eigenbrode
  235. Meredith Keller
  236. Candice Roubin
  237. ANGEL**
  238. Kathleen
  239. Alex Rowe
  240. Rachel "T" Thompson
  241. Abe Thompson
  243. David Dare
  244. Sarah Gullemette
  245. Ben Cormier
  246. Devon Smith
  247. Ashley
  248. Amy
  249. Nicole Thibodeau
  250. Katie Wallace
  251. Jessica Shanahan
  252. Brianna Harmer
  253. Mary E. Sundberg
  254. Kristen Sundberg
  255. Lindsay Chandler
  256. Heather King
  257. Nyleen Veigas
  258. Catrina Basset
  259. Melissa Ford
  260. Ashlie Johnson-In memory of my beloved John Doe-
  261. Ashley Jackson
  262. Mark Pepperdine
  263. Colleen Pepperdine
  264. Monica Waldrop
  265. Rebekah Martinez
  266.Heather VonKahle - my brother was killed by a drunk driver
  Cortney
  Minnix
  268. April L. Pepperdine
  269. Kelly Conlon
  270. Maura Marsico ~~May The Work That Ive Done Speak For Me Now
  I'll
  never
  forget you chris
  271. Nikki K.
  272. Jeff D " DUBS
  273. Carli Gilbride
  274. Renee' Moore
  275. Tracy Bunting-in memory of Shawn Johnson killed onis
  birthday while
  driving drunk.
  276. B. POIGNARD
  277. Debi Kennedy
  278. D BONAMI (For my brother-in-law (firefighter dedicated to
  helping
  others) who has a permanent back injury from a drunk driver)
  279. Judy Moore
  280. Laurie Eames
  281. Jackie White
  282. Amy R Sheets
  283. Andy Crosier
  284. Rodney Crosier & family
  285. Bonnie Aylor
  286. Dean Crosier
  287. Brenda Billings
  288. Lisa Davis
  289. Melissa Strange
  290. Jennifer Braddy
  291. Nancy M. Yarley
  292. Wilhemenia Ford-Farrow
  293. Heide Aicher
  294. Melissa Chapp
  295. Deborah Scobie
  296. Gwen Willis
  297. Dennis Willis
  298. Jill Graham
  299. Karen Beamon
  300. Judith Becker
  301. Marion Hughes
  302. denise thompson
  303. Lily L. Horsley
  304. Margaret Schupe
  305. Ginny Ploch
  306. Sally H.
  307. Mary Mcfarland
  308. Gina Guardiola
  309. D. Guerra
  310 Patrick Carroll
  311. Raeann Catanese
  312. Yvonne Selden
  313. Cary Selden
  314. Jovita Mendoza
  315. Angela Mendoza
  316. Tiffany Salkoski
  317. Sandy DeSantis
  318. Amy Van Pinxten
  319. Tony Mangum
  320. Sonya Nordquist - in memory of my best friend Karin Okesson
  hit by a
  drunk driver in NYC (93).
  321. Elizabeth Thurston
  322. Lesley Driver
  323. Judy Driver
  324. Joanna, RN-Spinal Cord Injury rehab nurse-drunk
  drivers don't
  always kill...sometimes they severely handicap through brain
  injury and
  spinal cord injury
  325. Kristen Hewett
  326.Lynn Lordi
  327. Jackie Vazquez
  328. Migdalia Tuero
  329. Michelle Beasley
  330. Tracie Teal
  331. Allie
  332. Monique Pinckney
  333. Kelly Rae Robbins
  334. Anthony Scott Robbins - In memory of Susan Mosely (Age
  31/Three
  Children)
  335. Melissa Brannen
  336. JoEllen Sandek
  337. Peter Sandek
  338. Paul Arnold
  339. Lin Arnold
  340. Mark Dixon - I used to drink and drive
  341. Chuck Wheeler- Ditto
  342. Yvonne B. Wetmore
  343. Carol L. Swarner
  344. Martha R. Priest
  345. Pamela S Creech
  346. Ronald W. McCarty
  347.Vince Workman
  348. Darrell Thompson in memory or Malik Sealy killed by a drunk
  driver 3
  weeks ago
  349. Bill Steele - A parent who loves kids
  350. Marge Miller
  351. Jayne Spooner
  352. Kelly Carkson
  353. Rhonda M. Cash (In memory of my brother, Kevin Slattery
  killed Sept. 1977 along with his friends, George Rice, Bob Cappo
  and Menno
  Jochums-all were killed labor day weekend the year they
  graduated -the
  weekend before all were to go on to college)
  354. Tina Rogers- In memory of so many friends and family
  355. Andrea Katz
  356. Laurie Ledbetter
  357. Christina Daniels
  358. Nunez Family
  359. Gary Reed
  360. Donna Beriault
  361. Odette Amigo
  362. Paula Scaini
  363.Lyne Desormeaux
  364. Louise Dupuis
  365. Ron Landriault
  366. Geoff Kneen
  367. Shari McIntosh
  368. Line Delorme
  369. Cecily Gonzalez
  370. trish lanthier
  371. France Laurin Lupien
  372. Anne Peters
  373. Jo-Anne Ladouceur
  374. Dan Bastien
  375. Rene Periard Gatineau P.Quebec
  376. Lee-Anne Peluk (in memory of my friends Alex Potenza, and
  David
  Eggertson who were killed at only 16 years of age)
  377. Kyla Tabak
  378. Joan Roberts
  379. Jennifer Jordan
  380. Jayne Cranz
  381. Carolyn Bower
  382. Kari Bodeker
  383. Sheri Ridgway
  384.Christina Jones
  385.Taylor j.
  386.karlie albrecht
  387.chantel jeffery
  388.courtenay jones
  389.Erik Moe
  399.Serina Hansen
  400.Andrea Welch
  401.April Ratcliff
  402.DaLonna Dawson
  403. Tonia Coronado
404. M. Castell
405. B.A. Bickerstaff
406. Mary K. Westbrook - For Allen, may you always make the right
decision, I love you.


John,

In regards to your question from our meeting this morning, the total amount
we are expecting to recover in fixed capacity payments from Dominion is
$157,183,000.  Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Thanks,
Kelli
5-3419


Hi Dana,

We need to get together for your review.  When are you unavailable this week or early next week?  I think you have fire marshall training this afternoon.  When is the United Way thing you are participating in?

Thanks,
Marnie


Please provide the following information:

Name:
Home Address:
Home Phone:
Cell No:


Ravi,

Maybe Stinson can get on this conference call. I shall be at the office on
Thursday
 only this week.

Vince

Ravi Thuraisingham@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 02/20/2000 01:13:06 AM
To: Vince Kaminski, Mark Holsworth/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Laura Beneville, Kristy Carnes/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Kristy Carnes/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
Subject: RE: VMI Agreements

Hi Vince, Mark Holsworth reviewed our contract on such a short notice.  I
thank Mark for responding to our short-notice request.  It turns out that we
need to get this database to move forward on a number of things and have
legal save some time for us is an excellent help.  As mentioned below, It
appears that PennWell's folks want to chat some more about this.

Mark, can you schedule a conference call with these people to finalise this
contract.  I will be out of town all week next week on a lock-down deal
meeting. Vince may be able to get on the conference call.  I would greatly
appreciate it if you could help us close this one!

Regards,

Ravi.
----- Forwarded by Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications on 02/20/00 12:38
AM -----

	Russell@pennwell.com
	02/18/00 06:16 PM

		 To: Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc: toni.turnerbudd@sbtglaw.com
		 Subject: RE: VMI Agreements

Ravi -

I would like to schedule a conference call between you, me, PennWell's
counsel (Toni Turner Budd), and Enron's counsel to discuss your changes and
finalize the KMI End-User License Agreement.  I propose that we have the
conference call at 2:00 PM CST this Monday, February 21.  Please let me know
if you are available at this time and, if not, propose an alternative time
for the call.  In addition, please provide me with a telephone number where
I can reach you for the conference call.

PennWell is looking forward to finalizing the license agreement and
delivering the KMI data to Enron.

Yours truly,

Russell Iorio
Manager of Business Development
PennWell Corporation
1421 South Sheridan Road
Tulsa, OK  74112
russell@pennwell.com <mailto:russell@pennwell.com>
(918) 831-9122 Direct
(918) 831-9476 Fax

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Ravi_Thuraisingham@enron.net
[mailto:Ravi_Thuraisingham@enron.net]
  Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 6:30 PM
  To: RMack@kmicorp.com; mpass@kmicorp.com;
russell@pennwell.com
  Cc: Kristina_Lund@enron.net;
Stinson_Gibner@ECT.enron.net; Vince_Kaminski@enron.net;
Earl_Harvey@enron.net; Tracy_Williams@enron.net
  Subject: VMI Agreements

   << File: Mac Word 3.0 >>

     Hi Richard, here is a marked up version from our lawyer.
Please have your
     people look at it and if it seems fine make the changes
and send a signed
     copy back to me.

     Ravi.
  ----- Forwarded by Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications
on 02/17/00 06:21 PM
  -----
  |--------+----------------------->
  |        |          Mark         |
  |        |          Holsworth@ENR|
  |        |          ON           |
  |        |                       |
  |        |          02/17/00     |
  |        |          04:10 PM     |
  |        |                       |
  |--------+----------------------->

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-|
    |
|
    |       To:     Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications,|
    |       Gene Diers/Corp/Enron@ENRON
|
    |       cc:
|
    |       Subject:     VMI Agreements
|

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-|

  Please find attached my redlining of the VMI Agreelment.
Please review it and
  send it to the vendor for their review.

  (See attached file: 2-14-2000 EULA.doc)


The latest and greatest including form of construction agreement.


In the budget numbers we had a headcount of 638.  I would like a list of all of those employees of Enron North America, with work numbers, home phone numbers, cell phones and pagers.

I would also like the same for EES wholesale.

It may be easy to do this by looking at the floor plans for the new buildings.


Jeff -- This is a little rough, but a point you should probably add under
concerns is:
Potential supply interruptions and significantly increased costs that
inhibit the ability to operate a businesses in California, and the potential
negative effect on the state's economy as a whole.

----- Original Message -----
From: <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>
To: "Ken Smith" <ken@kdscommunications.com>
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: Principles

Thanks.  All comments/edits welcome and appreciated.

Best,
Jeff

"Ken Smith"
<ken@kdscommunica        To:     "Jeff Dasovich"
<jdasovic@enron.com>
tions.com>               cc:
Subject:     Principles
03/05/2001 11:50
AM
Please respond to
"Ken Smith"

Jeff --

I made a couple changes and saved them to my attached file (I  renamed it
with my initials so you'd know which version had come from me).   I want to
take a closer look at this and maybe offer a few more later this  morning.
All in all, I think everyone's on the right  track.
(See attached file: Principles 0304 ks.doc)