Robert and I put our heads together and decided to enter the partnership
agreement on the days in question to keep the third parties whole.

Thu - it will be reallocated in about five minutes.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

- Aimee

Daren J Farmer
03/22/2000 01:47 PM
To: Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Brenda F Herod/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thu Nguyen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert E
Lloyd/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Hakemack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Megan
Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: Meter 8740 Dec 99

We do not have deal to enter for this.  You need to look at the entire Midtex
line for each of the days that are out of balance.  If we are short at Katy,
I would think that we would be long at Dewville.  (Many times, our receipts
from the Midtex line at Katy are offset by our deliveries to Tufco at the
Tap.)  This should help you fix the January problem.  Also, for December, you
may need to ask PG&E where they show the delivery for Western.  Is it at HPL
Katy, as our records show, or is it at PGE's another point on the Midtex
line?  In any case, we don't have deliveries to make.  The only other remedy
is to book the variance on the partnership imbalance.

D

   Aimee Lannou                03/22/2000 01:24 PM

To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Brenda F Herod/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thu Nguyen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert E
Lloyd/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Hakemack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Megan
Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Meter 8740 Dec 99

Daren - can you set up a delivery deal for meter 8740 for Jan 00 and Dec.
99?   I checked OSS and there is an 089 operational contract that took the
swing in case the meter flows more or less than the nom.   Third party
contracts are supposed to stay whole.  Days 12-14 did not flow enough to
cover the noms for Western.  We have the same problem on Jan. 25.  Please let
me know, Brenda Herod would like this resolved today, as would I.

- Aimee
---------------------- Forwarded by Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT on 03/22/2000 01:10
PM ---------------------------
   Aimee Lannou                03/06/2000 04:36 PM

To: Stacey Neuweiler/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Thu Nguyen/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Meter 8740 Dec 99

Stacy- Can you please set up a new deal for meter 8740 for Dec. 99.  The
problem with this meter is,  all third party transports should stay whole and
HPL takes the swing.  Several days the meter did not flow enough and the
third parties did not receive all of their gas.  I need a delivery set up so
the 3rd parties will stay whole.  If you have any questions, please let me
know.

Thanks.

- Aimee
---------------------- Forwarded by Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT on 03/06/2000 04:30
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Thu Nguyen                           03/06/2000 04:14 PM

To: Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: George Grant/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Meter 8740 Dec 99

Aimee,

 We are still having problem with this meter.  From what I understand of our
conversation a week or two ago, HPL needs to take the swing to keep the other
contracts whole.  In the case where we have excess flow the HPL (R) contract
takes the swing.  So in the case where we are short, shouldn't we have a HPL
(D) contract to take the swing?  Please let me know if this will work.  I
need to get back with Settlement today.  Thanks

Thu


Yes, shall we meet in my office?  or a conference room?  Sara

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Roberson, Weezie
Sent:	Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:25 AM
To:	Shackleton, Sara
Subject:	RE: liquids update

Yes.  Are you available around 2pm?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shackleton, Sara
Sent:	Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:18 PM
To:	Flores, Nony; Roberson, Weezie
Cc:	'bestes@cwt.com'
Subject:	liquids update

Can Blake and I meet with you sometime on Wednesday afternoon to discuss your financial contracts and how to terminate open positions?  Thanks.

Sara Shackleton
Enron Wholesale Services
1400 Smith Street, EB3801a
Houston, TX  77002
Ph:  (713) 853-5620
Fax: (713) 646-3490


Yes, this is issue is still around.

Thomas, I had some correspondence faxed to you today.  In it SW is clearly
taking the position that the damage to the generator occured after delivery
under the contract.  I thought you addressed that well in your memo, however,
I have another question.  What impact does the use of DDP (Incoterms) have?
Is it just one more part of the contract to be taken as a whole, or might it
have some greater significance?

Will the passage of ROL impact the LD claim?  I assume not, but I want a
sanity check.

Thanks,

Kay

"Thomas Hetherington" <thetherington@bracepatt.com> on 12/19/2000 09:47:11 AM
To: <kay.mann@enron.com>
cc: <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>

Subject: Westinghouse 501d memo

Attached is a legal memo regarding Westinghouse's delivery obligations with
respect to the 501D5A gas turbine generator package.  I will forward you an
additional copy by fax.

TFAH


'
Subject: FW: GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER

Get a piece of paper and record your answers.  The answers are at the end.
Good luck...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------

GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER

1).  What is a four-letter word that ends in k and means
 the same as intercourse?

2).  What is it that a cow has four of and a
 woman has only two of?

3).  What can you find in a man's pants that is about six
inches long, has a head on it, and that women love so much
that they often blow it?

4).  What word starts with f and ends with u-c-k?

5).  Name five words that are each four letters long, end
 in u-n-t, one of which is a word for a woman?

6).  What does a dog do that you can step into?

7).  What four letter word begins with f and ends
with k, and if you can't get one you can use your hands?

8).  What is hard, six inches long, has two nuts, and can
 make a girl fat?

9).  What four-letter word ends in i-t and is
found on the bottom of birdcages?

10). What is it that all men have one of; it's
 longer on some men than on others; the pope doesn't use
his; and a man gives it to his wife after they're married?

     ANSWERS:
     1.    (talk)
     2.    (legs)
     3.    (a twenty dollar bill)
     4.    (firetruck)
     5.    (bunt, hunt, runt, punt, aunt)
     6.    (pants)
     7.    (fork)
     8.    (Almond Joy candy bar)
     9.    (grit)
     10.   (last name)


Please join John Lavorato for a meeting regarding Gas Traders in ECS 06980 (the large conference room) tomorrow, January 29 at 10:00 am.

Let me know if you have questions.

Kim
x30681


Fred,

Dale Rasmussen has been handling the breakout contracts for the LV CoGen
project, and I think the form is in good shape. However, the breakout
contract is for all the LV Co Gen units, but that is easy enough to fix. Does
GE know this is coming?

What are you projecting for a closing date?

 We need the unit numbers (original and serial), associated delivery dates,
price attributable to the units (maximum liability amount), price to sell the
LLC member interests, and the contact persons from Panda for the contract.
Will there be a development fee, and if so, how much?

If you get me the particulars of the deal we can work on it in house.  We
have the forms, so we can get cracking without outside counsel.  In fact,
I've been working on the form letter agreement today in connection with the
other deal.  Retaining outside counsel requires internal approval, which I'm
sure we can get in the next day or two, assuming no conflict of interest. I
can get started on the process if you are ready.

If you think these guys are serious, we can set up the LLC's.  We may want
two LLC's if the total price is in excess of $50mm.  Kathleen, please talk to
me before we do this as I think we should discuss the slate of officers.

Kay

Fred Mitro@ECT
02/26/2001 05:56 PM
To: Stephen Thome/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Kay
Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Chris Booth/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen
Carnahan/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Panda Energy

Steve:

I talked with Ben this afternoon and understand that we are ready to proceed
with Panda Energy in a transaction involving the sale of member interests in
special purpose entities associated with the four(4) LV units.  I have left a
message with Panda letting them know that we are prepared to proceed and will
begin preparing a set of draft definitive agreements for their review.  I
have asked Panda to confirm that they are ready to receive these documents
and proceed.  I understand that you are in Houston.  Please call/see me
tomorrow morning so that we can discuss this transaction.

Kay:  We need to prepare a draft set of definitive agreements for this
transaction.  Can Carolyn complete this while you are in New York?  Also,
what is the status of the LM Breakout contract for the 4 LV units.  Let me
know.

Kathleen:  We need to confirm tomorrow morning that we have received executed
CA's from Panda.  I have the CA execution originals for the four Panda
entities at my desk for Ben's signature.  These need to be received prior to
sending Panda the definitive agreements.  We will fax signature pages to Ben
tomorrow.

Chris:  See me tomorrow morning to discuss the technical spec's that were
sent to Panda

I will be at my desk by 8 am tomorrow morning.

Thanks,
Fred
x35406


Anthony:

There's not a form of assignment attached.  The attachment is your Overseas Securities Lending Agreement.

Marie

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Anthony Capolongo <A.Capolongo@morganstanley.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Anthony+20Capolongo+20+3CA+2ECapolongo+40morganstanley+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Monday, July 02, 2001 8:18 AM
To:	aneela.charonia@enron.com; Heard, Marie
Cc:	Joseph Marovich; Ketan Parekh
Subject:	Assignment of OSLA

Marie:

Attached is an assignment for the OSLA signed in 1997, they may work.
Please review and let me know if you have any comments.

Anthony

 - Enron - ECT Invest OPT.doc << File: Enron - ECT Invest OPT.doc >>


Mark,

Further to our conversation the other day, are you happy for us to change the
following in the GTC screen in EnronOnline:

Old:  "(Guest Users will view Generic GTCs which are shown for information
purposes only)"

New: "(Guest Users will view sample GTC's which may differ in some respects
from execution versions)"

Dave


I vote for you.

From: Ben Jacoby/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/01/2001 04:08 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Fred Mitro/ENRON@enronXgate

Subject: RE: TECO

Do you want to send the LOI to TECO, or should I?

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:32 PM
To: Mitro, Fred
Cc: Jacoby, Ben
Subject: RE: TECO

I don't believe we need Keffer's input to process the LOI.  I can have their
power guy look at the term sheet if we think we are done with it.

From: Fred Mitro/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/01/2001 12:42 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Ben Jacoby/ENRON@enronXgate

Subject: RE: TECO

Kay:

I will review your comments on the LOI.  I wanted to check with make sure
that someone at King & Spalding is reviewing the Midway term sheet along with
the LOI, so that we can send the term sheet to TECO on Monday/Tuesday.

Let me know.

Fred

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 11:45 AM
To: Jacoby, Ben; Mitro, Fred
Cc: jkeffer@kslaw.com
Subject: TECO

Ben,

I made a minor adjustment to the LOI re: exclusivity.

 << File: Midway TECO LOI june 1.doc >>

Policy states that any time we sign up to exclusivity we are supposed to get
it approved by Mark Metts, Tim Detmering and the CEO of the affected business
unit.  Seems a little silly in this case, but it can't hurt. (yes, I know we
didn't do it with the turbine stuff)

Kay


[IMAGE]

?

Please  do not reply to this message. If you have any questions about
E*TRADE,  please go to the E*TRADE website at www.etrade.com  and click HELP
at the top of the page. If you are unable to view your  birthday card,
please click here to view it online.

, 2000 E * TRADE Securities, Inc. All  rights reserved. Member NASD/SIPC. E *
TRADE is a registered trademark  of E * TRADE Securities, Inc.


[IMAGE] [IMAGE]  Avoid costly bounced check  fees?    Get your car fixed so you  won't lose your job?    Pay your bills before you  get penalized?    For ANY other reason?       CLICK  HERE NOW to apply for the cash you need for FREE in JUST 3 MINUTES!   It's quick. It's easy. It's confidential. No need to borrow  money from friends or ask the boss for an advance. All you need  is a checking account in good standing and a steady paycheck. Even poor credit won't be a problem!        Get up to $500 cash deposited  into your bank account by tomorrow!      [IMAGE]

Please allow at least 48 hours for your unsubscribe requests to be processed.
Remove yourself from this list by either:
Entering your email address below and clicking REMOVE:
OR
 Reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject line.
 This message was sent to address kward@ect.enron.com  pmguid:ud.xdd.e00nm  pmg


Just an example of "brokerage account stuff" that can occur with respect to a
single account.  SS
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2000
11:47 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Sheila Glover                           03/21/2000 10:49 AM

To: Gil Melman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Donna Lowry/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Greene/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara
Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Deville/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Harlan/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Rhythms stock

Gil,
I received my copy of the instructions to Morgan Stanley and the letter to
the transfer agent.
I have faxed a copy to Frank Moy at Morgan Stanley who has not received the
original,as yet.
I have requested his verification that the account is open and an anticipated
timing for the transfer agent.

Have instructions been provided with the account opening authorizing John
Greene to trade for Enron Communications Investments Corp?
Has Donna been provided with the necessary internal releases for the sale?
Are we anticipating only selling 2,392,058 in the near term since that is the
only piece being registered in street-name?
John Greene will be provided with  instructions requesting him to sell and
acceptable pricing guidelines.

Thanks Sheila


We do need to pay PJM- the two profitable deals have NOT been terminated.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Miller, Don (Asset Mktg)
Sent:	Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:49 PM
To:	Tricoli, Carl; Duran, W. David; Presto, Kevin M.; Davis, Mark Dana
Subject:	FW: EPMI - Liquidation Schedule of non-Terminated Contracts

I think this should capture our positions by region.  We need to confirm such that we can decided whether we let PJM and NEPOOL go away.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sacks, Edward
Sent:	Wednesday, December 19, 2001 1:31 PM
To:	Miller, Don (Asset Mktg); Miller, Don R
Subject:	EPMI - Liquidation Schedule of non-Terminated Contracts

I've prepared a few slides illustrating the liquidation of various positions which appear not to have been terminated based on the information provided to me.  Perhaps these slides could be used as a tool for prioritizing contracts for potential prepay transactions, in an effort to reduce the depletion/economic erosion we currently face.  As well, I have provided this same information to Calger in the West.

 << File: MTM Liquidations by Region cob 121801.xls >>

Ed


Attached is a copy of Stan's staff meeting notes, so that you'll know what
he's looking for and expecting to hear you report on.


Sorry I missed your call last night...big shock, I was in the bath-tub.  Anyways, you can definitely give me a call tonight if you'd like.

Talk to you soon,
Susan


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/news/2002/01/16/nebraska_offenses_ap/

Seems the NU football program is the Omaha police's Cash Cow.


Susan Wadle will follow up with you to confirm.

Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Samantha Smith [mailto:samantha_smith@transcanada.com]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 3:47 PM
To: McCarty, Danny; Gadd, Eric; Holm Jay; Reese Brad D.; King Tom; Moore James C. (Jim); Carlton Cavan; Hulse Darcel; Stewart D. Michael G.; Birch Murray; Moffatt J. Curtis; Roberts Tom; francine.amaral@neg.pge.com
Cc: Armstrong, Julie; Wadle, Susan; angelina.vitela@elpaso.com; ann.e.robinson@williams.com; anita.l.brown@williams.com; jharris@sempra.com; Tang Mary; Woodhouse Chris; cmr@vnf.com; mgstark@duke-energy.com
Subject: Oct 23 Teleconference - Your Availability ?

Gentlemen,

Dennis McConaghy has requested another teleconference with all of you.

The call has been tentatively scheduled for 4:00 p.m. Mountain Time, Tuesday, October 23 (3:00 p.m. Pacific,  5:00 p.m Central,  6:00 p.m. Eastern)     If this time does not work for you, we could look at  moving the call to later that evening.

Please contact me regarding your availability.

Thanks.

Samantha Smith  403-920-2017


Good job, Jane and team.  mcs
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 06/02/2001
09:14 ---------------------------

Neil McGregor@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
06/02/2001 08:50
To: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Wade Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mohan
Gurunath/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Paul
Kraske/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rajesh
Sivaraman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jimmy
Mogal/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mukesh
Tyagi/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sanjeev
Khandekar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark Schroeder@ECT, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Ban Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Akshay
Singh/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Amr
Ibrahim/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Heidi
Hellmann/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ashok
Mehta/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, K
Seethayya/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT

Subject: Re: MSEB tariffs. The final Cost-of-Service model for 1999-2000

This is brilliant Jane and team. I would like to build a database in DPC to
keep this rate filing type info in. Can you in the meantime put in other
columns of info such as number of consumers and the amount of billing for
each group. This would give us another angle. Jane lets discuss with IT the
set up of a database to house this and other info. Can you arrange with
Sevina and Raghulan.
Neil

Jane Wilson
02/06/2001 01:32 PM
To: Wade Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Neil
McGregor/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mohan
Gurunath/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Paul
Kraske/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rajesh
Sivaraman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jimmy
Mogal/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mukesh
Tyagi/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sanjeev
Khandekar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Mark Schroeder@ECT, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Ban Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Akshay
Singh/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Amr
Ibrahim/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Heidi
Hellmann/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ashok
Mehta/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, K
Seethayya/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT

Subject: MSEB tariffs. The final Cost-of-Service model for 1999-2000

An additional complementary tariff study was developed by Amr Ibrahim and
B.A.N. Sharma with assistance from Akshay Singh regarding the MSEB tariffs --
a traditional cost of service study.  This study is for 1999-2000 and
allocates MSEB's revenue requirements to the various customer classes based
on their cost of service.  In this case, you can see the difference between
the allocated average cost and the actual average realisations from the
tariffs as they are today, which gives you an idea of the basic tariff
rationalisation that must occur to remove the unreasonable cross subsidies.
(Note: because of the paucity of data from MSEB, the team used the same load
factor assumptions used in the Andhra Pradesh cost of service study.)


Darron is in Hawaii until next week.  I am not going to be able to go.  Sorry.
PL


I think there is a real possibility here.  It would be extremely challenging commercially.

How do we convince customers to participate?
Two distinct areas:  (i) Existing portfolio of business and (ii) New business.

New business is easier in one sense since everything is at the money, who would say no to a AAA credit?  Still requires significant amendment to existing trading documentation and where existing trades are present, separating them out as not netting with new trades.

Existing business is easy for counterparties who are already in the money -- they will want the improved credit.  But how do we convince the out of the money side of the equation to participate?  This seem to me to be the biggest hurdle.

Issues:

Requires consent of customers and significant amendment of existing contracts.
	Adequate incentive for customers currently out of the money to participate?
	Might make more sense where no current positions exist.

Contract hurdles:

	Need to allow for termination by defaulting party so Enron (VMAC) will be able to control termination on default.
	Need the consent of counterparty to assign contract to VMAC.
	May require changing permitted credit support from counterparties (letters of credit probably don't work).

If we are attempting to put an existing book of business into the structure, an initial chunk of money will have to be given to VMAC to secure the existing out of the money side of the portfolio - how much is it and do we have that money?

It's not clear how the proposal allows for credit lines to and from counterparties.  That is, if we have given an aggregate $200 million credit line to out of the money counterparties and have only been given an aggregate $100 million credit line to in the money counterparties, will VMAC be satisfied with the mismatch.  Will we continue to control the amount of credit we give to customers?  If we go to 100% collateral requirements for all participating transactions, this is solved since there can't be a mismatch.  (Will customers agree to 100% collateral requirements - i.e. no credit lines?)

Once the supported/participating portfolio is out of the money, Enron will have to post collateral to VMAC.  If we fail, VMAC can default all participating/supported contracts.

When all of the contracts are terminated with Enron as the defaulting party, the payments to and from counterparties are calculated on their side of the market.  Presumably VMAC will require some cushion to cover this.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Tuesday, November 27, 2001 10:03 AM
To:	Taylor, Mark E (Legal)
Subject:	FW: VMAC Transaction

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Eichmann, Marc
Sent:	Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:51 PM
To:	Kitchen, Louise; Lavorato, John
Cc:	Richter, Brad
Subject:	VMAC Transaction

Louise and John:

Here is a general description of the transaction we are negotiating with VMAC (Virtual Markets Assurance Corporation)-FSA (Financial Securities Assurance). FSA is an AAA rated insurance company large enough to provide us with a credible deal.

Here are the deal highlights:

FSA would wrap Enron's credit exposure as follows:

1) In case of default FSA would liquidate the contracts sleeved to them by Enron and use the proceeds of in the money transactions to pay for out of the money transactions.

2) In case Enron is out of the money in the portfolio of trades sleeved to VMAC. FSA would pay the counterparties with the 100% collateral previously posted by Enron and managed on a day to day basis.

FSA has mentioned the possibility of extending a line of credit to Enron based on its net collateral position (~$1.3 billion as of today) and the net mark to market position (~ $1.4 billion to date). Haircuts on the line of credit would have to be negotiated and might be significant.

FSA-VMAC would receive as compensation the fee structure described under terms and conditions. Under the current structure the only risk FSA- VMAC is exposed to is the risk of simultaneous default by Enron and another counterparty and the operational risk of marking to market the positions and liquidating the contracts.

Please find enclosed the following:

1) Transaction structure : 	Describes the payment logic in case of default
2) Terms and conditions :	Describes the terms and conditions under negotiation for the contract
3) Collateral Haircuts : 		Describes the collateral haircuts on the securities posted to FSA to guarantee our net mark to market position (if out of the money)
4) FSA snapshot
5) FSA rating: 			AAA qualification of FSA by Moody's

Please feel free to contact me or Brad Richter to clarify any doubts with respect to this,

Marc Eichmann
Work 713 345-8422, Cell 713 870-2696
Manager Transaction Development
EnronOnline LLC

 << File: VMAC Transaction structure.doc >>  << File: VMAC Term and Conditions.doc >>  << File: Collateral Haircuts.doc >>  << File: FSA snapshot.doc >>  << File: FSA rating.pdf >>


FYI.

Janette Elbertson
Enron North America Corp.
Legal Department - EB3326
Telephone:  (713) 853-7906
Fax:  (713) 646-2600
janette.elbertson@enron.com
----- Forwarded by Janette Elbertson/HOU/ECT on 08/30/2000 05:08 PM -----

	Eileen Buerkert@ENRON
	08/30/2000 05:06 PM

		 To: Janette Elbertson/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: The equipment you ordered is on order.

--- Automatic Notification System ( Request #: ECTH-4NPKMD, PO #: 200899912 )

The equipment for your order (see below) was not in stock. Please allow 5 to
7 days for procurement. You will be notified when the equipment arrives.

--- 15IN TFT 5010 OPAL          --- for Sara Shackleton


Mr. Lay,

Thank you in advance for taking time to meet with me.

I wanted to let you know in advance the topics I would like to discuss.

Now that I have been at EBS for a little over a year, I want to update you on
my
progress and experiences within EBS.

The other topic I would like to discuss with you is my pursuit of an MBA.
More
specifically I wanted to gather some of your insight as to pros and cons of
this
pursuit and how having an MBA with a technical background positions me within
Enron.

I would also like to talk to you about the outside business interest of mine
that I mentioned the night of the RISE School fundraiser.  This interest
fulfills my entrepreneurial desires and for that matter, I have been involved
with this company for the last five years and am one of three principles.

Best regards,

Chad Modad
Software Engineer
Enron Broadband Services
Tel: 713-669-4070
Cell: 713-516-2347


I assumed you were with ENA.  If with Corp. or Networks, just indicate on Item 2.

EDD

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kaminski, Vince J
Sent:	Thursday, January 10, 2002 6:15 PM
To:	Gonzalez, Esmeralda
Cc:	Kaminski, Vince J; Daniels, Eddy
Subject:	RE: Enron Corp., Enron North America Corp. and Enron Net Works Questionnaires

Esmeralda,

I have not received any questionnaire. Can you, please, resend it.

Vince Kaminski

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gonzalez, Esmeralda
Sent:	Thursday, January 10, 2002 5:45 PM
To:	Lay, Kenneth; Whalley, Greg; Causey, Richard; Kean, Steven J.; Koenig, Mark; McMahon, Jeffrey; Metts, Mark; Olson, Cindy; Butts, Bob; Detmering, Tim; Donahue, Jeff; Lindholm, Tod A.; Muller, Mark S.; Rieker, Paula; Shapiro, Richard; Stabler, Frank; Taylor, Mitch; Donovan, Bill; Joyce, Mary; Menchaca, Peggy; Oxley, David; Palmer, Mark A. (PR); Port, David; Rogers, Rex; Rub, Jenny; Steffes, James D.; Waddell, Rick; Webb, Jay; Piper, Greg; Haedicke, Mark E.; Kitchen, Louise; Beck, Sally; Apollo, Beth; Dayao, Anthony; Jones, Robert W.- HR Exec; Palmer, Mark A. (PR); Pearce, Barry; Perlman, Beth; Rub, Jenny; Taylor, Mark E (Legal); Brown, Bill W.; Deffner, Joseph; Miller, Don (Asset Mktg); Lavorato, John; Allen, Phillip K.; Beck, Sally; Belden, Tim; Calger, Christopher F.; Deffner, Joseph; Detmering, Tim; Duran, W. David; Gold, Joe; Hickerson, Gary; Kaminski, Vince J; Mcclellan, George; McMahon, Jeffrey; Milnthorp, Rob; Murray, Julia; Arora, Harry; Baughman, Edward; Beyer, Michael J; Bradford, William S.; Brown, Michael; Bunnell, Don; Castleman, Kent; Collonges, Remi; Curran, Greg; Foster, Chris H.; Fox, Craig A.; Garner, Bruce; Gomez, Julie A.; Gonzales, Eric; Grigsby, Mike; Hermans, Greg; Herndon, Rogers; Hirl, Joseph; Holzer, Eric; Jones, Robert W.- HR Exec; Josey, Scott; Keel, Allan; Kinneman, Jeff; Knudsen, Sheila A.; Kohli, Sandeep; Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Lagrasta, Fred; Leach, Doug; Lemmons Jr., Billy; Lewis, James C.; Lewis, Richard; Luce, Laura; Malcolm, Rodney; McCullough, Travis; McMichael Jr., Ed; Melendrez, Jesus; Miller, Don (Asset Mktg); Miller, Michael; Nath, Tani; Novak, John; Oxley, David; Patrick, Michael K.; Quilkey, Paul; Reck, Daniel; Roberts, Mike A.; Sager, Elizabeth; Sanders, Richard B.; Sandt, Jim; Sayers, Rod; Schuler, Lance (Legal); Schwieger, Jim; Seyfried, Bryan; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Shapiro, Richard; Staley, Stuart; Swerzbin, Mike; Tawney, Mark; Thompson, John (London); Tricoli, Carl; Tweed, Sheila; Wantschek, Lloyd; Wiggs, Brett; Young, Steve
Cc:	Daniels, Eddy; Haedicke, Mark E.
Subject:	Enron Corp., Enron North America Corp. and Enron Net Works Questionnaires

We have not yet received your response.  Please forward your responses to the questionnaires to Eddy Daniels as soon as possible.

Please disregard this message if you have already sent your responses.  Thanks.

Sent on behalf of Eddy Daniels

Eddy Daniels
Legal Dept.
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, ECN 3813
Houston, Texas 77002
Phone:	713.345.4753
Fax:	713.646.3490


Steve -

Could you please escalate per our conversation

Thank you

Paula
---------------------- Forwarded by Paula Corey/Enron Communications on
01/21/2000 08:35 AM ---------------------------

Stinson Gibner@ECT
01/21/2000 08:09 AM
To: Timothy Morita-McVey/Enron Communications@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS@ENRON
cc: Paula Corey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jean Mrha/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications

Subject: Re: ECI ID for Stinson

Timothy:

I still have a problem.   When I am on the ECI network I cannot receive
email, and, even worse,  I cannot even send email.     This is not an
acceptable situation.   I need to have a fully functional email account on
the ECI side as well as the ENA side.    Don't tell me that its against
policy because I know that Ravi Thuraisingham has already be set up this way
for months.    I don't care if mail from one network is forwarded to the
other as I will have access in Houston to both, but I can already see that I
need to have functional accounts on both sides, or it will be a continual
thorn in my side when travelling to Portland, etc...

Again thanks for your help on getting this set up correctly,

--Stinson Gibner
x34748

From: Timothy Morita-McVey@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 01/19/2000 10:20 AM PST
To: Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: ECI ID

Thanks Stinson,
That should give me what I need.
I understand that you will have two Notes ID's with the ECI mail forwarded to
your "Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON" address.
I should be able to complete this today (later today)

Thanks,

Timothy Morita-McVey
Lotus Notes Administrator
Enron Communications, Inc.
503.886.0390
Timothy_Morita-McVey@Enron.net

	Stinson Gibner@ECT
	01/19/00 09:07 AM

		 To: Timothy Morita-McVey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
		 cc:
		 Subject: ECI ID

I  must have written down your phone number incorrectly,  it did not work.

Regarding my user ID on the ECI network,  I would be set up in the same way
as Ravi Thuraisingham with an ID on both the ENA and the ECI networks.   I am
in the Corp. research group but am spending about 80% of my time in support
of ECI in the trading and origination areas.

Feel free to contact me if you need any further info.

--Stinson
Houston x34748


Per our conversation.

Rose


Please follow up with Lou on this.  It sounds like something the commercial
people would be in a good position to answer, so maybe start by finding out
if they are already responding, either through Lou or otherwise.  Then get
the right people to review and supplement this list.  Thanks. df
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 11/08/2000
12:29 PM ---------------------------

11/08/2000 11:06 AM
Louis Soldano
Louis Soldano
Louis Soldano
11/08/2000 11:06 AM
11/08/2000 11:06 AM
To: John Shafer/OTS/Enron, Janet Place/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Molly
Sample/Houston/Eott@Eott, David Johnson/EU/Enron@Enron, David L
Johnson/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David Bush/ECF/Enron@ENRON, Mark
Cartwright/ECF/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy
McCoppin/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Don Hawkins/OTS/Enron@Enron
cc: Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James
Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael
Moran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: ETS Products/Services

EHS Corporate has asked we verify this inventory of services/products  from
all of the various companies that fit under the very broadest form of the ETS
umbrella.  I offer the following thoughts:  I don't believe EOTT has any
relationship with the Mt. Belvieu storage operations; I don't know if we
purchase natural gas except for fuel purposes; do we currently have any gas
gathering facilities?? or just transmission??; EOTT Fleet Vehicles could be
better defined; Risk Management services??

Feedback would be extremely helpful before the 17th
---------------------- Forwarded by Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron on 11/08/2000
10:53 AM ---------------------------
From: Susan Worthen@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 11/07/2000 10:00 AM
To: Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: ETS Products/Services

Lou,

This is a follow-up to a meeting we had about 2 months ago on Life Cycle
Impact Assessments.  The 1st phase of the assessment involves completing an
inventory of Enron's products\services and volumes.  I am currently
requesting each business unit to verify the products and services we have
identified and make any modifications to the list.  I am enlisting your
assistance to do this for ETS, including EOTT.  I need to have the
verification completed by 11/17. Please advise if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Susan Worthen
Director
Environmental Compliance, Enron Corp
713/646-6579  713/345-6164 fax
3AC 1525


Just in case you haven't seen a copy, NCNG has filed a petition to intervene
in the CPCN proceeding.  The reason stated is that it isn't clear who is
providing the natural gas.  It has asked for the right to examine and
cross-examine witnesses, to file briefs and argue its position, etc.

Kay


Hi Sarah -

The Enron attendees for tomorrow's meeting are:  Ken Lay, Marty Sunde and Bob
Williams.  Their resumes are attached.

Sarah, will you please e-mail me exactly where they should come once they get
through traffic.

Thanks.

Rosalee


----- Forwarded by Shonnie Daniel/HOU/ECT on 09/14/2000 04:11 PM -----

	Jessica A Wentworth@ENRON
	Sent by: Jessica A Wentworth@ENRON
	09/14/2000 04:09 PM

		 To: Shonnie Daniel/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: updated schedule info w/MTG info


Mike:

1) Attached is the CSFS report on the reorg and some recent press.
2) Learning to let go is good thing.

Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Florio [mailto:mflorio@mail.turn.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:56 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: Dissent from Commissioners Bilas and Duque Opposing
Suspension of DA

Despite the personal pleasure that I would derive from seeing Glynn and Richard strike out big time, it's not worth the price to ratepayers of letting these pirates (yes, pirates!) rip off so many valuable assets that should stay under PUC regulation for the benefit of consumers.

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Dasovich, Jeff" <Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com>
Date:  Tue, 25 Sep 2001 00:18:55 -0500

>So I'm assuming that you support the plan?
>
>Best,
>Jeff
>
>	-----Original Message-----
>	From: Mike Florio
>	Sent: Mon 9/24/2001 11:13 PM
>	To: Dasovich, Jeff
>	Cc:
>	Subject: Re: Dissent from Commissioners Bilas and Duque Opposing
>Suspension of DA
>
>
>
>	I have a new description of PG&E's reorg plan-- it is the
>ultimate
>	expression of their longstanding affliction with Enron-envy.
>Now that
>	they're cutting loose the UDC/LDC, they can fall flat on their
>faces with
>	no safety net (except the hydro, of course).   MIKE
>
>
>	At 04:43 PM 9/24/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>	> >  Commissioners Henry M. Duque and Richard A. Bilas,
>dissenting:
>	> >
>	> > One could say that this order is consistent with the
>Administration's
>	> > present third world country mentality. We are punishing the
>very
>	> > consumers and providers who made a commitment to ensuring
>electric
>	> > restructuring did work by adding a demand retail component
>to cure the
>	> > dysfunctions in the wholesale market.
>	> >
>	> > We are not convinced that the Department of Water Resources
>(DWR) bond
>	> > ratings depend on killing direct access.  This notion is a
>scare
>	> > tactic and a smoke screen. Direct access comprises such a
>small
>	> > percentage of overall demand that it cannot reasonably be
>seen to be a
>	> > threat to the sale of the bonds. Direct Access should be
>seen as a
>	> > benefit to DWR.  It would decrease the amount of the
>utilities net
>	> > short obligations and relieve DWR from its power purchasing
>	> > responsibilities sooner.
>	> >
>	> > Something else is going on here. We think that the DWR does
>not want
>	> > direct access because if the public is presented with
>alternatives, it
>	> > will make DWR's purchasing mistakes abundantly clear. The
>Commission
>	> > should be holding hearings to test the assertions being made
>by DWR,
>	> > Finance and the Treasurer.  Instead, the Commission is
>making an ill
>	> > informed, panicked decision to act now and study the
>repercussions
>	> > later.
>	> >
>	> >       DWR and the bonds should not be threatened by direct
>access if
>	> > DWR is making prudent energy purchases. Only if DWR's
>contracts are
>	> > too expensive, relative to market, will customers seek
>shelter in
>	> > lower direct access prices. Indeed, retaining direct access
>as a way
>	> > to send price signals to consumers may be the only way to
>place
>	> > pressure on DWR to make more prudent purchases. This is a
>very
>	> > important consideration since AB 1X prevents us from
>engaging in any
>	> > prudency review of the DWR costs to be passed through to
>ratepayers in
>	> > order to repay the bonds. If there is no yardstick, how can
>anyone
>	> > measure DWR performance? The answer is, one can't, unless SB
>18xx is
>	> > signed into law.
>	> >
>	> >       We think that additional review of these issues,
>before
>	> > suspending direct access, would have produced a more sound
>decision in
>	> > the long run.
>	> >
>	> > For these reasons we must respectfully dissent.
>	> >
>	> >
>	> >
>	> >
>	> > /s/ HENRY M. DUQUE                              /s/ RICHARD
>A. BILAS
>	> >         Henry M. Duque
>	> > Richard A. Bilas
>	> >         Commissioner
>Commissioner
>	> >
>	> > September 20, 2001
>	> >
>	>
>	>
>
>>**********************************************************************
>	>This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant
>affiliate
>	>and may contain confidential and privileged material for the
>sole use of
>	>the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or
>disclosure by
>	>others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
>recipient (or
>	>authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the
>sender or
>	>reply to Enron Corp. at
>enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and
>	>delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any
>attachments hereto)
>	>are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not
>create or
>	>evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp.
>(or any of
>	>its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party,
>and may not
>	>be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel
>or
>	>otherwise. Thank you.
>
>>**********************************************************************
>
>
>
>


Here are the files from Wheatland and Brownsville in dealbench that have some
issues.
Wheatland:
All of  01.01 General -     Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential reason:
Very large file
01.02.16 Umbrella Title Insurance Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: Unclear
01.02.19.02 A Index of Closing...  Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: Unclear- needs to be moved over from livelink
01.03 Equipment Contracts   Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential reason:
Westinghouse contract - haven't received consent and very large file
02.03.13 Indiana Utility Reg...  Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: Unclear - needs to be moved over from livelink
02.03.15 A Erosion & sedimentation... Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: very large file
02.03.15 B Erosion ....   Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential reason:
very large file
02.07 Consultants...    Issues: Misspelled in Dealbench; Change "Cunergy" to
Cinergy
04.01 Performance test data...  Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: Very large file

Brownsville:
01.01 General...    Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential reason: Very
large file
01.02.17 Land Option Agreements  Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential
reason: Very large file
01.02.19 Land Lease Agreements  Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential
reason: Unclear - Needs to be moved over from Livelink
01.03 Equipment Contracts   Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential reason:
Very larg file
01.03 .01 A and B Same as above
01.03.01.02 Same as above
01.03.02 Westinghouse Proposals...  Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential
reason: Have not received consents yet
02.01.03 Air Permit Notifications:  Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential
reason: Very large file
02.01.04 A...     Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential reason: Very large
file
02.06.09 Site Surveys & Maps  Issues: Needs to be named in Dealbench
04.01 Performance Tests...   Issues: Missing in Dealbench; Potential reason:
Very large files
04.01.06  Stack Compliance...  Issues: Missing in Dealbench: Potential
reason: Unclear - Missing in livelink as well, need to research
04.01.08 Fuel Flow:    Issues: Make sure that this is in Caledonia as well
b/c this file referneces Caledonia as well

Let me know if you need to see the physical indicies for any further
explanations.
Ben


will be in this morning around 9:00-9:30 a.m.

Holly Keiser
Enron Wholesale Services
Legal Department
Phone: 713-345-7893
Fax: 713-646-3490
Location: EB 3887
Holly.Keiser@enron.com


1-360-418-2957,

This number should allow you to make transmission accounts with BPA.
Remember to provide source and sink, and the portions of the path that we
will be paying.
Good luck.

Bill


Please click on the attached icon or the Web address below to go to the most recent OASIS Posting.

If that doesn't work highlight and copy the address below, then paste it into the address line of your Web browser and hit "enter":

Information on BPAT's implementation of tariff terms and conditions and/or transmission marketing policy has been posted to:

http://www.transmission.bpa.gov/oasis/bpat/scheduling/NoTagNoFlow2.doc"> No Tag/No Flow Implementation Update

For questions or comments, please contact your Transmission Account Executive.


Sorry, I was off the desk and did not read this message earlier.  We did price this put up - it comes out on our offer side in the $6 - $7 range. The best offer we'd make would be $6.  I think Rob gave this number to Rogers earlier this afternoon and hopefully it got to you.

Harry

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Friday, April 20, 2001 12:38 PM
To:	Arora, Harry
Cc:	Presto, Kevin
Subject:	Alamac Option

There is an option in the Alamac agreement which is not a CP&L option - its a financial option with us.

Seller: ENA
Buyer: AIG
Index: Megawatt Daily in TVA Index
Strike $45/MWh
Exercisable: Day Ahead
Duration: May 1 2001 - December 31, 2001
Type:	On peak
Phy/Fin:  Financial

Please could you price that for me at your offer.

We really need this before 1:30pm for the meeting Kevin is attending.

Thanks

Louise


HOLD this date
June 19, 2001 11:00 am - 1:00 pm
Enron Building Lobby
(Near the escalators)

Please come experience the services offered
by the following local businesses:

Dessert Gallery Bakery:  box lunches, client gifts, desserts, custom cookies
Elaine's Florist: Floral Design
Illusions Screen Print: Promotional items for the office or family reunions
Renewal Centre: Massage Therapy
Mother Teresa's Fine Food:  Gourmet Italian Foods
ADPRINT International:  Promotional Products
La Mere et L'Enfant Gallery:  Frames & Pictures, etc.
Neutral Posture Ergonomics, Inc.:  Ergonomic seating and accessories

Also, Enron Mentoring Connection will be on hand to speak with Enron Professionals about becoming a Mentor

Thanks in advance for your participation,

Cathy Riley
Enron
Global Strategic Sourcing
Minority & Women Business Development
(713) 345-6570
<http://gss.enron.com/>


Thank you for your helpful comments.  Good points.

On the timing issue, we still have the time sensitivity, but I hate to give
it a precise day.  Maybe the way to address that is within 10 BD's, as
mutually agreed.

I don't have the doc in front of me (I'm in Florida), but I thought it said
ENA was taking responsibility for increases in the Purchase Amount as it
exists the date of closing.  I'll check.

I agree with deleting CO definition.  It doesn't add anything.

Again, thanks.

Kay

"Campbell, Carolyn" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com> on 03/01/2001 02:07:06 PM
To: "'kay.mann@enron.com'" <kay.mann@enron.com>
cc: "Keffer, John" <JKeffer@KSLAW.com>

Subject: FW: Form for Blue Dog

Kay:

I have a few minor comments to the new draft of the LLC Letter Agreement:

1.  Section 2 - The new draft provides for closing "no later than 10
business days" after funding the escrow, while the old draft provided for
closing "on the 7th business day" after funding the escrow.  I have a
recollection that ENA actually needed the 7 business days and no less (thus
the requirement of ON the 7th business day) in order to prepare for closing,
and was trying to avoid the possibility of the counterparty wanting to close
before ENA could complete the matters required of it to properly effect a
transfer.  If the timing on this is not sensitive, the new draft is fine.

2.   Section 5(a) - The new draft provides that ENA is responsible for any
"increase in the Purchase Amount," if the increase is caused by ENA's acts
or omissions.  The new draft does not mention the base amount or point of
reference, any increase over which would thus be ENA's responsibility.  (The
old draft provided that ENA was responsible for the Purchase Amount, as
determined on the basis of facts and circumstances existing prior to
closing).

3.  Section 9(a)(xiv) - It appears that a verb is missing from this
sentence.

4.  Section 19(c) - I think the definition of "Commercial Operation" can be
deleted, since the only place it appears is in Section 19(g), where it is
used with the parenthetical (as defined in the Turbine Contract).  However,
we need to confirm that "commercial operation" is actually defined in the
Turbine Contract, as I believe this was the transaction where the term was
constantly used in the underlying agreement without definition.

5.  Section 19(g) - In the definition of "Take Over," replace both
references to "Unit" with references to the "GE Equipment".

Please call if you want to discuss these comments.  Thank you.

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Kay.Mann@enron.com [mailto:Kay.Mann@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 7:05 AM
To: ccampbell@kslaw.com
Subject: Form for Blue Dog

Hi Carolyn,

Could you check this and see if I did anything stupid with the revisions:

(See attached file: Form of LLC Purchase Letter AgreementBD2u.doc)

Thanks,

Kay

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

 - Form of LLC Purchase Letter AgreementBD2u.doc


I will be setting up a conference call for later today to discuss our latest view on developments in the California market.  If anyone has any specific questions before then, please call me at 713-853-7673.

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dasovich, Jeff
Sent:	Monday, August 27, 2001 8:26 PM
To:	Kean, Steven J.; Kingerski, Harry; Belden, Tim; Sharp, Vicki; Blachman, Jeremy; Comnes, Alan; Tribolet, Michael; Walsh, Kristin; Delainey, David; Leff, Dan; Frazier, Lamar; Keeney, Kevin; Blachman, Jeremy; Gahn, Scott; Belden, Tim; Swain, Steve; Lavorato, John; Kaufman, Paul; Steffes, James D.; Calger, Christopher F.; Mara, Susan; Black, Don; Richter, Jeff; Kitchen, Louise; Dietrich, Janet; Mara, Susan; Robertson, Linda; Kingerski, Harry; Denne, Karen; Palmer, Mark A. (PR); Shapiro, Richard; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa
Subject:	California Update--08.27.01

The California PUC
Loretta Lynch held a press conference in Sacramento today to discuss changes to the Commission's previously released proposal regarding Direct Access and the rate agreement between the PUC and DWR.
In the amended proposal discussed and distributed today, Direct Access would end retroactive to July 1.  Customers with contracts executed as of July 1 would would remain Direct Access customers.

The Legislature
The Assembly version of the Senate MOU (SB 78) has not yet been reviewed and voted on in the Committee.
It is scheduled to be reviewed and voted on at 6:30 PM PDT today.
Amendments on Direct Access were released this afternoon (based on negotiations between Davis' office and business customers):
Customers who have consistently been DA since May 2000, including those "involuntarily" returned to bundled service, would be exempt from charges for Edison's undercollection, DWR's forward contracts, and DWR-related exit fees, provided that the PUC finds that no additional stranded costs are created for Edison's remaining customers.
Customers who have consistently been on DA between May 2000 and Jan 17, 2001 would be exempt from charges for Edison's undercollection, DWR's forward contracts and DWR-realted exit fees, provided that the PUC finds that no additional stranded costs are created for Edison's remaining customers.
Customers who have been on DA between Jan 17, 2001 and August 24, 2001 would be exempt from exit fees related to DWR forward contracts, provided that the PUC finds that no additional stranded costs are created for Edison's remaining customers.
Customer's leaving after August 24th would not qualify for exemptions.
There is considerable work underway to make the August 24th date the deadline for contract execution, rather than the date by which the customer must be DASR'd, in order to qualify for the exemptions.
Direct Access would not be suspended, however, until 90 days after the bill is signed by Davis (if he signs it), i.e., the "effective date" of the bill.
So anyone going to Direct Access between Aug 24 and the effective date would not qualify for any exemptions.
After the 90-day period, DA would be suspended until 1.1.03.
Self-gen in service consistently from May 200 to August 24 would be exempt from Edison's undercollection and DWR charges.
Self-gen that submitted an application to the Energy Commission by August 24 would be exempt from DWR charges beginning the date that the self-gen comes on line.
Self-gen that comes on line after August 24 would be exempt from DWR charges beginning the date that the self-gen comes on line, but the total number of exempt MWs in this category would be limited to 250 MWs per year, on a first-come-first-serve basis.
At least 30% of any increases in net short due to increases in demand would be reserved for self gen.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rodriquez, Andy
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 4:46 PM
To: Black, Tamara Jae; '/o=ENRON/ou=NA/cn=Recipients/cn=notesaddr/cn=a478079f-55e1f3b0-862566fa-612229'; Abler, William; Aggarwal, Anubhav; Allen, Diana; Arora, Harry; Bailey, Debra; Ballato, Russell; Ballinger, Ted; Baughman Jr., Don; Benchluch, Moises; Benjelloun, Hicham; Benson, Robert; Bentley, Corry; Blaine, Jay; Bolt, Laurel; Broderick, Paul J.; Broussard, Richard; Burnett, Lisa; Campbell, Larry F.; Capasso, Joe; Carson, Mike; Chen, Alan; Choate, Jason; Cline, Kevin; Collins, Dustin; Comeaux, Keith; Coulter, Kayne; Davis, Mark Dana; Day, Smith L.; Dean, Clint; Decook, Todd; Emesih, Gerald; Errigo, Joe; Forney, John M.; Freije, William; Garcia, Miguel L.; Gilbert, Gerald; Gilbert-smith, Doug; Giron, Gustavo; Greer, Andrew; Gualy, Jaime; Guerra, Claudia; Gulmeden, Utku; Gupta, Gautam; Ha, Amie; Hanse, Patrick; Hernandez, Juan; Imai, Rika; Ingram, David; Jenkins IV, Daniel; Kaniss, Jason; King, Jeff; Kinser, John; Larkworthy, Carrie; Laurent, Dean; Laverell, Justin; Lenartowicz, Chris; Lorenz, Matt; Lotz, Gretchen; Lowell, Thomas; Mack, Iris; Mahajan, Ashish; Makkai, Peter; Marquez, Mauricio; Maskell, David; May, Tom; McElreath, Alexander; Miller, Jeffrey; Oh, Seung-Taek; Olinde Jr., Steve; Pace, Andy; Padron, Juan; Pan, Steve; Philip, Willis; Podurgiel, Laura; Poppa, John D.; Presto, Kevin M.; Quenet, Joe; Rawal, Punit; Rogers, Benjamin; Rust, Bill; Ryan, David; Saibi, Eric; Schiavone, Paul; Schneider, Bryce; Seely, Michael; Serio, Erik; Shoemake, Lisa; Simpson, Erik; Stalford, Robert; Stepenovitch, Joe; Sturm, Fletcher J.; Symms, Mark; Tamma, Ramanarao; Thomas, Paul D.; Trejo, Reese; Valdes, Maria; Vernon, Clayton; Wang, Steve; Williams, Ryan; Willis, Cory; Zipperer, Mike; Baughman, Edward D.; Clynes, Terri; Dalton III, Oscar; Kelly, Mike E.; Sewell, Doug; Valderrama, Larry; Walton, Steve; Roan, Michael; Perrino, Dave; Maurer, Luiz; Hueter, Barbara A.; Landwehr, Susan M.; Hoatson, Tom; Novosel, Sarah; Nicolay, Christi L.; Yeung, Charles
Subject: RE: RTO Week -- Summary of Standards and Practices Panel

RTO Week

 <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Day 4 - October 18, 2001

Afternoon Session

Standardizing Markets, Business, and Other Practices

Panelists for this discussion were:  Sarah Barpoulis, PG&E National Energy Group; William P. Boswell, GISB; Bill Burkes (substituting for David J. Christiano), City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri; David N. Cook, NERC General Counsel; Michael Kormos PJM Interconnection; LeRoy Koppendrayer, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission; and Marty Mennes, Florida Power & Light Company.

General Observations

The Commissioners were all present the majority of the time (Massey left late in the  afternoon).  FERC Staff was active in the discussion; however, the commissioners were very active as well, asking perhaps as much as 70% of all questions.  There was a general consensus that standards were needed; much discussion focused simply on how much and by who. The Commission seemed very interested in leaning what they needed to do to move the industry forward and how far they needed to go.  Panelists urged the need to mover forward as quickly as possible, but both they and FERC seemed to recognize that some of the issues regarding standardized market design and such needed to be addressed before RTOs could really begin to move forward.  There was discussion on identifying which industry group (NERC or GISB) would take the reins in the future.  On an interesting tangential note, there was noticeable conflict between NERC and GISB, with veiled insults between the two organizations somewhat common during the discussions.

FERC Deliverables

A great deal of the discussions focused on identifying what the industry needed from the Commission.  Staffers probed all panelists to find what they felt was critical.

The first major topic was "How many RTOs?  What is their scope?"  All panelists seemed to agree that this question needed to be answered immediately by FERC, in strong definitive language.  N o one offered any specific language, but seemed to be urging FERC to issue a formal statement.

The next topic was, "What will be standard market design?"  Panelists varied on this, but most felt strong guidance from FERC is urgent.  Some urged for one mandatory design for North America, one supported a set of rigid standard designs, one supported a single design with requests for exceptions (followed by an in-depth review process), and one seemed to prefer the current situation.

The commission in general seemed to be very interested in understanding what the industry needed to move forward.  They continually visited this topic throughout their discussions, asking questions like, "Do we need to issue a Mega-Order that addresses all these issues?" and, "How much detail do you need us to provide?"   General feel from the panelsists seemed to be they wanted strong leadership in this areas.  Kormos and Burkes went so far as to say FERC should "Mandate as much as they felt comfortable - and then go a little further."  Others seemed to be a little worried about this idea, but in general did not oppose the concept, citing only general warnings and the need for cautious investigation.

One item of interest: Wood referred to the filing made by the Electronic Scheduling Collaborative and specifically asked if the items identified in the "RTO Design and RTO Implementation" section would address many of the questions and uncertainty facing the industry with regard to RTO design.  Kormos indicated that clear and specific answers to these questions specifying a course of action would go a long way toward guiding the industry.  The section to which Wood referred was one that I wrote, and asked the following questions:

?         Congestion Management - When Operational Security Violations occur, how is the system to be stabilized in a fair and equitable manner that is nonetheless efficient?  Will LMP based systems be standard, or will there be others that must be accommodated?

?         Transmission Service  - Are transmission services required to schedule ("covered" schedules only), or are they risk management tools protecting from congestion charges (both "covered" and "uncovered" schedules are allowed)?

?         Loop Flows  - Are contract-path based or flow-based transmission services appropriate?  If contract-path based, how are parallel path issues to be addressed?

?         Grandfathered Transmission Service - Should contracts existing prior to RTO development be transferred, or is there an equitable way to retire those contracts?  Are there other solutions?

?         Energy Imbalance Markets - How are imbalance markets to function? Will they serve as real-time energy markets (support unbalanced schedules), be limited to supplying needs of imbalance service (require balanced schedules), or will they be required at all?

?         Ancillary Services - Will ancillary service markets be developed in standard ways?  Will entities be required to actually schedule ancillary services (required to schedule), or will they be treated primarily as financial instruments (protecting against real-time POLR charges)?

?         Losses - Can we utilize the imbalance markets to support losses?  Can we create specific loss standards that facilitate the scheduling process, or must we support methods that are currently in tariffs, but technically unwieldy?

?         Non-Jurisdictionals - How are non-jurisdictionals to be integrated into the new world?  Should systems be designed with the assumption that non-jurisdictional will be part of an RTO?  Or should they be designed to treat each NJE as a separate entity?

Hopefully, FERC will use this section as a template to answer these critical questions in an assertive manner, and give some solid direction in which to move. Kormos emphasized the need for concrete answers to these questions, pointing out that vague answers (i.e., "do congestion management") will take a year or two to resolve, but specific answers (i.e., "LMP with financial hedging instruments") will take only months.  The Commission asked Mike about moving forward, and he told them that effectively, it was impossible to move forward with implementation without getting these issues addressed.

Now for a  funny point - One of the commissioners (I think Breathitt) referred to some concerns expressed in the Northwest that their high concentration of hydro power makes LMP inefficient for the Northwest.  Kormos flat out said, "My profession is understanding how power systems work, and I don't believe that that statement is true."  He then backpedaled a bit and said that it would need more study, but he stood by his statement that the assertion by the Northwest interests was false.

NERC and GISB

A great deal of discussion focused around the need for a single standard-setting organization.  Massey went so far as to ask, "Are we looking at a beauty contest between NERC and GISB?"  Cook and Boswell then went into several short polite jabs at each other's organizations.  Other participants continually reiterated the need for ONE, INDEPENDENT organization.  Interestingly, Boswell was very emphatic about the established trust and respect in GISB, while Cook preferred to only talk about the "new" structure of NERC and did not focus on its history.

Brownell offered some not-too-subtle passive support of GISB by pointedly asking both Cook and Boswell if they lobbied political positions (i.e., were they not only an organization but also a stakeholder?).  GISB was easily able to say they were not, but NERC of course had to admit to their romancing of Congress and the Bush administration for reliability legislation. Point, Brownell.

Mennes acted as somewhat of a supporter for NERC, playing Dave Cook's yes-man.  He probably did them a little bit of harm by pointing to NERC's supposed "successes," such as TLR and E-Tag.  If staffers have tenure, they will likely remember that these "successes" have not been so successful, resulting in several filings and interventions.  We may also wish to file comments in specific objection to these claims, to refresh their memory and to show the pretty picture Marty painted was in fact a fiction.

There was a little discussion about splitting reliability and market issues, but general consensus was that I could not be done.  There was also some talk of folding NERC under GISB/EISB.

The arguments began winding down after a some time, and Boswell strongly urged the Commission to speak to industry executives and advocacy group leadership to see whether NERC or GISB should lead the industry forward.  NERC somewhat less enthusiastically supported this position.  In general, I would say it was a close fight but GISB came out more on top.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Andy Rodriquez
Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp.
andy.rodriquez@enron.com
713-345-3771


We received the executed EEI Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement dated 7/26/01 from the referenced CP.  A copy will be scanned into Livelink.


FYI
Thanks
Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fergus, Gary S.
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 1:37 PM
> To: Andy Pickens (E-mail); Barrett H. Reasoner (E-mail); David J. Noonan
> (E-mail); Jean Frizzell (E-mail); Michael L. Kirby (E-mail); Michael
> Molland; Mike D. Smith (E-mail); Peter Meringolo; Richard B. Sanders Esq.
> (E-mail); Robert C. Williams (E-mail); Susan Bisop (E-mail)
> Subject: FW: Summary Outline of our ongoing preservation discussions
> Importance: High
>
> FYI
> Thanks
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fergus, Gary S.
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 2:41 PM
> To: 'Richard Rochman (E-mail)'
> Subject: Summary Outline of our ongoing preservation discussions
> Importance: High
>
> Rich,
>  As promised, here is my summary outline of what we discussed
> regarding preservation of data:
>
> 1. In Portland, we proposed to handle business email related to the
> topics in your preservation letter by instructing employees not to delete
> any email sent or received for 24 hours.  Email that is personal and does
> not relate to the business topics you have identified can be kept,
> discarded etc. at the employee's pleasure.  Each day there is a backup
> made that will capture the email in those employees mailboxes.  After 24
> hours, each employee is free to manage their email box as they deem
> appropriate to the business needs (e.g. keep, discard).  From our
> conversation, I understand that you agree that this is an acceptable
> procedure.
>
> 2. With respect to the hard drives on individual computers, you would
> like to get an organizational chart for Portland that would enable us to
> discuss 6-12 individual's computers that would be copied using ProQuest
> Drive Image Pro 4.0.  In addition, there may be some other individuals
> that you would like to have us use a software product called Robocopy to
> copy files from their hard drives onto the network.  Until we figure out
> which computers to copy etc. we will not begin this process.  We discussed
> that because of the holiday period, it may not be practical to get this
> started until after the new year.
>
> 3. Outside of Portland, we have proposed making a snapshot backup along
> business function lines reasonably called for by the subject matter of
> your request.  We propose not to backup any other business units or
> functions.  On a going forward basis, those business functions that
> related to the subject matter of your request would be instructed not to
> delete business email.
>
> 4. We believe that relevant database  backups have been and will
> continue to be made and preserved.
>
> 5. When an employee runs out of hard disk space on their computer, it
> is an acceptable practice to copy files form their hard disk to the
> network (where they will be backed up) and then delete those copied files
> to make sufficient work space for the employee to work.
>
> 6. For EES, I explained that their IT services are outsourced so we do
> not have as detailed information immediately available.
>
> As I mentioned on the phone, all of these discussions and efforts being
> made are done without waiving any objections that any of the Enron
> entities may have to your request including scope, burden, jurisdiction,
> relevance, privilege, privacy, vagueness etc. and Enron specifically
> reserves each and every right and objection it or its employees may have.
>
> Please let me know if your general understanding of our conversation is
> different than the above.
>
> Thanks
> Gary

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

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


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/09/2000
11:09 AM ---------------------------

"NW on Linux" <Linux@bdcimail.com> on 03/09/2000 01:11:14 AM
Please respond to "Linux Help" <NWReplies@bellevue.com>
To: <vkamins@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Thinking with Linux

NETWORK WORLD FUSION FOCUS: PHIL HOCHMUTH
on LINUX
Today's focus: Thinking outside the (server) box with Linux
03/08/00

Dear Wincenty Kaminski,

Today's focus: Thinking outside the
(server) box with Linux
---------------------------------------------
By Phil Hochmuth

Welcome to the first Network World Fusion Focus newsletter on Linux in
the enterprise. With the mountains of information available about Linux,
it can be hard for network professionals to keep up with Linux news that
is fresh and relevant to their jobs. Here each week, you will find Linux
industry news, tips and examples of how Linux is being used in
enterprise networks.  Jumping right in, this week,s topic will focus on
how Linux can be used to turn an old PC into a network router.

When people talk about a Linux box, what generally comes to mind is
either a server or client machine running some distribution of Linux.
One way for users to use Linux outside &the box8 is with the Linux
Router Project,s distribution of the operating system.

The Linux Router Project (LRP) is a microdistribution of Linux (it fits
on a 1.44M byte floppy) that can be used along with some extra hardware
to turn a variety of low-end PCs into practical, useable network gear.
Additionally, as with most Linux distributions, the software is free.

A variety of different network devices can be put together using LRP.
For instance, using just an Intel 486 PC with a floppy drive, 12M bytes
of RAM and at least two network interface cards, LRP can be used to
assemble a 10M bit/sec Ethernet router. For higher speeds, a Fast
Ethernet router can be assembled with a simple Pentium 100 or higher,
along with 16M bytes of RAM and 10/100M bit/sec network interface cards.
LRP can also be configured as a secondary Domain Name System firewall, a
Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service and a WAN router with DSU
functionality. LRP routers support standard routing protocols, such as
Routing Information Protocol and Open Shortest Path First. Advanced
routing protocols are also supported, such as IPX for NetWare networks
and Token Ring.

Building a Linux router out of spare parts can be useful when setting up
a testing environment that requires the simulation of live router
traffic. It,s also more practical than disconnecting your live
commercial routing equipment for use in testing purposes. LRP can also
be put into a live production environment as a way to add extra routers
to a network for a minimal cost.

Because Linux routers can be built with standard PC components, the
materials to build one are likely sitting in a storage room or back
closet somewhere in your office. LRP is a completely free, open source
operating system  so if you can program, you can add functions such as
Multi-protocol Label Switching and load balancing to the router by
writing customized code.

If you are not a Linux hacker, odds are someone else has already written
the code for these types of functions. Start at
http://www.linuxsupportline.com
to find these kinds of modules. As with many free software products,
your best source of support for LRP will be the Web. An extensive list
of FAQs and tips on using LRP can be found at
http://www.linuxrouter.org/faq.

Since LRP is developed and distributed mostly by volunteers, download
access to the software is not always very fast. The easiest way to get
it is to log on to http://www.linux-howto.com, which has a search engine
for Linux documentation and free distributions. Type in &Linux Router8
in the search field, and it will let you choose what geographical region
to download the LRP software and source code from for optimal speed. You
can also try several of these mirror sites to download LRP:

ftp://ftp.cpwright.com/linux-router/
ftp://lrp.rutgers.edu/pub/linux/distributions/linux-router/
ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/distributions/linux-router/
ftp://ftp.xtdnet.nl/pub/linux/linux-router/
ftp://sunsite.ktu.lt/pub/linux/distributions/linux-router/
ftp://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/linux/linux-router/
ftp://ftp.clear.net.nz/pub/linux-router/
ftp://mailtrans.sote.hu/linuxrouter/
ftp://ftp.di.fct.unl.pt/pub/linux/linux-router/
ftp://ftp.wipol.uni-bonn.de/pub/mirror/ftp.linuxrouter

To contact Phil Hochmuth:
-------------------------
Phil Hochmuth is a writer and researcher for Network World, and a former
systems integrator. You can reach him at mailto:phochmut@nww.com.

*********************************************************
Subscription Services

To subscribe or unsubscribe to any Network World e-mail newsletters,
go to:
http://www.nwwsubscribe.com/news/scripts/notprinteditnews.asp

To change your email address, go to:
http://www.nwwsubscribe.com/news/scripts/changeemail.asp

Subscription questions? Contact Customer Service by replying to this
message.

Other Questions/Comments

Have editorial comments? Write Jeff Caruso, Newsletter Editor, at:
mailto:jcaruso@nww.com

For advertising information, write Jamie Kalbach, Account Executive,
at: mailto:jkalbach@nww.com

Network World Fusion is part of IDG.net, the IDG Online Network.
IT All Starts Here:
http://www.idg.com

Copyright Network World, Inc., 2000


FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Stokley/HOU/ECT on 04/03/2001 07:41 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.  From:  Amy Clemons @ ENRON                           04/03/2001 06:20 AM

To:	Chris Stokley/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:	Melissa K Ratnala/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject:	CDWR/CERS

Just an update : CDWR/CERS did make their 5th payment on time on Friday - one invoice (this Wednesday) left to go.

Thanks
Amy


Hi Kent,

I believe this to be blacklined against the original document.  Please note
there are some comments/questions included.

Talk to you soon,

Kay


Well, I hope it works out for you!


Done.

KK

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Vickers, Frank
Sent:	Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:36 PM
To:	Mendoza, Genaro
Cc:	Love, Phillip M.; Keiser, Kam
Subject:	RE: Nov. 2001 Price Discrepancy

Genaro, we restructured the deal effective with November deliveries.  I have a copy of the document if you need it.  Phillip Love and Kam Keiser are familiar with the deal if they can help.  The customer is correct in their pricing.

Frank
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Mendoza, Genaro
Sent:	Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:16 PM
To:	Vickers, Frank; Neal, Scott
Subject:	Nov. 2001 Price Discrepancy

Frank/Scott,

Are either of you handling deal # 22957 (sell to TBG Cogen)? There is a price discrepancy for Nov. 2001.

TBG Cogen Partners is disputing the rate invoiced by ENA for November 2001 gas. ENA invoiced a rate of $3.4367 for deal # 22957. The customer claims the rate should be as follows: first 4,000/d @ $2.25, remainder over 4,000 @ monthly index of delivery location + $.025. Please review and advise.

Thanks,
Genaro


Dear Linda

I apologize for not having responded earlier but I do not think I received the invitation, which is quite possible bearing in mind the difficulties here at the moment.  We have recently received approval from the bankruptcy judge to sell the portion of the business I jointly manage to UBS Warburg and in fact I am planning to relaunch enrononline (under our new entity) and we hope to be up and running around the time you are in Germany.

I am sure you understand that it is going to be a busy time for me in February combining the integration with UBS and restarting the gas and power trading operation under our new owner.

I appreciate your comments and thank you for your invitation but I do not feel able to accept.

I hope you all have a safe and enjoyable trip to Germany.

Regards

Louise Kitchen

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Rader, Linda" <Linda.Rader@jacobsconsultancy.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Tuesday, January 22, 2002 6:58 PM
To:	Kitchen, Louise
Subject:	"50 Key Women in Energy" - rsvp

I have an important question, so I'll e-mail it to you so you have time to
respond accordingly. I'm creating the final list of which of the "Key Women
in Energy" will be attending the awards ceremony in Essen, Germany on 14
February, and don't have a response from you yet. If you'd like to attend,
we'd love to have you. At the same time, I understand your world is changing
daily. All the same, it might be nice for you to meet the other women and
for the other women to meet you. Please do let me know if you plan to
attend, or, given your schedule, if there is the possibility you could
attend.

So far, I think there are 15 women who have committed to attend - from as
far away as Australia, the US, the UK, Bulgaria and Germany. We're all
gathering for dinner on Feb. 13, and many of us are meeting earlier than
that to explore the German countryside. I've been taking German lessons all
winter so hopefully we'll get by.I'd be glad to help better understand the
conference setting and details if you'd like. Several of us are gathering in
Essen over that weekend and early that week to meet one another, share a
meal, and get to exchange stories. You've personally done much for the
energy industry and might be surprised what a warm welcome you could receive
for your extensive efforts to lead the team that built EnronOnline.

Please do let me know so I may complete reservations, etc. Many of us are
staying at the same hotel, so it should be interesting.
Linda K. Rader
Group Manager
Jacobs Consultancy
5995 Rogerdale Road
Houston, Texas 77072 USA
linda.rader@jacobs.com
+1 (832) 351-7813


Ava, here is the correct spelling of the two names we talked about today in the team leader
meeting.  Thanks. Lynn
---------------------- Forwarded by Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron on 05/29/2001 05:20 PM ---------------------------
From:	Janet Butler/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/29/2001 05:07 PM
To:	Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Nancy Bagot/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Martha Benner/ENRON@enronXgate, Donna Bily/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jack Boatman/ENRON@enronXgate, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Theresa Branney/ENRON@enronXgate, Lorna Brennan/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ENRON@enronXgate, Alan Comnes/ENRON@enronXgate, Bill Cordes/ENRON@enronXgate, Shelley Corman/ENRON@enronXgate, Christi Culwell/ENRON@enronXgate, Shonnie Daniel/ENRON@enronXgate, Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Dushinske/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharon Farrell/ENRON@enronXgate, Drew Fossum/ENRON@enronXgate, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Goodpasture/ENRON@enronXgate, Pearce W Hammond/HOU/EES@EES, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Hayes/ENRON@enronXgate, Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate, Bambi Heckerman/ENRON@enronXgate, Theresa Hess/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert Hill/ENRON@enronXgate, Staci Holtzman/ENRON@enronXgate, Tamara Hopkins/ENRON@enronXgate, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lee Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Martha Janousek/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven January/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Kilmer/ENRON@enronXgate, Frazier King/ENRON@enronXgate, Steve Kirk/ENRON@enronXgate, Tim Kissner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Laura Lantefield/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda L Lawrence/NA/Enron@Enron, Blair Lichtenwalter/ENRON@enronXgate, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Teb Lokey/ENRON@enronXgate, Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Donna Martens/ENRON@enronXgate, Dorothy McCoppin/ENRON@enronXgate, Mike W McGowan/ENRON@enronXgate, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Nelson/ENRON@enronXgate, Ray Neppl/ENRON@enronXgate, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Neustaedter/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Maureen Palmer/HOU/EES@EES, Zelda Paschal/ENRON@enronXgate, Geneva Patterson/ENRON@enronXgate, Maria Pavlou/ENRON@enronXgate, Keith Petersen/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet Place/ENRON@enronXgate, Dan Pribble/ENRON@enronXgate, Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Raker/ENRON@enronXgate, Randy Rice/ENRON@enronXgate, Kathy Ringblom/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, James Saunders/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Sawyer/ENRON@enronXgate, Donna Scott/FGT/Enron@ENRON, John Shafer/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike G Smith/NA/Enron@Enron, Louis Soldano/ENRON@enronXgate, Lon Stanton/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ENRON@enronXgate, Gina Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate, Denis Tu/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Van Norden/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Veatch/ENRON@enronXgate, Donald Vignaroli/ENRON@enronXgate, Jody Warner/ENRON@enronXgate, Kimberly Watson/ENRON@enronXgate, Kim Wilkie/ENRON@enronXgate, Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rob Wilson/ENRON@enronXgate, Michele Winckowski/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject:	Wood and Brownell Confirmation Hearings

The Senate approved the nominations for Pat Wood and Nora Brownell late last week for FERC commissioners. Wood will fill a term expiring June 30, 2005 and Brownell will fill a term expiring June 30, 2001 continuing in a new five-year term through June 30, 2006.


Shirley,

I would like to  invite him to an interview next week. We should use his home
phone
number and/or private E-mail address.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 10/18/2000
12:33 PM ---------------------------

"Jaesoo Lew" <pontgyn@hotmail.com> on 10/17/2000 09:59:01 PM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: position

Dear Dr. Kaminski

My name is Jaesoo Lew and I am referred by Dr. Wayne Lee.

Currently I've been working at Aquila Energy in Kansas City as an pricing
analyst since July 2000.  Since then, I have developed a natural gas storage
valuation model applying the swing options (forest method) pricing approach.
The price processes would be considered critical for the storage valuation
since a trinomial forest is required to value storage. Also the c++
programming using Excel DLL has been developed, too.

I attached my resume to this message for your consideration and am looking
forward to talking about an opportunity at Enron.

My home phone number is 913-649-0578, Dr. Kaminski, I will wait your call in
this week as Dr. Lee informed me.  If possible, please let me know your
expected calling day through the mail.  I appreciate your consideration.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Jaesoo Lew
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.

 - vitae2.doc


I'm not sure what's going on with these options, but I entered them as 2 PM
expiry, then got a message that they were 2 AM from Stephanie Piwetz this
morning, changed them AGAIN, and now they're back to 2 AM. I've changed them
again, but I honestly have no idea why they keep going back. Please let me
know if you see the expiry as 2 PM now.

Thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
05/01/2001 12:02 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: option date - 597086

deal 597086
can you please ch the time to 2:00 p.m. not 2:00 a.m. for the exercise time.

Thanks


Just a reminder that the EGM weekly staff meeting will take place on Monday, June 4th, from 8:30 - 9:30 a.m., in video conference room EB 32C2.  The staff meetings will continue on a weekly basis on every Monday at the same time and location unless notified otherwise.

Please let me know if you are unable to attend.  Thank you.

Cathy Phillips
X-36898


Here are the correct parameters to be inserted in Schedule II:
L = 120.7 miles
d = 23.23 inches
Ke = 0.001
All other parameters are correct.


I couldn't get the email through to Bill Gang, so lets try William.  Bill V,
if this doesn't show Bill G as an addressee, please forward from your
computer.  Thanks.  DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 05/26/2000
01:49 PM ---------------------------

	From:  Drew Fossum                           05/26/2000 01:51 PM

To: Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@Enron

Subject: Pueblo

I just talked to Tino Monaldo, Dennis Langley's lawyer/project manager for
the Pueblo project.  I explained Bill and Bill's credentials and concerns and
Tino suggested that a sit down between Enron and their government contracts
team might be helpful.  He offered to do it in Houston, probably late next
week or the following week.  Attending would be Dennis, Tino, and their
outside lawyers, Jim Slattery and Rick Harrington.  Harrington is the key--he
is a retired military guy and one of the lead govt. contracts lawyers at my
old firm in DC.  The would basically put on a dog and pony walking us all
through their sole source strategy,  including their legal interpretations
and the allies they have lined up within DOE/DOD.  Bill and Bill--does such a
meeting sound productive?  If so, should we have outside govt. contracts
counsel present and if so, who do you suggest?

On a related note, Tino explained (without me asking or really caring) that
he was in the middle of a "big drafting project"--revising Dennis' joint
venture agreement with the Isleta.  I took the opportunity to express my
concern at how far down the road Dennis is getting on the overall deal,
including structure issues, without knowing whether Enron is even on board.
I reminded Tino that GPG has not committed to participating in the pipeline
or the power plant, and that we have not obtained ENA's agreement to commit
turbines.   Apparently Dennis believes that if the economics pans out, Enron
or someone else yet to be identified will magically jump in to the deal with
money, turbines, etc.   If Enron does eventually decide to get into this
deal, the agreements and promises that Dennis has already made may need to be
revisited.   Thanks for your patience on this project.  DF


Dan and Larry,

I wanted to let you know that we have found out what the problem was regarding these deals. Tonight we will create new products in order for these deals to bridge correctly tomorrow.   As a result, all straddle products should be captured correctly with two legs tomorrow.  I apologize fro the inconvenience.  Thanks TARA

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thibaut, Dan
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:49 PM
To:	Sweitzer, Tara
Cc:	McLaughlin Jr., Errol
Subject:	RE: Straddle Problem

Tara,

I have booked the deals correctly and reference the EOL ID's.  Additionally, deal confirms has done their thing and notified the c/p.  Please let me know if my trader, Larry May, or I need to do anything else to preempt this from happening in the future.

Thanks for your quick response to this problem.

Dan

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sweitzer, Tara
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:05 PM
To:	Thibaut, Dan
Cc:	Moorer, Torrey
Subject:	RE: Straddle Problem

It will have to be someone from comformations.  We never interact with the customer.  Also, This fix will only affect deals on a go forward basis.  All the deals that have been booked incorrectly will need to be fixed by risk.  Myself, and Tagg IT are still working on the issue, and will be in contact with you as soon as it has bee fixed.  Thanks TARA

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thibaut, Dan
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:44 AM
To:	Sweitzer, Tara
Subject:	RE: Straddle Problem

Thanks.

Can someone let the C/P know that the deals are good?  Do y'all interface with C/P?  If not deal confirmations could but they need the deal details.

Please let me know,

Thanks,

Dan

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sweitzer, Tara
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:23 AM
To:	May, Larry; Thibaut, Dan; Riordan, Sean; Cheung, Cecilia; Rivera, Oscar
Cc:	Moorer, Torrey
Subject:	Straddle Problem

Dan,

I wanted to let you know that we are working on the problem that we are having with the straddle deals being booked into Tagg. I also wanted to bring to your attention that these deals tested correctly in Tagg Stage, so we are trying to sort out what is happening in Production.  I am working with Tagg IT to resolve the issue.  I will keep you posted.  Thanks TARA


BLOOMBERG
aLL O.K.

PREBON WEST
Chris Mallory
deal 596370
Prebon shows cp as Reliant

AMEREX WEST
all deals o.k.


Andrzej,

Thanks. Please, send me the information about the dates
when you plan to visit Houston. Also, the information about
your position/title/responsibilities (as well as the info
about the other members of your team) would be useful.

I shall be in the Bay Area  between the 10th and the 20th of October.

Hope to see your then.

Wicek


Kevin, do you want to talk to Julie about this?  How many users do you think we should have down here?  I would like to have this put together and in front of Eric to consider before you and I leave this week, if possible.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	diane_linnane@platts.com@ENRON
Sent:	Wednesday, November 07, 2001 10:56 AM
To:	Wadle, Susan
Subject:	Re: Inside Ferc's Pipeline Project Tracker - 2nd request

Dear Susan

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Pipeline Project Tracker.  The cost for
a site license is based on the number of users and locations.  We currently show
one subscription to Pipeline Project Tracker for Julie Gomez.

Please advise of the number of users and locations and I will price this for
you.

In the meantime if you have any quesdtions, please do not hesitate to call me at
212-438-3003.

Sincerely Yours,
Diane Linnane
Sales Director


you're cooking?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Maggi, Mike
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 9:55 AM
To:	Nelson, Michelle
Subject:	RE:

i am cooking, how about you

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nelson, Michelle
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 9:52 AM
To:	Maggi, Mike
Subject:	RE:

i think that you were telling me that you had a big mouth and that you were going to be nice to me this week.  what are you doing for thanksgiving?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Maggi, Mike
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 9:51 AM
To:	Nelson, Michelle
Subject:	RE:

i got a little busy, where were we

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nelson, Michelle
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 9:51 AM
To:	Maggi, Mike
Subject:

where did you go?


ESTIMATED ACTUALS

March 30, 2001

     No Flow

March 31, 2001

     No Flow

April 1, 2001

     Teco Tap       35.000

When I receive the actuals from Duke I will forward them to you.


EFF_DT PORTFOLIO_ID DOWN95
11/20/00 MANAGEMENT-CRD 0
11/20/00 MANAGEMENT-GAS 2,010,184
11/20/00 MANAGEMENT-PWR 196,977.
11/20/00 AGG-MANAGEMENT 2,036,711


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
? California Budget Resolved
? FERC Ordered Energy Settlements Stall MOU/Plan B

BUDGET
California legislators in the House have once again established a tentative
reserve amount for the state's depleted budget.  Both sides are reportedly
uneasy with the $2.74B compromise and sources indicate that the four
Republican votes needed to pass the budget  in the Assembly are likely far
more obtainable than the one Republican vote needed in the Senate.
California's current redistricting process may provide Republicans with
future seats that could translate into immediate bargaining power in energy
and budget matters.  Adding to the frustration, sources indicate that
consumer activist Harvey Rosenfield plans to pressure State  Treasurer
Angelides into battling with legislators for progress on the budget and
revenue bonds.

ENERGY SETTLEMENTS
Today marked opening negotiations for California state energy officials and
the several large energy providers who are charged with price gouging
Californians.  Sources close to California State Sen. Burton report that the
results from the15 days of negotiations before the FERC appointed
Administrative Law Judge, Curtis Wagener, will significantly influence the
state's efforts in promoting any Plan B or MOU.  Burton indicated that FERC
would need to order between $3 and $4B in generator refunds before the state
would finalize a SoCal bail-out.  Of that amount, SoCal would most likely be
infused with $1B, however, without substantial contributions from power
providers that sold into California and currently fall outside FERC's
jurisdiction (i.e. BC Hydro & LA DWP), a $3 to $5B refund would be impossible
to achieve.  Regardless of legislators' desires, sources believe that
consistent with the PG&E bankruptcy advisor's view, a multibillion dollar
refund from FERC is unlikely.  Sources will continue to monitor and report on
these negotiations.


taerystrystrystry


Yes way too high for a diesel that has a bad reputation.

The guys here think they can come up with a pair of Cummins for about
$4,500 (for both).

I'll give Ricky a call.

-----Original Message-----
From: Parks, Joe [mailto:Joe.Parks@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 3:01 PM
To: Eugene Connors, Eugene
Subject: RE: Re: Engine Prices

no, dont know, call Ricky 281-820-8205, is that deseal price to high

-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Connors, Eugene [mailto:EConnors@mail.mainland.cc.tx.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:58 PM
To: Parks, Joe
Subject: RE: Re: Engine Prices

Joe,

The guys who teach auto for us said that if I do have to go with gas,
that the 502 is a much "healthier" engine than the 454.  Any idea of the
cost of 502's?

Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: Parks, Joe [mailto:Joe.Parks@ENRON.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:38 PM
To: Eugene Connors, Eugene
Subject: FW: Re: Engine Prices

-----Original Message-----
From: Landmark Chevrolet Parts [mailto:parts@landmarkchevrolet.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:32 PM
To: Parks, Joe
Subject: FW: Re: Engine Prices

-----Original Message-----
From: Landmark Chevrolet Parts [mailto:parts@landmarkchevrolet.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 5:52 PM
To: jparks@houston
Subject: Re: Engine Prices

Diesel Engine  $ 6275.00

454 Engine  $ 3350.00

These are your cost.

Rick Darnell

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


ATTENTION!  Starting 06/22/00, Enron IT Purchasing will no longer be able to
receive orders for IT equipment.  To place an order, please proceed to the
following website:  <insert link> http://itcentral.enron.com     Any orders
sent to Enron IT Purchasing before this date will be processed -- you do not
need to enter another request.  Enron IT Purchasing will still be open to
status requests, approval notifications and pricing inquiries.  Thank you
very much for your patience and cooperation!

IT Sourcing and Procurement.


Bill:
Could you please forward this to the business folks at Ace since this is a
critical point and I don't want them caught by surprise tomorrow.  Thanks.
Carol
----- Forwarded by Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT on 06/27/2000 02:04 PM -----

	"SCOTT AVITABILE" <SAVITABI@LLGM.COM>
	06/27/2000 10:07 AM

		 To: <rick.gieryn@ace-ina.com>
		 cc: <Carol.st.clair@enron.com>
		 Subject: Policy

Rick:  In addition to the comments on the mark-up of the policy I faxed to
you yesterday, please note that the reference to the "Approved Transaction
Counterparty" contained in Section 6.1(a) should be deleted as that issue is
now addressed in the revised text of the Force Majeure definition.  Best
regards.


Attached please find the latest version of the CA Development I and II
Agreements, as well as blaclines (Document Nos. 83699 and 83700) showing
the changes to Sections 6.1.2 and 17.
<<CA Development II - Comparison of 6 to 7.DOC>>  <<CA Development I -
Comparison of  v 5 to 6.DOC>>  <<break out agreement for CIS01
(12/20/00).DOC>>  <<break out agreement--CIS02 (12/20/00).DOC>>
 - CA Development II - Comparison of 6 to 7.DOC
 - CA Development I - Comparison of  v 5 to 6.DOC
 - 00).DOC
 - 00).DOC


Best regards,

JHHerbert

 - gd010314abr.pdf


> From:  OSU Alumni Association[SMTP:OSUAlum@orst.edu]
> Reply To:  OSU Alumni Association
> Sent:  Wednesday, November 15, 2000 9:50 AM
> To:  OSUAA Electronic Newsletter
> Subject:  E-Clips News Flash
>
> Sometimes the news can't wait until Friday. This is a special E-Clips News
> Flash on the Civil War and the Beavers' bowl game possibilities. This
> week's regular E-Clips will be delivered to your email box on Friday.
>
> The Beavers are 9 and 1 and this year's Civil War has huge bowl game
> implications! Not coincidentally, the game has been sold out since the
> summer.
>
> If you aren't going to be able to be in the stands, but still want to be
> around fellow Beaver Believers while you watch the game on TV, the Oregon
> State University Alumni Association has arranged for several official
> televised locations around the country. The details can be found here:
> http://alumni.orst.edu/CivilWar
>
> As far as the bowl game goes, we know two things:
> The Beavers will be in a bowl game.
> That bowl game will not be in Hawaii.
> As more information becomes available, the Alumni Association staff wants
> to be able to distribute the information as quickly as possible to anyone
> who is interested. To that end, we have developed a web site and an email
> update system that will allow us to keep everyone up-to-date. You can sign
> up to receive the updates at this web site: http://bowlgame.orst.edu/
>
> ________
>
> You are currently subscribed to Beaver E-Clips as: mleslie@amgen.com
>
> Please feel free to forward this newsletter on to any of your OSU Friends
> who would be interested in keeping current on university news!
>
> To subscribe send a blank email to mailto:join-e-clips@laser.sparklist.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> mailto:leave-e-clips-2883245R@laser.sparklist.com
> Please send any input or questions to mailto:OSUAlum@orst.edu
>
> GO BEAVERS!!
>


Can we sit down at 3:00?

andrew

To: Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew Miles/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: ECS / EES agreements

I would like to discuss the draft agreements and need some perspective for
how they fit into the overall big picture (e.g., the gas agreement doesn't
explicitly discuss the 2 month lag or nomination issues which may be ok if
this is covered elsewhere).

When would be a good time?  I have a 1:30 - 2/2:30 meeting but am free
otherwise.