"Roy J. Shanker" <royjshanker@worldnet.att.net> writes to the
NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

I concur with Mark. The only answer if you want to sign up more is to de
rate the payments and make the program aggregate capacity a max of 150 MW.

Roy J. Shanker
9009 Burning Tree Road
Bethesda, MD 20817
301-365-3654
301-365-3657 FAX
royjshanker@worldnet.att.net

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nyiso_tech_exchange@lists.thebiz.net
[mailto:owner-nyiso_tech_exchange@lists.thebiz.net]On Behalf Of Mark Younger
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 4:19 PM
To: PRLWG; 'Larry DeWitt: PACE'; jdprunkl
Cc: Tech Team EMail List,
Subject: RE: 150 mW DEC Cap for "Emergency Exempt" for EDRP

"Mark Younger" <mdy@slater-consulting.com> writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE
Discussion List:

If only 150 MW can be called on when the NYISO needs them then no more than
150 MW should be allowed to qualify as ICAP providers.  The purpose of ICAP
is to assure that the NYISO has capacity when it needs it.  "Having" the
capacity and then not being allowed to use it makes the capacity worthless.
Resources that cannot be called upon are do not add to system security.

-----Original Message-----
From:   owner-nyiso_dltf@lists.nyiso.com
[mailto:owner-nyiso_dltf@lists.nyiso.com] On Behalf Of jdprunkl
Sent:   Friday, May 11, 2001 3:55 PM
To:     'Larry DeWitt: PACE'; PRLWG
Subject:        RE: 150 mW DEC Cap for "Emergency Exempt" for EDRP

Larry:

A couple of comments:

1. I recommend that the 150 MW limit be managed by NYISO Operations.  They
are going to understand the problems in real time and should have complete
authority of which generators get run based on the situation. Trying to
fairly rotate which units get called at this late date, given the hours of
operation are completely unknown would be a waste of time, in my opinion.

2. We all should be very grateful that the DEC has taken the action they
have on expanding the exempt generator definition.  If people are not happy
with the 150MW cap then they should get a registration or state facility
permit and notify the ISO that the their site is not to be counted in the
150 MW cap calculation.

3. Not paying full ICAP for these resources would be a disaster.  If we want
to kill the emergency program, this is the best way to do it.  Again,
calling of generators should be based on the NYISO Operations assessment of
the emergency situation.  A special case resource generator standing ready
to serve, even if DEC has placed some limits on the number of MW running at
one time, should not be penalized by this cap.  We may find situations where
some of the SCR "exempt" generators called can not start or limit their
generation hours for some reason.  In this case we need as many SCR
resources ready to fill the void as possible. Limit payments really hurts
the credibility and effectiveness of the programs we have all worked so hard
to develop.

4. I do not think the EDRP manuals need to say anything on this subject.
This should strictly be an internal NYISO operation matter on which
generators get called in each zone.  If the Operations manual needs to be
updated to reflect the 150 MW exempt generator class of EDRP generators lets
do it here not in the EDRP manual.

Looking forward to Monday's discussion. Have a great weekend.

Best Regards,
John D. Prunkl
MetroGen LLC
205-343-1977 w
217-454-0295 cell
509-356-9367 fax
jdprunkl@metrogen.com
www.metrogen.com

-----Original Message-----
From:   Larry DeWitt: PACE [SMTP:dewitt@nycap.rr.com]
Sent:   Friday, May 11, 2001 1:43 PM
To:     PRLWG
Subject:        150 mW DEC Cap for "Emergency Exempt" for EDRP

Colleagues,
This is a "heads up" that there are several issues we will need to look at
on Monday with respect to the new NYS DEC expanded definition of "emergency
exempt" when participating in the EDRP.  The problems needing solving that I
am aware of so far concern the 150 mW cap that DEC placed on the ISO's call
for emergency customer generation.  Our understanding is that more than that
amount can be signed up for the program--but only 150 mWs can be called at
any one time.

Some have suggested that the DEC does not have the right or power to
regulate the NYISO.  I don't know.  But I do know that DEC would revoke this
in heart-beat if they thought we were going to ignore it--especially after
all these different parties, including the ISO and the self-generation
developers, bargained with NYS DEC to do what they have done.  Also, the
individual participating customers would be more than some upset if they
found out that DEC was revoking their emergency exempt status because they
were deemed to have been the ones who were over the 150 mW limit in an
emergency call.

There are two problems that I have seen, both related to enrolling more than
150 mWs of emergency exempt EDRP participants.  First, if there is more than
150 mWs in the region being called, we need to determine a method for who
gets called--it could rotate in an equitable fashion.  But our manual should
probably speak to this.

The other problem is that we probably shouldn't be paying full ICAP to 300
mWs of emergency exempt EDRP participants if we know that no more than half
of them can respond to any ICAP call.  We might derate them in percentage to
the subscription over the 150 mWs.  Or some other system.

My purpose here is to alert you to the issue and suggest that we want to
come up with a solution on Monday.  I spoke with Mollie Lampi about it and
hope the ISO has a chance to work on it today.  We want all EDRP and DADRP
manual matters to go before the BIC on May 24th.

Have a great weekend and thanks for all of the creative thinking and
constructive participation on getting these programs as right as we can as
quickly as we can!

Larry
<< File: ATT00000.htm >>


-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Thomas [mailto:hoooot@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 1:26 AM
To: doc-knapp; Mike Nolan; Nigel Self; pgreens
Subject: Fw: Gotta love chinese food!

Subject: Gotta love chinese food!


IntercontinentalExchange
Firm Physical Natural Gas Price Bulletin
For Natural Gas Delivered on Wednesday, November 21, 2001
(Trade Date of Tuesday, November 20, 2001)
Click here to access index history.
* volume represents sell-side only *
 Region     Hub 	 High 	 Low 	 Wtd Avg Index 	 Change ($) 	 Vol (mmBtu) 	 Hub Name
  LOUISIANA
     ANR SE 	 $2.7900 	 $2.1000 	 $2.6126 	 +.5901 	 222,600 	 American Natural Resources Pipeline Co. - SE Transmission Pool
     Columbia Onshore 	 $2.7450 	 $2.1500 	 $2.5128 	 +.3097 	 305,200 	 Columbia Gulf Transmission Co. - Onshore Pool
     Henry Hub 	 $2.8200 	 $2.2200 	 $2.6180 	 +.5406 	 1,538,500 	 Henry Hub tailgate - Louisiana
     NGPL LA 	 $2.7400 	 $2.0550 	 $2.5180 	 +.5460 	 287,900 	 Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Louisiana Pool
     Tenn 500L 	 $2.7400 	 $2.2800 	 $2.5295 	 +.4989 	 275,100 	 Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.-Zone L, 500 Leg Pool
     Tenn 800L 	 $2.7300 	 $2.2450 	 $2.4840 	 +.4767 	 248,800 	 Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.-Zone L, 800 Leg Pool
     TETCO ELA 	 $2.7900 	 $2.2500 	 $2.5993 	 +.4619 	 164,900 	 Texas Eastern - East LA
     TETCO WLA 	 $2.7700 	 $2.3300 	 $2.5976 	 +.6778 	 208,300 	 Texas Eastern - West LA
     Transco 65 	 $2.8200 	 $2.3000 	 $2.6756 	 +.5535 	 176,100 	 Transco - Station 65
     Trunkline ELA 	 $2.7600 	 $2.0000 	 $2.5481 	 +.5686 	 82,500 	 Trunkline Gas Company - East Louisiana Pool
     TxGas SL 	 $2.8400 	 $2.2800 	 $2.6244 	 +.5326 	 245,000 	 Texas Gas Transmission Corp.-Zone SL FT Pool
  MIDCONTINENT
     MichCon, citygate 	 $2.9000 	 $2.2500 	 $2.8052 	 +.6308 	 219,800 	 Michigan Consolidated
     NGPL Midcont 	 $2.5900 	 $2.2300 	 $2.4805 	 +.6875 	 221,700 	 Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Mid-Continent Pool
     NGPL Nicor, citygate 	 $2.7975 	 $2.1300 	 $2.6082 	 +.5992 	 1,231,800 	 Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Nicor Citygate
     NGPL NIPSCO, citygate 	 $2.8000 	 $2.5400 	 $2.7380 	 +.7435 	 107,500 	 Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Nipsco Citygate
     NNG Demarcation 	 $2.7000 	 $2.1250 	 $2.4831 	 +.4382 	 214,200 	 Northern Natural Gas, Demarcation Pool
  NORTHEAST
     Columbia TCO 	 $2.9100 	 $2.2900 	 $2.7287 	 +.5870 	 533,300 	 Columbia Gas Co. - TCO Pool
     Dominion So.Point 	 $3.1000 	 $2.7800 	 $2.8973 	 +.5502 	 235,300 	 Dominion - South Point
     TETCO M3 	 $3.3100 	 $2.8000 	 $3.0520 	 +.5224 	 218,400 	 Texas Eastern - M3 Zone
     Transco Z-6 (NY) 	 $3.4100 	 $2.9000 	 $3.2445 	 +.6188 	 100,000 	 Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. - Zone 6 (NY)
  WEST
     El Paso non-Bondad 	 $2.4500 	 $2.1600 	 $2.3522 	 +.6445 	 183,900 	 El Paso - San Juan Basin, Blanco Pool
     Huntingdon/Sumas 	 $2.4500 	 $2.3200 	 $2.3958 	 +.5708 	 126,000 	 Westcoast Energy & Northwest Pipeline Corp.
     Opal 	 $2.4100 	 $1.9600 	 $2.2514 	 +.6931 	 109,800 	 Opal
     PG&E Citygate 	 $2.6500 	 $2.3800 	 $2.5525 	 +.5769 	 227,500 	 PG&E - Citygate
     SoCal Border 	 $2.7200 	 $2.4000 	 $2.5593 	 +.6743 	 208,000 	 Southern California Border Points (Ehrenberg,Topock,Needles)
  WEST TEXAS
     El Paso - Keystone 	 $2.5300 	 $2.3700 	 $2.4526 	 +.7034 	 606,000 	 El Paso - Keystone Pool
     Waha 	 $2.5700 	 $2.3800 	 $2.5118 	 +.6383 	 245,300 	 Waha Hub - West Texas

Includes all firm physical fixed price trades done from 7 AM to 11:30 AM Central Prevailing Time on the trade date specified for natural gas delivered on the specified date(s).
IntercontinentalExchange is the world's most liquid trading platform for over-the-counter energy and metals.  Active markets include North American power and natural gas, global crude and refined oil products, and precious metals.  Traded instruments include forwards, swaps, and options.
In order to receive the proprietary information contained in this email, you acknowledge and agree that you shall not further disseminate the IntercontinentalExchange Market Data contained herein to any person or entity without the express written consent of IntercontinentalExchange.   Furthermore, you acknowledge that (1) IntercontinentalExchange has exclusive and valuable property rights in this data; (2) IntercontinentalExchange's data is being made available to you only for your own business or personal activities; and (3) you cannot communicate the data, in any form, to any other person or entity without the express written consent of IntercontinentalExchange.
This data is provided to you free of charge.  IntercontinentalExchange reserves the right to cancel this service at any time for any reason or no reason at all.
You agree that IntercontinentalExchange does not make any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the data.
To become an Exchange Participant or inquire about the indices, please contact sales@intcx.com.
To unsubscribe from this service, click here unsubscribe.
?Copyright IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. 2001, All Rights Reserved.


<<depriest.enron.plsletterhead.sanders.doc>>  <<depriest
jonathan.plsletterhead.doc>>  <<DePriest jonathan.doc>>

 - depriest.enron.plsletterhead.sanders.doc
 - depriest jonathan.plsletterhead.doc
 - DePriest jonathan.doc


Sweetie, what happened?  How'd you hurt your back?  So sorry.  And SO sorry that this isn't working out for anyone.  I really wanted to see you guys and REALLY wanted to ride.  Another day, I guess.  Take care of that back.  Herniated disks are bad, so take care.

Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Madeleine Todd [mailto:Madeleine@madeleinetodd.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 1:23 PM
To: afinch@iasco.com; Dasovich, Jeff; Scatena, Pat;
mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov; jeff_walker@i2.com; cwfinch@pacbell.net;
Luis Pine (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride
Importance: High

Hey gang-
Just back from the doctors and he said "do not go riding this weekend".
I am terribly disappointed but it wouldn't be wise. I don't have any
broken bones and it doesn't appear that I have a herniated disk--at this
point just a lumbar strain but he is afraid it will get worse if I ride.
I am sorry for the inconvenience and I will send Lari a separate email.
I hope the trip is wonderful. Please share the details.
Madeleine

-----Original Message-----
From: Amy Gustafson Finch [mailto:afinch@iasco.com]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:41 PM
To: 'Dasovich, Jeff'; 'Scatena, Pat'; Madeleine Todd;
mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov; jeff_walker@i2.com; cwfinch@pacbell.net;
'Luis Pine (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride

Hi all,

Sorry that some of you won't be making it to Mendocino.  I talked to
Lari's
assistant Cynthia and they are not planning to exact cancellation
charges.
Cal and I are still planning an all-day ride on Saturday, and Pat and
Nora
will be joining us on Sunday for a four-hour beach ride.  Would love for
any
of you who are "on the fence" to join us for both days.  The Ranch would
like to know by Wednesday if possible.

Amy

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 8:16 AM
To: Scatena, Pat; Madeleine Todd; afinch@iasco.com;
mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov; jeff_walker@i2.com; cwfinch@pacbell.net;
Luis Pine (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride

Dear folks:
Hope all finds you well, given the circumstances.  I would very much
like to go, but I continue to be embroiled in the energy mess and school
has started (last year!).  Turns out I'm going to have to be in Southern
California that Friday and part of Saturday for work.  I'm going to have
to cancel.  If there are any charges, please let me know.  Hope to see
all of you very soon.  Be safe.

Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Scatena, Pat [mailto:pat.scatena@intel.com]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:03 AM
To: 'Madeleine Todd'; afinch@iasco.com; mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov;
jeff_walker@i2.com; Dasovich, Jeff; cwfinch@pacbell.net; Luis Pine
(E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride

that's really too bad, i hope you are still able to make it.  I am still
planning to go, but will definitely be riding only on Sunday and might
drive
up on Saturday instead of on Friday.  Lu, I'll call you after I talk to
Jeff
to confirm whether he's still going.
p

-----Original Message-----
From: Madeleine Todd [mailto:Madeleine@madeleinetodd.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 6:50 PM
To: afinch@iasco.com; Scatena, Pat; mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov;
jeff_walker@i2.com; jeff.dasovich@enron.com; cwfinch@pacbell.net; Luis
Pine (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride

Hey guys--
It is my hope that you and your loved ones have not been directly
affected in the tragedy.

I assume that the trip to Mendocino is still going forward. I am not
happy to report that my lower back has gotten worse and not better since
the accident in Hawaii. Sadly, I may have to pass on Mendocino. I will
find out more this upcoming week and let you know.

If I do have to cancel I would assume we should keep the Grandma's room
for Jeff & Lu. If there are any potential cancellation charges I should
pay to Lari please let me know. I have been looking forward to this for
so long, I am sad to think of not joining all of you.

I will get back to you by Wednesday.

Madeleine

-----Original Message-----
From: Amy Gustafson Finch [mailto:afinch@iasco.com]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:05 PM
To: 'Scatena, Pat'; Madeleine Todd; mcgee.nora@epamail.epa.gov;
jeff_walker@i2.com; jeff.dasovich@enron.com; cwfinch@pacbell.net
Subject: RE: Mendocino Ride

Hi Group,

Need input for Lari as our ride approaches (Pat can you forward to Lu
and
ask him to reply to me).

I know some of you have ridden with Lari many times, but her scheduler
is
facilitating this process and has asked for some information.  Please
provide the following and I will batch and send to Lari:

Years riding
How often currently riding
type of riding (i.e. English lessons, dressage, trail)
type of saddle preferred
age, height and weight

Also, we initially planned on an all-day ride on Sat, and a four-hour
ride
on Sunday so we could all head back relatively early.  Lari would like
to
know where we want to ride on each day.  Nora is only riding for the
four-hour ride, and prefers the beach.  How about an all-day ride in the
redwoods on Saturday, with a four-hour beach ride on Sunday?

Amy

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


what do they mean when they have a cold summer scenario results in a $1.50 price?  these guys are freaks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Fraser, Jennifer
Sent:	Friday, August 17, 2001 5:42 AM
To:	Arnold, John
Subject:	Goldman Sachs $2.19 Natural GAs

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Scott, Eric
Sent:	Thursday, August 16, 2001 4:46 PM
To:	Abramo, Caroline; Dyk, Russell; Fraser, Jennifer; Gomez, Julie A.; McLeish, Alex; Zivic, Robyn
Subject:

 << File: gs gas.pdf >>


>From: Stuart Porter <stupor@home.com>
>To: Beach Craigmyle <craigmyl@locus.win.net>,  Bill Keeney
><bkee@naturalwonders.com>,  Bill Sawyer <sawyer@ntr.net>,  Brian Hoskins
><bthoskins@hotmail.com>,  "Brown, Timothy M (GEA,075502)"
><TIMOTHY.BROWN@APPL.GE.COM>,  Bruce Cain <cutbeef1@aol.com>, Cap Hoskins
><candjhoskins@aol.com>,  DJ Schreck <Djsatlanta@aol.com>, EBoland494
><EBoland494@aol.com>,  Fast Eddie Gutterman <eddieg@thepoint.net>,  Gary
>Conway <viper@combatsimulations.com>,  George & Linda Kimmel
><Geklcp@aol.com>,  "J. T. \"Tim\" McNary" <jtm@tdin.com>,  Jeff Hoskins
><jhoskins_90254@yahoo.com>,  Jo Zahner <Jojozahner@aol.com>, John Fowler
><hitit@thepoint.net>,  "Jonathan R. Howlett" <Jonathan.R.Howlett@jci.com>,
> Kurt McClain <kwmcclain@aol.com>, Mark Stauble <marks@stauble.com>,  Marty
>Otten <wmotten@earthlink.net>,  Monty horner <Montyhorn@aol.com>, Noel
>Booker <noelbooker@aol.com>,  Randy Chappell <randolph02@home.com>, Robert
><MAUMAU19@aol.com>,  "Robert B. Horner Jr." <Bhorner@ntr.net>,  Roger
>Sibold <rsibold@cs.com>, Ron Hendrich <ronh@fireking.com>,  Ron Hall
><reh@k93mail.com>, Scott Eller <scott_eller@hotmail.com>,  Steve Porter
><spport@bigfoot.com>, Steve Grant <doc2th@yahoo.com>,  Tom Gettelfinger
><TCGDOC@aol.com>,  Tom Kincheloe <info@lodgecraft.com>
>Subject: And We Wonder Why He Was Popular
>Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 06:02:34 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [24.2.1.66] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBBDD09F300C8D820F3E61802014290D40; Thu Nov 16 03:03:21 2000
>Received: from home.com ([24.10.81.202]) by mail.rdc1.il.home.com
>(InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP          id
><20001116110311.GNRE23432.mail.rdc1.il.home.com@home.com>;          Thu, 16
>Nov 2000 03:03:11 -0800
>From stupor@home.com Thu Nov 16 03:04:41 2000
>Message-ID: <3A13BECA.8D65EA30@home.com>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
>X-Accept-Language: en
>
>

_________________________________________________________________________
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.


Per Mary Kay Miller's request, I am forwarding you the attached file that provides similar data under CPUC Data Response No. 4 for the requested months of November 2000 and December 2000 for Socal and PG&E firm contracts delivering to the California border.  If you need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thanks,
Elizabeth Brown


i think you see the writing on the wall that we are going to dominate.  who
cares about the last two years, it is about now.  we are going to rope-a-dope
ya.


CALENDAR ENTRY:	APPOINTMENT

Description:
	Lynn - Oncall Christmas

Date:		12/25/2001
Time:		7:00 AM - 8:00 AM (Central Standard Time)

Chairperson:	Outlook Migration Team

Detailed Description:


Monte,

Please scrub the prompt tab, phys index tab, fin index tab, and consolidated tab.  Make sure they all tie out to the hedge strips and sitara.  Shannon will give you a copy of my physical volumes from sitara.  We will go over it tomorrow.

Shannon,

Please run a new copy of all DEC positions for IM WC CAL and give it to Monte Jones.

Thanks,
Mike


Russell -- As we discussed earlier today, I talked with Joel Sharkey, Supervisor of the Michigan PSC staff's Gas Division Competitive Services Section regarding our upcoming gas supply outsourcing meeting with MGU on August 21st.  Joel recommended that we review his testimony in Consumers Energy's case wherein the LDC asked for a change in its gas purchasing practices.  I have attached the full text of his testimony below.  Joel's testimony focused on the reasonableness and prudence of Consumers' filing.  The Commission's final order was issued July 25 and approved a settlement that generally followed his testimony.  Following is a brief synopsis of that testimony.

	--	Consumers' past approach to gas supply purchasing relied on long-term gas supply contracts. In contrast, Consumers' current filing proposes 		to rely instead on shorter-term, market-based contracts.

	--	Joel Sharkey believes that such a gas acquisition practice is imprudent because it focuses only on short-term purchasing strategies and 			exposes ratepayers to highly volatile markets and decreases reliability because of the risk that supply may not be available in the short-term.

	--	Staff recognizes that it is imprudent to lock prices when they are at historically high levels (i.e., $10.00 mcf).

	-- 	Historically, Consumers was the low-cost provider of gas because it used long term fixed price contracts.  Staff does not want this to change.  		Staff believes that marketers' prices will cluster around the GCR factor.

	-- 	Marketers need some type of standard, like the GCR, against which to measure their effectiveness.  Enron bought Columbia's customers 			behind MichCon and offered those customers $ 8.49 mcf commodity; MichCon's reinstated GCR would have been $ 5.17 mcf; Energy 			America was offering customers $ 6.249 mcf with a 5-10% rebate after 3 years; CMS marketing will charge $ 5.35 mcf weather normalized 			gas for two years, etc.

	-- 	Shorter term contracts do not minimize stranded costs.  The LDC already knows what its migration risks and can plan accordingly.

	--	Since: 1) marketers prefer competing against prices that are at market (fluctuating) levels; and, 2)  annual gas costs may not reflect monthly or 		daily prices; and, 3) LDC sales customers may have a negative reaction to an increase in volatility; then 4) the Commission needs to balance 		the competing interests of marketers and customers.

	--	If Consumers wants to use hedging as part of its gas acquisition strategy, it should include that in its next GCR plan.

	-- 	Consumers asked for an additional $1.00 mcf "volatility component" which was analyzed and rejected by Mr. Sharkey.  Notably, his rejection 		was based on an analysis of  Act 304 and his finding that only two reasons listed in the Act were relevant to Consumers' proposed GCR plan: 		market volatility  and the likelihood of shifting large under recoveries to future GCR years. Consumers' other reasons were inconsistent with the 		purposes of the Act, specifically, the volatility component did not minimize the cost of gas.

	--	Mr. Sharkey did opine that a $1.00 adder could, under MCL 460.6h(6), be linked to the occurence of a future event as a contingent GCR factor, 		but that was not proposed by Consumers, so the $ 1.00 volatility component was not recommend by staff.

	Additionally, when I spoke to Mr. Sharkey he told me that he is looking forward to meeting with us on the 21st.  I responded that we have what I believe to be a win-win proposal.  He indicated that such a result would be well received by staff because MGU has given them a great deal of trouble and that there were times when staff wanted someone to buy that company so that it could be better run.  Such candor  to an outside party regarding a regulated company is unusual and underscores his hopefulness that we will deliver a product that solves a  problem for the Commission.


I need 2 additional tickets for the Washington game that are next to my 4 season tickets.   I will call you later today to give you my AMEX to get the parking pass and confirm the specific seat location.   Patrick never called me to confirm the seats in the front row of the upper section, therefore, your message is the first confirmation I have received.

Thanks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Cato, Kinch H." <kcato@miami.edu>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Cato+2C+20Kinch+20H+2E+22+20+3Ckcato+40miami+2Eedu+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:33 PM
To:	'kpresto@enron.com'
Cc:	Nero, Patrick F
Subject:	Invoices

Kevin,

I got your message  today regarding the invoices that you have received for tickets.  I am  sorry I didn't have a chance to call you back.

The only invoices  that you should have received recently are for the 6 Washington tickets and the  SVIP parking pass.  I faxed these to you about a week  ago.

As part of your  membership at the Golden Cane level, you are entitled to 4 complimentary season  tickets.  Based on your conversation with Patrick, these are going to be  located in the section in front of the press box reserved for Golden Canes and  Living Scholars.  Your parking pass and any additional season, home or away  game tickets would need to be purchased.

Please let me know  if you have any additional questions or concerns.  Thank you, once again,  for continued support of the Hurricane Club.

Kinch Cato
Director of Annual Giving
University of Miami  Hurricane Clubkcato@miami.edu << File: mailto:kcato@miami.eduhurricanesports.com >>
hurricanesports.com
1-800-GO-CANES/305-284-6699
Fax: 305-284-3838


See end of first paragraph.

Jim

---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 06/07/2001
12:33 PM ---------------------------
From: Joe Hartsoe on 06/07/2001 12:26 PM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W
Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L
Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Stanley Horton/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley
Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Drew Fossum/Enron@EnronXGate, Mary Kay
Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ray Neppl/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert
Kilmer/Enron@EnronXGate

Subject: FERC Staff Concerns on the Gas Side

Folks --

Had a good discussion with a Senior Staff member at FERC in preparation for
the Pipelines Outreach meeting next week.  He told me that the two issues on
the gas side that are of primary concern to the Commission are 1) Marketing
Affiliates and potential abuse on the pipelines (Think El Paso); and 2) the
failure of CFTC and/or SEC to more closely oversee derivative trading.

Apparently, staff is considering whether to ban all transactions by marketers
on an affiliated pipeline, and some form of filing/reporting requirement to
better understand the derivative market.  Due to a lack of information, some
at FERC are assuming the worst.

I believe these proposals are in the formative stage and have not been
presented to Senior Staff or Commissioners as a recommendation.  I think
Staff would appreciate some information (ammo) to refute the need to further
regulate marketing affiliates or delve into derivative trading.

INGAA filed comments and a study concerning Marketers' use of affiliated
pipelines in response to the Marketing Affiliate Conference at FERC.  These
are attached.   Staff questions whether the underlying information remains
accurate.  We are considering whether to update the underlying information
used in the INGAA Study and how best to address these issues (probably during
Q&As) during the Staff Outreach.

I believe it would be helpful to put back together the coalition that Leslie
Lawner used at the last Market Affiliate conference to request a meeting as
part of the current Staff Outreach to discuss Staff's concerns.  In addition,
I think it would be helpful to request a separate ENRON meeting with Staff to
discuss how the derivative market works and why FERC does not need to
establish ongoing reporting requirements or otherwise become involved in
these markets.  Unfortunately, in this meeting we would probably be asked
about our involvement in the El Paso Merchant Transportation deal into
California, in light of Peggy Hegg's comment on the Frontline Show that El
Paso hedged some of the risk with Enron.

We can discuss further on Friday's call.  Later Joe


Sherri,

Can you let Jeff know that the attached memo is going to go out tonight under his name.  Steve Kean, Cindy Olson and legal have signed off on it.  If you or he have any questions or concerns, please call me at 53231.

Thanks,
Karen


Wow, what a week so far.  Beauty of a short squeeze early on.  Even some of
the biggest bears I know were covering to reestablish when the market lost
its upward momentum.  Unfortunately, my boat is too big to play that way.
Takes too long to put the size of the position I manage on or off to play
that game.  just had to sit back and take my lumps. couldnt have been a more
bearish aga # in my opinion.  got one more decent one and then watch out
below.  amazing that we've had more demand destruction recently.  the economy
is the 800 pound gorilla that is sitting on nat gas and it aint getting up.


As you are aware, your business unit has been selected to participate in
Project GEM (Global Enron Migration) for the rollout of Windows 2000.  In
preparation for this rollout, it is imperative that we gather information
about your workstation and the applications you use.  To begin this data
collection, we have automated the process.  In fact, your system has just
been inventoried.   Once this information is received, we will be working
with your local department coordinator to consolidate this information to
ensure this transition is as smooth as possible.

The GEM team would like to thank you for your participation.  If you have any
questions, please contact Lee Steele at (713) 345-8259


How bout them Horns? Give me a call when you get a chance.


Note:If you do not want to receive notice of any upcoming programs, please
reply to this email with "remove" in the subject line. You also can limit
notices to specific topics by replying and specifying the topics. Thank
you.

Dear Mr. Dasovich,

Energy Restructuring in the Southwest conference, co-sponsored by Energy
Newsdata Corporation

When/Where: July 19 and 20, 2001 at the Alexis Park in Las Vegas

While California,s electric system stumbles from crisis to crisis during a
continuing state of emergency, states and municipalities throughout the
Western region are reexamining and, in some cases, reversing their policies
regarding restructuring of the electric services industry. This has
resulted in ever-changing and confusing laws and policies affecting
utilities, energy service providers and consumers in Arizona, Nevada and
New Mexico.

This conference will help lay the groundwork for a better understanding of
current market and regulatory conditions in the Southwest, and the faculty
of expert speakers will provide insight as to how evolving policies will
shape markets of the future.

Program Co-chairs: Arthur O'Donnell of California Energy Markets and Fred
Schmidt of Hale Lane Peek Dennison Howard & Anderson.

Information or registration: reply to this announcement; call us at (800)
854-8009; or visit our web site:
http://www.lawseminars.com/htmls/seminars/01resnv.

--------------------------------------------
Copyright 2001 by Law Seminars International
All Rights Reserved
--------------------------------------------


I would appreciate a response confirming receipt of this note.

Regards

Andy Blanchard
Manager, Trading Support
x54979


Me polite??  I think you have me confused with someone else.  You  are
definitely invited.  And as for my family and friends, if you think you can
stand them you're welcome to come along.  Some of my friends usually end up
at my parents house anyway.  There's only one friend that'll I'll probably
try to catch up with over Thanksgiving and we usually just go to dinner and
catch a movie, so you are welcome to come.

What'cha doing for lunch?

Robin

Gabriel Monroy
11/17/2000 11:26 AM
To: Robin Rodrigue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: PS

Robin,

I thought you were just being polite and you felt bad because it was going to
be a lonely Thanksgiving for me.  So, you were serious about it?   I really
appreciate that you still keep me in mind, and I apologize for not having
told you anything. I am sure you probably need to know to plan ahead.
Ok, here is the plan. Let me make a few phone calls b/c  my best friend  from
Cd. Juarez (border with El Paso, TX) said he  was going to Austin for that
weekend  but nothing is for sure. Also, Ramiro was planning a trip, but I
don't feel that bad If I decline b/c you know he loves finding foreigners to
travel with. He actually already found somebody.

Honestly, I did think about it, and I was a little worried that maybe you
want to spend quality time with family and friends and I will be a perfect
stranger there. (Ok, here is your chance to say "yeahh,  maybe you are right"
"I want to spend time with my F & F)  Or if you are still being polite, then
let me get bactk to you on that after I make those phone calls.

THank you.

Gabriel

Robin Rodrigue
11/17/2000 10:35 AM
To: Gabriel Monroy/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: PS

Have you thought any more about coming with me for Thanksgiving?


James Martin
810 Bellevue Rd Unit 243
Nashville, TN 37221
jdmnash@home.com

To Mr. Ken Lay,

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

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

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

Sincerely,

James Martin


Hello Mark,

Both Bob and myself have left messages to speak with you about email
retention time.  Those messages must have been lost, so I have decided to try
email.

The group we work in, Technical Power Services,  is project oriented.  We are
an extension of the Engineering department.  As you are well aware the
development, and construction of power projects can be a minimum of 9 months,
to as long as 4 years plus.  To give an example, the work that has been
started on the coal initiative. At $4-$5 mmbtu for gas, the development of
coal plants becomes more economical.  This development is just starting,
nothing will be decided for a couple of years, then if it goes ahead
construction could easily be 3 years or more.

What we are trying to stress is the information that is started in the
beginning of a project needs flow through to the end of the project, which in
most instances is longer than a year.

Some of the current power projects we are developing have COD date in 2002 to
2004.  The retention of email is important to the projects.

The companies that we deal with will be keeping the correspondence and if we
don't have our own copies, I think you know where this is going.

We would like to discuss this with you.  There has been folders set up in the
Public mailbox system to give us more than the 100MB limit.  This is very
helpful since some drawings files we receive can be over 10MB.

We are patiently waiting to speak with you on this subject.

Thank you.

Terri Austin
Development Engineer
713-345-4681


Approved.  Please note that Co. # should be 0342 for Misc. Expense on
Todd032400LondonSAP expense report.
Thanks,
Sally Beck
---------------------- Forwarded by Sally Beck/HOU/ECT on 03/28/2000 03:03 PM
---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Lynn Tippery                           03/24/2000 04:25 PM

To: Sally.Beck@enron.com
cc: Patti Thompson/HOU/ECT@ECT, D.Todd.Hall@enron.com@ECT
Subject: Todd Halls Exp Rpts

Hi Sally,
Would you please approve and forward to Expense Report stating your approval.

Patti has the orginal hard copies if you want to review them.  I thought
emailing this to accounting
might get it processed quicker.
Thank you
Lynn


Yes - it's with APB - I've changed it.

	From:  Kimberly Indelicato                           04/13/2001 08:48 AM

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

Subject: #581085.01

Kate, Spoke with Prebon and they don't show this trade. Could it be with
another Broker?

KI


IMPORTANT  MESSAGE!  PLEASE READ!

FILENET SYSTEM OUTAGE

JANUARY 31, 2002

The FileNet Envision System will be down Thursday, January 31st beginning at 5:00 p.m.  It is necessary to take the system down for Hardware repair.  The good news is that it will be back up on Friday, February 1st at 7:00 a.m.

On Saturday, February 2nd the FileNet Envision System will not be available for use until 9:00 a.m.  On Saturday, we will update the database between 6 am and 9am.  Users will not be able to access the Envision System during both these outages.

I would like to thank you for your patience as we work through these outage.

If you have any questions or concerns about this outage, please feel free to call the Help Desk @ 713-853-1555 Option #1

Envision/Encompass Support Team
Document Mgmt and Process Automation
713/853-1555 Opt 1

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


Does Rob want to meet on Oct 5?  If yes, I want to be done by 10:00.   Mark
----- Forwarded by Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT on 10/03/2000 06:05 PM -----

	Rob Walls@ENRON
	09/28/2000 04:57 PM

		 To: Mark E Haedicke@ECT, Kristina Mordaunt@Enron Communications, Mike Moran,
Rex Rogers@ENRON, Vicki Sharp@EES
		 cc: James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject: Technology Committee -- Electronic Contracts and Signatures

Three things:

I attach a copy of the memo on the federal electronic signature law that we
discussed this morning.  Mark and I will discuss with Alan his original
proposal of adding a footer to company emails and get back to the group.
Until then no footer will be added.

With respect to Paulette, I understand that each of you agree to bear your
proportionate share of her cost for the budget year 2000--although the basis
of that allocation is still to be agreed.

Finally, we agreed to discuss what projects we would like for our technology
committee to undertake.  I propose that we discuss this topic during next
Thursday's meeting--since Jim will be out of town we can have this meeting in
lieu of the regular meeting.  I think having this discussion now would be
helpful and I think the technology group would greatly benefit from the
meeting as well.  Let me know if that is acceptable to you.

Thanks.

----- Forwarded by Rob Walls/NA/Enron on 09/28/2000 02:12 PM -----

	Nora Dobin
	09/20/2000 03:53 PM

		 To: Rob Walls/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, AL
ALEXANDERSON/ENRON@Gateway, Sylvia Hu/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Britt
Davis/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Labanowski/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Colleen
Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eva Neufeld/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Eickenroht/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Nora Dobin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Monica Jordan Richards/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C
Williams/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Luiz Watanabe/SA/Enron@Enron,
Jon Chapman/LON/ECT@ECT, Luis Derrota/HOU/EES@EES, Bonnie
White/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Benson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Paulette
Obrecht/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
		 cc: John Ale@AZURIX, Julia Murray@ECT, Bruce
Lundstrom/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Kristina Mordaunt@Enron
Communications, Eric Newell@ENRON, Daniel R
Rogers/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Molly Sample@EOTT, Frank
Sayre/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Rex Rogers/Corp/Enron@Enron, Scott
Sefton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gareth Bahlmann/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julia H Chin/NA/Enron@Enron,
Roseann Engeldorf/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joel Ephross/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Brenda L
Funk/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gina Karathanos/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Technology Committee -- Electronic Contracts and Signatures

As I mentioned at our last meeting, we have been working with issues of
electronic contracts and signatures in Global Finance, especially in the
development, implementation and ongoing operations of the DealBench Internet
site.  Vinson & Elkins has been working with us on DealBench and related
e-commerce matters.  Attached for your information is a V&E memorandum on
electronic contracts and signatures under federal, Delaware, New York, Texas
and certain uniform laws.

As a postscript to the meeting minutes circulated today, Enron Corp., some of
its affiliated entities and third parties successfully are using the
DealBench site for various types of transactions.

Let me know if I can help or provide additional information on any of these
matters.

Regards, NJD


<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">

CALGARY, Alberta ? October 24, 2001 ?  (TSE:TRP) (NYSE:TRP) - TransCanada
PipeLines Limited will release its third quarter 2001 financial results
in the morning of Tuesday, October 30. Analysts, members of the media and
other interested parties are invited to participate in a teleconference
and audio web cast October 30 at 1:00 p.m. (Mountain) / 3:00 p.m. (Eastern)
to discuss the third quarter 2001 financial results, general developments
and issues concerning the company.  more....

For more information on this and other TransCanada news, please visit:
http://www.transcanada.com

******************************************

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: You are receiving this message because you subscribe
to TransCanada's News Release notice list.  If you would like to be
removed from this list, please reply with UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject line,
or visit http://www.transcanada.com/form_unsubscribe.htm

Thank you for your interest in TransCanada.


Please process an additional payment, to be paid 11/15/01, to the following individuals as follows: Lisa Yoho: $20,000; Lara Leibman:$20,000; Janel Guerrero: $15,000. Thanks.


Thank you for your kind e-mail. I think that Omni and Arp are the same in
importance. If you have the room, go with Omni.

Let me know if you will purchase any Pleasurscape pieces.

Yours, Karim

Karim Rashid Inc.
357 W 17th Street
New York NY 10011
p 212 929 8657
f 212 929 0247

www.core77.com/karimrashid

> From: John.Griffith@enron.com
> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 10:36:41 -0600
> To: KarimRashid <karim@karimrashid.com>
> Subject: Re: Limited pieces
>
>
> Thanks for the email.
>
> I haven't had a chance to thank you for your trip to Houston.  It was a
> true pleasure to meet you.  I have a new excitement for design.  It is so
> nice to meet a person that is so down to earth.  I hope that you accomplish
> all of your goals.  You are truly deserving.
>
> The pieces look very beautiful at circline.  I am talking to them about the
> timing of getting an Arp sofa.  It is such a beautiful piece.  Do you think
> that the sofa's foam will last?  How is the fabric that IDEE uses?  Are you
> happy with the design?  Angie and I were looking into the Omni also.  How
> do you compare the two as far as design goes?  Is one more important than
> the other to you?
>
> Please keep me informed on your watch and eyewear designs coming this year.
> I am very excited.
>
> Once again thanks for the email and also your trip to Houston.  I hope that
> you can make it again soon.  Please call or email if you need anything.  My
> phone number is (713) 527-8743.
>
> Have a great week.  Talk to you soon.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> John Griffith
>
>


Dale - better check your address book - this one went to the other Mark
Taylor.
----- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 10/26/2000 09:11 AM -----

	Mark A Taylor@EES
	10/26/2000 06:48 AM

		 To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: New Product Type - Approval Requested

Yours?
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark A Taylor/EFS/EES on 10/26/2000 07:46
AM ---------------------------

Dale Neuner@ECT
10/24/2000 12:38 PM
To: Mark A Taylor/EFS/EES@EES, Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Matthew
Adams/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rudi Zipter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON,
Jo Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Blumenthal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H
Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jason Althaus/Corp/Enron@Enron, Naveed
Ahmed/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: New Product Type - Approval Requested

Please offer your apprval to the following Product Type:

US Pipeline Capacity  NNG (Firm)

The related Products are capacity products being offered by Nothern Natural
Gas Company. As there are regulatory issues concerning the viewing of
proprietary information by the market affiliates of NNG, chinese walls are in
place through the operation of policy.

You may notice that there is no Sigma Factor associated with this Product.
The SF has purposely been set to zero, as the Credit area of NNG will be
responsible for the daily review of exposure to their Counterparties, and
will coordinate any Credit issues with the Credit area of ENA.

Attached please find an example of a related Product Type.

I need to ask that you expedite this approval. In order to have the Product
Type available for this coming Monday I must have the full approval by no
later than this Wednesday (tomorrow) at Noon.

If you have any question, please feel free to call.

Dale
3-9746


Folks  --  Attached is the report sent to the Commission regarding the
California "settlement conference" on forward contracting.  As expected, this
conference has expanded in scope and Judge Wagner is now seeking a
"comprehensive settlement" for California.  Please give me a call if you
would like additional information.  Joe 202.466.9150

----- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 12/20/2000 04:20 PM -----

	"Martha Altamar" <martha.altamar@ferc.fed.us>
	12/20/2000 04:11 PM

		 To: <clgentile@brudergentile.com>, <degoroff@brudergentile.com>,
<carlwood@cpuc.ca.gov>, <eisenstatl@dsmo.com>, <perlism@dsmo.com>,
<klm@dwgp.com>, <Lcross@eei.org>, <jhartso@enron.com>, <cgeorge@eob.ca.gov>,
"Daniel Poffenberger" <daniel.poffenberger@ferc.fed.us>, "Howard Forman"
<howard.forman@ferc.fed.us>, "Laura Sheppeard" <laura.sheppeard@ferc.fed.us>,
"Linda Lee" <linda.lee@ferc.fed.us>, "Linda Patterson"
<linda.patterson@ferc.fed.us>, "Martha Altamar" <martha.altamar@ferc.fed.us>,
<mmanning@fulbright.com>, <pmohler@hewm.com>, <SBerman@hewm.com>,
<ckrupka@mwe.com>, <glawrence@mwe.com>, <ppantano@mwe.com>,
<karen.tomcala@pge-corp.com>, <DXH4@pge.com>, <dxhr@pge.com>, <JXB7@pge.com>,
<RMK4@pge.com>, <jhong@phjw.com>, <lisa.dowden@piegelmcd.com>,
<jadillon@pplweb.com>, <sandrar@prestongates.com>, <kmccrea@sablaw.com>,
<anne.cleary@southernenergy.com>, <rroberts@steptoe.com>,
<eberlin@swidlaw.com>, <glortman@verner.com>, <cfr@vnf.com>,
<alex.goldberg@williams.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Chief Judge's Report to the Commission Issued 12/20/00

Attached for your information is the Chief Judge's Report to the Commission
issued today.
?
Martha
 - PL01-2.000.wpd


I will be out of the office from 11/27/2000 until 12/12/2000.

I am out of the country and cannot check mails. You can reach me by sending
an e-mail to chonawee@yahoo.com. Otherwise, I will response to your message
when I get back.
Thank you.
-Chonawee


Thanks

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Presto, Kevin M. [mailto:Kevin.M.Presto@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:06 AM
To: david.shine@ubspainewebber.com
Subject: Holdings

There is one left - Net 10000 DYN short with 10000 DYN long.

Kevin Presto
East Power Trading
Phone:  713-853-5035
Cell:  713-854-3923
Fax:  713-646-8272

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

 - Presto shorts 2.doc


Vince, thanks for your very prompt email response. I passed your message
along to Dave.

Thanks also for a great dinner and day of meetings last week. I really
enjoyed the chance to learn more about Enron, and was very impressed with
everyone I met.

Look forward to working with you these next few months!!

Cheers,
Vincent

-----Original Message-----
From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com [mailto:Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 2:39 PM
To: chenvinc@wharton.upenn.edu
Cc: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
Subject: Re: Enron Cover Letter & Resume for Dave Gershenson

Vincent,

I have forwarded the resume to our Analysts / Associate pool with
a recommendation to accept David as a summer intern.

I expressed interest in taking him into my group. He may, of course,
work for a different unit of Enron. It's up to him and I shall not be
offended
if he would like to go into trading or deal origination.

Vince


Bob Walker has brought to my attention that the HPL Contracts should still be
sent to Cheryl Dudley.  The email from Debra Perlingiere (below) applies to
all other gas contracts.  I apologize for any confusion.
----- Forwarded by Pat Radford/HOU/ECT on 12/14/2000 10:33 AM -----

	Debra Perlingiere
	12/12/2000 06:00 PM

		 To: Pat Radford/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Gas Contracts

Please send an e-mail to all in Barbara's group:

Please note  all documents regarding  gas contracts, including new agreements
should be sent  to Cyndie Balfour-Flanagan in Contract Administration @ EB
3767A , Ex 31443.

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


How much to you have?!  SRS

Kevin Hannon @ ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 04/20/2001 08:03:14 AM
To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re:

OK Sherri how much do you want?

Kevin

	Jeff Skilling@ENRON
	Sent by: Sherri Sera@ENRON
	04/19/01 05:18 PM

		 To: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron, Philippe A
Bibi/HOU/ECT, Michael Brown/NA/Enron, Wade
Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, James A Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT,
Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Greg
Piper/Corp/Enron, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet
R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Matthew
Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rod
Hayslett/FGT/Enron, Stan Horton/Houston/Eott@Eott, Danny
McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject:

I know how incredibly busy you all are, so I'm sure that making a pledge to
Jeff for the MS150 has simply slipped your mind.  Well the ride is this
weekend, time is running out and we need you!

Enron's goal is to raise $700,000, and Jeff's personal goal is to raise
$50,000.  As of today, we are a little better than half way there.  Won't you
consider helping him reach his goal?

Thanks for your consideration.  I look forward to hearing from you tomorrow...

Sherri :-)


The DOE order requiring gas suppliers to supply gas to PG&E expires at 3:00
a.m. EST on February 7.  In view of the DOE warnings that the order will not
be extended, PG&E has received permission from the CPUC to grant to certain
gas suppliers a security interest in certain of its receivables, and a draft
security agreement and other documents were circulated over the weekend.
Here is a summary of the proposal and associated risks:

Summary of Proposal:

The security interest will be granted only to those gas suppliers that
execute the security agreement.  If we don't sign the agreement, we will
remain unsecured (there are reasons to refuse to sign -- see below).
PG&E is granting  a security interest in core customer receivables, and will
also grant a security interest in its natural gas inventory designated for
core customers if the value of its A/R falls below the amount owed to gas
suppliers.  PG&E's figures indicate receivables in excess of payables for
each of October, November, and December, with $491 million in receivables and
$329 million in payables in December.
However, the security interest is subject to the prior lien of its First
Mortgage Indenture, under which approximately $3 billion is outstanding (not
currently in default).  PG&E believes the total collateral available to
creditors under that Indenture is from $12 to $30 billion, and that creditors
under that Indenture would be required to "marshal" assets in the event they
foreclosed on their security (meaning that a court would require those
creditors, who have ample access to security other than these receivables,
would be required to go against that other collateral and leave the security
for the gas suppliers alone).
U.S. Trust Company will act as collateral agent (essentially, a trustee).
The security interest is in place until April 30 (per the CPUC order); PG&E
could seek an extension of the CPUC order if necessary.
The collateral secures obligations for future deliveries only (the collateral
will not secure PG&E's payment obligations for past supplies).
Suppliers executing the security agreement are committing to "negotiate in
good faith" to sell natural gas to PG&E on "market" terms; a refusal to sell
to PG&E on market terms presumably places a supplier in default of the
security agreement, and the supplier would loses the benefit of the
collateral.
For as long as the security agreement is in force, suppliers executing the
security agreement are required to waive provisions in their existing supply
agreements permitting them (i) to suspend performance on account of PG&E's
failure to demand additional performance assurance, (ii) to demand payment or
parent company guarantees, (iii) to declare a default under, terminate or
suspend performance under, its supply agreement in the event of a bankruptcy,
insolvency, appointment of liquidator, or failure to pay debts as the become
due (no supplier is required to waive rights with respect to deliveries prior
to the date of the security agreement).
PG&E will be required to deliver weekly reports on the value of its
receivables at the end of the preceding week.

Risks:

Essentially, Enron's choice is (A) execute the security agreement, get the
benefit of the security for future deliveries under existing commitments and
any new deals we enter into, and subject ourselves to restrictions on our
ability to refuse new deals or to exercise our rights under existing
commitments, or (B) refuse to execute the agreement and remain unsecured, yet
free of the restrictions and limits that the agreement will place upon us.

If we sign the agreement, we will be a secured creditor to the extent of
PG&E's obligations covered by this agreement.  If not, we will be an
unsecured creditor, potentially behind all of the suppliers that did sign the
agreement.  This is assuming that this arrangement survives any bankruptcy of
PG&E (it's reasonable to assume that it will).
Signing the security agreement does give Enron security for PG&E's payment
for future deliveries of gas under existing contracts.  Should Enron decide
to enter into new deals for additional volumes, PG&E's payment obligations
would also be secured.  However, Enron will be required to negotiate in good
faith to supply PG&E on market terms; PG&E has stated that this means that
Enron will have to supply PG&E in a manner consistent with our dealings with
PG&E over the past year.  This probably requires Enron to enter into new
deals, and means that Enron will not have complete discretion in deciding
whether to enter into new deals if Enron wants to keep the benefit of the
collateral (if Enron refuses to enter into a new deal with PG&E, PG&E may
have cause to terminate the security agreement as to Enron).
The security agreement requires Enron to waive certain rights under its
supplier agreements, including the right to declare a default upon a PG&E
bankruptcy, as long as the security agreement is in place.  This could limit
our flexibility to deal with our overall exposure to PG&E across contracts
and affiliates in the event of a "meltdown".
There can be no guarantee that the courts would require the creditors under
the First Mortgage Bond to marshal assets; this means that suppliers signing
the security agreement may still end up subordinated to those creditors.
The security agreement is governed by California law, and suppliers are
required to submit to the jurisdiction of California courts.  This means any
dispute under these agreements will be decided by a California judge.

Please call me at X31575 if you have any questions.

Travis McCullough
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street EB 3817
Houston Texas 77002
Phone:  (713) 853-1575
Fax: (713) 646-3490


----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 09:00 AM -----

	Bradley Diebner
	09/07/2000 05:41 PM

		 To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli
Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia
Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary G Gosnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Enron Europe Global
Contracts and Facilities, Enron Europe Global CounterParty, Stephanie
Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bradley Diebner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey
Richardson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Adnan Patel/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
Claudia Clark/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EOL Credit Responses 09/07/00

The EOL approvals for 09/07/00 are attached below.

Regards,
bd


I apologize for this.  May I get a copy of all the invoices we sent CES for
January please.


Thought this might relieve some work stress.  Careful, it's hightly addictive!!!!!!!
Love ya,
Jules

http://www.vectorlounge.com/04_amsterdam/jam/flamjam.html


Sally/Janet - I wanted to forward Christine's resume to you for review.  I have asked her to set up a time to meet with each of you (or someone in your area) to explore potential rotations in each of your areas.  She is presently working for Rod Hayslett and he speaks very highly of Christine.  He told me her strengths were in the qualitative area and that she is good at quantitative work.  I think she would be a good fit in either one of your groups/business units.  Thanks.  Ted

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Milliner, Christine
Sent:	Monday, May 14, 2001 5:12 PM
To:	Bland Jr., Ted C.
Cc:	Hayslett, Rod
Subject:	Analyst Rotation

Mr. Bland,

I am currently working as an analyst under Rod Haslett in ETS finance and accounting.  I am up for rotation at the end of this month, and would like to meet with you to discuss opportunities within the analyst program where my skills might be a fit.  My resume is attached for your review.  I appreciate your time and consideration.

Thank you,
Christine

 << File: Christine Milliner resume, May 2001.rtf >>


Today's IssueAlert Sponsors:

[IMAGE]

The CIS Conferencec provides utility management personnel unequaled insight
and current information on Customer Relationship Management (CRM),
E-Commerce, Technologies and Marketing. Fifty-four sessions conducted by
utility industry representatives will focus on issues facing the industry.
Over 100 companies will exhibit the latest technologies and services.

Former President George Bush is our Honored Keynote Speaker

www.cisconference.org

Which e-commerce energy provider had over 600,000 customers in nine states at
the end of 2000 and expects to become the largest unregulated  electricity
and gas marketer in the U.S. in the first half of 2001? SCIENTECH'S
E-Commerce InfoGrid provides the answer and gives you much more to stay
informed. Purchase your InfoGrid today at www.scientech.com or contact  Chris
Vigil, toll-free at (888) 972-8676 for more information.

[IMAGE]

In an exclusive SCIENTECH PowerHitters Interview, Cody Graves, CEO of
Automated Energy, Inc. and former Chairman of the Oklahoma Corporation
Commission, discusses the status of restructuring in Oklahoma and
nationwide.  Graves also discusses the role Automated Energy is playing in
providing an essential piece of the restructuring pie.  Read more at:
www.scientech.com

[IMAGE]

[IMAGE]
April 11, 2001

SCE Agrees to Sell Transmission Assets to California

by Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis

At a joint press conference with Governor Gray Davis, Edison International
Chairman, President and CEO John Bryson announced agreement on a plan to
restore Southern California Edison (SCE) to financial health. "The negotiated
resolution with the Governor is far preferable for our company, our employees
and for our customers than is going into bankruptcy," Bryson said. The key
part of the agreement is that the state will receive a primary utility asset*
SCE's 12,000 mile transmission system. SCE employees will operate and
maintain the system through a contractual arrangement with the state.

Analysis: Only days after Pacific Gas & Electric Co., its California utility
counterpart, declared bankruptcy, SCE announced what is being billed as a
pact with the State of California that should keep it out of bankruptcy
court. From all appearances, this seems to be a strong deal for SCE, as it
not only keeps the utility financially solvent but also removes it from a
line of business that remains rather uncertain and financially unrewarding.

First, let's establish the key aspects of the agreement. Keep in mind that
the California Legislature, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
and federal regulators must approve this deal. Edison International (NYSE:
EIX), the parent of SCE, has agreed to sell the utility's transmission assets
to the State of California for $2.76 billion. The confirmed price tag that
the state is paying for SCE's lines seems like a generous offer because it is
about 2.3 times the system's current book value of $1.2 billion (the original
cost, less any accumulated depreciation (OCLD) recorded in SCE's books).
Since transmission rates are based on an allowed rate of return on OCLD, it
is uncertain that SCE's current transmission rates will provide sufficient
revenues for the state to cover its purchase cost.

The sale includes only SCE's transmission assets. It appears that SCE will
remain in the distribution business and continue delivering power to
customers and running generation. Both the state and SCE have agreed to
commit to no less than $3 billion of capital investment in utility
infrastructure over the next five years, which presumably includes upgrades
to the transmission system and new generation capacity. It is not entirely
clear at this time how the $3 billion in capital investment will be shared
between the State of California and SCE.

Edison officials also have agreed to sell cost-based (not market-based)
electricity to the state from power generated at SCE plants. Edison Mission
Energy, the unregulated subsidiary of Edison International, is also obligated
to sell output from its Sunrise power plant exclusively to California under
cost-based pricing. Although SCE divested much of its power assets under
agreements with the CPUC, it still shares ownership of the San Onofre Nuclear
Plant Units 1, 2 and 3 with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), and shares in
the Palo Verde, Mohave and Four Corners generating stations. SCE also owns
hydroelectric facilities and the Pebbly Beach generating facility. The
Sunrise Mission power project is a gas-fired power plant that is currently
under construction. Reportedly, the Sunrise plant is expected to provide
about 320 MW of electricity during peak periods of demand this summer.
According to the Memorandum of Understanding between SCE and the California
Department of Water Resources, "SCE's generation assets*including all energy,
capacity, ancillary services, and any combination thereof*will be committed
to cost-based ratemaking for SCE's bundled service customers." In addition,
SCE is prohibited from selling any of these generation assets until Dec. 31,
2010.

Also included within the agreement is SCE's commitment to dismiss all pending
lawsuits against the CPUC related to market prices in California. Edison
International also has agreed to refund $400 million to the utility unit that
reportedly had been paid in dividends to the parent company.

The $2.76 billion that the state is paying SCE for its transmission assets
can be used to pay pre-existing debt to creditors, including power generators
that have previously sold power to SCE. This is the essential benefit that
the utility receives in the deal and it is a considerable achievement given
that the liquid capital theoretically should stave off bankruptcy
proceedings. It is also important to note that this is the first revenue
stream that has been specifically earmarked for SCE's pre-existing debts.
Recent rate increases that have been approved by the CPUC can only be applied
to subsequent debts incurred by the utility. In addition, SCE will be allowed
to issue bonds to recover a "substantial portion" of the approximate $5
billion in debt that the utility has accrued due to uncollected purchases of
wholesale power. The agreement should return SCE's debt to investment grade,
making it easier for the company to raise money to fund future operations. By
reducing its debt load, Edison CEO John Bryson remains confident that SCE
"can borrow to pay out [remaining] debts."

SCE Chairman and CEO Stephen Frank expressed confidence that a final
agreement could be reached "before the end of the year," although the
California Legislature reportedly has agreed to expedite its own review of
the agreement and provide approval before summer temperatures begin to wreak
havoc on the California market. If for any reason the sale of the
transmission assets has not been completed within two years, SCE is obligated
to sell to the state its hydroelectric generation facilities instead (at a
to-be-determined price). Although the deal is expected to proceed, some
concerns have been raised about federal issues related to interstate
commerce. In addition, the fact that Pacific Gas & Electric Co.*with which
SCE has often been intertwined*remains in bankruptcy court could also
complicate the agreement between SCE and the state.

News of the agreement immediately caused Edison shares to increase by about
$2.16, or 24 percent, to $11.08 on April 9. As of the close of trading on
April 10, Edison shares were priced at about $11.38.

For its part, SCE said that it was "racing toward" an agreement with the
governor to avoid being forced into an involuntary bankruptcy. Yet, for some
time, SCE has been more willing to sell its transmission assets than PGOever
appeared to be. In fact, I wrote in the 2/26/01 IssueAlert that Gov. Davis
had reached an "agreement in principle" with SCE regarding the sale of the
transmission lines. Most of the key elements of the agreement that has been
agreed to by both parties have been in the works for over two months.

PGOCorp. issued a statement that it was pleased that SCE had been able to
reach an agreement with Gov. Davis, but said that the agreement did not
change its own direction toward bankruptcy court. According to a report on
CBS.MarketWatch.com, Fitch analysts have suggested that the sale of SCE's
transmission assets to the state of California could in fact lend a
"framework" that might be used in Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s bankruptcy
proceedings. What this might mean is that Federal Judge Dennis Montali, the
official overseeing Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s bankruptcy, might rely upon
the agreement between SCE and the State of California to mandate a similar
deal for PG&E.  Gov. Davis commented that the SCE deal could serve as a basis
for separate agreements with SDG&E, and eventually PG&E, if they choose to
come back to the negotiating table. In fact, the state could submit a plan to
Judge Montali outlining a purchase of PG&E's transmission assets, which the
judge could ultimately enforce.

An argument could be made that the agreement SCE has reached with the State
of the California provides benefits to the utility that go beyond protecting
it from bankruptcy. One could argue that SCE benefits by being able to exit
the transmission business altogether, which in many ways can cause tremendous
problems for the companies that choose to remain in this business.
Transmission operations also typically offer a low rate of return; in SCE's
case, according to its most recent 10K filing, its transmission business
resulted in a return on equity of 9.68 percent. SCE had proposed that the
return on equity for its transmission assets be set at 11.6 percent, which
FERC rejected (FERC has ultimate authority over transmission service
pricing). Thus, the question could be raised of why SCE would even want to
remain in the transmission business, given this low return on equity. Behind
the scenes, SCE could very well have previously made the determination that
its transmission business was not a valuable part of its overall operation.
This could be representative of an international trend, as regulatory
agencies in Australia and Great Britain have also set lower limits on the
average transmission network charges that utilities can implement.

Moreover, the State of California does not bring extensive operational
expertise to its new role as a transmission owner. Thus, the state is wise to
keep SCE employees in charge of the operation and maintenance of the
transmission system. This substantially reduces the risk for the state, which
is a prudent move. From the state's perspective, it gets an asset in exchange
for a bailout, which makes its investment in SCE beneficial. However, the
transmission business will present unique challenges for the state, such as
raising capital for transmission improvements and siting procedures. The
state may quickly learn why the transmission business is perceived as being
so challenging, and why it is difficult to entice companies to build new
transmission lines (especially considering the low rate of return that the
transmission business offers). On the other hand, by assuming the role of a
transmission system owner, the State of California will be in a position to
obtain competitive information about the activities of power generators in
the state. This could result in a significant advantage for the State of
California if it remains in its current power-buying role.

An archive list of previous IssueAlerts is available at
www.scientech.com

Reach thousands of utility analysts and decision makers every day. Your
company can schedule a sponsorship of IssueAlert by contacting Nancy Spring
via e-mail or calling (505)244-7613. Advertising opportunities are also
available on our website.
SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free,  daily IssueAlert. Let us
know if we can help you with  in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH
information  products. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive our
free,  daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include  their full
name and email address or register directly on our site.

If you no longer wish to receive this daily email, send a message to
IssueAlert, and include the word "delete" in the subject line.
SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts(SM) are compiled based on the  independent analysis
of SCIENTECH consultants. The opinions expressed in  SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts
are not intended to predict financial performance  of companies discussed, or
to be the basis for investment decisions of any  kind. SCIENTECH's sole
purpose in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer  an independent perspective
regarding the key events occurring in the  energy industry, based on its
long-standing reputation as an expert on  energy issues.

Copyright 2001. SCIENTECH, Inc. All rights  reserved.


Return-Path: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
Received: from  rly-yb05.mx.aol.com (rly-yb05.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.5]) by air-yb03.mail.aol.com (v81.9) with ESMTP id MAILINYB39-1024183745; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:37:45 2000
Received: from  postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by rly-yb05.mx.aol.com (v81.9) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYB58-1024183704; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 18:37:05 -0400
Received: from corp.enron.com (nahou-msmsw03p.corp.enron.com [192.168.110.110])	by postmaster.enron.com (8.10.1/8.10.1/external_corp-1.08) with ESMTP id f9OMas324123	for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:36:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com (unverified) by corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with SMTP id <T56cc31f681c0a86e6e63c@corp.enron.com> for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:36:53 -0500
Received: from NAHOU-MSMBX03V.corp.enron.com ([192.168.110.41]) by nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966);	 Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:36:53 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4712.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative ; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C15CDA.3795C304"
Subject: FW: Dynegy vs. Enron: A "Tale of Two Companies"
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:21:24 -0500
Message-ID: <31738B46B7BD864080808A19977D9F757ABDBA@NAHOU-MSMBX03V.corp.enron.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Dynegy vs. Enron: A "Tale of Two Companies"
Thread-Index: AcFczSKEOV9gx7bTRSOXuwC2E+0CoAAADzlQAAMzRNA=
From: "Kaminski, Vince J" <Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com>
To: <vkaminski@aol.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Oct 2001 22:36:53.0044 (UTC) FILETIME=[60D86740:01C15CDC]
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)

-----Original Message-----
From: Corey, Paula
Sent:  Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:51 PM
To: Kaminski, Vince J; Mihura,  Brian
Subject: FW: Dynegy vs. Enron: A "Tale of Two Companies"
Thought you might find this of  interest

See  you both at 5:00
-----Original Message-----
From: Rhonda Brown  [mailto:rhonda.brown@divine.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001  3:49 PM
To: Paula_Corey@enron. net; Marcinkowski,  Danielle
Subject: Dynegy vs. Enron: A "Tale of Two Companies"
fyi, and my apologies  if you already received  this.

Dynegy vs. Enron:
A "Tale of Two Companies"
By Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis

Facts: Dynegy Inc. (NYSE: DYN) beat expectations in  the third quarter, reporting that its earnings rose to $286 million, or 85 cents  per diluted share, from $177 million, or 55 cents per diluted share, for the  same period in 2000. This represented a 22-percent increase from 3Q 2000 and  boosted the company's 2001 earnings estimate. Dynegy has a market capitalization  of $14.5 billion. Its stock is currently trading at about $43 down from a5 2-week high of $59, although it is important to note that for year-end 2000 the  company's stock was one of the top performers among Standard & Poor's 500  companies with a total shareholder return of 218 percent. Dynegy employs 5,778  people.
Enron Corp. (NYSE: ENE) reported $638 million in losses for  the third quarter, after taking $1.01 billion in charges associated with several  of its non-core businesses. The company's 3Q recurring net income (before the  write-offs) increased 35 percent to $393 million, or 43 cents a diluted share,  and revenue in the quarter rose to $47.6 billion from $30 billion in 3Q 2000.  Enron has a market capitalization of $14.8 billion. Its stock is currentlyt rading at about $16.0, which represents a six-year low for the company and is  considerably lower than the peak of $82 hit in August 2000. Enron employs 20,600  people.
Analysis: Dynegy closed out a banner year in 2000 and  appears to still be on a roll in terms of its financial performance. In  contrast, Enron faced an unprecedented year of turmoil, and is presently  languishing in a low ebb, characterized by a strategic crossroads and heightened  scrutiny of the company's financial reporting. While the two companies operate  in the same market space of power trading and are fierce competitors,  Dynegy-ironically the younger and smaller of the two companies-is an industry  success story while Enron's status remains rather uncertain. The questions to be  addressed in this article are: What is Dynegy doing "right"? What is Enron doing  "wrong"? What lessons can other power and natural-gas marketers learn from this  "tale of two companies"?
Although they are often referred to as "cross-town rivals,"  Dynegy and Enron are worlds apart in terms of their competitive positions. Their  divergent approaches to the global marketplace illustrate what could be thes ingle-most important element related to their disparate positions at the end of  2001. Put more simply, the two companies have vastly different strategies,a nd-hindsight being 20/20-a strong argument can be made that Dynegy's strategy  is the winner at this juncture. Throughout this article, I will focus on two key  areas in which Dynegy and Enron differ dramatically. Those two key areas are the  ownership of physical generation assets and the extent to which the companies  have expanded (and invested) into non-core sectors.
Both companies started out as natural-gas companies and  converged into the power market in the 1990s. However, that is essentially where  their similarities end, and over the last few years Enron and Dynegy havef ollowed decidedly different paths. In an attempt to make the complex rather  rudimentary, let me summarize the two paths this way: Enron does not believe it  needs to own physical assets to be a success in the power and natural-gast rading sector; Dynegy, on the other hand, not only believes in the ownership of  physical assets, but has set a goal that could ultimately establish the company  as owning one of the largest generation arsenals in the industry.
Let's look at the companies separately. We'll discuss Enron  first since it is the older of the two. Enron readily admits that its strategy  is difficult to define, but a close approximation is that Enron literallyc reates commodity markets so that it can deliver physical commodities to  customers. The participation and success in commodity markets, according toE nron, does not necessitate ownership of physical assets. In fact, the company  has routinely sold physical assets that are not considered to be strategic to  its wholesale business. Rather, Enron has concentrated on developing a newp hilosophy of risk management excellence, in which it will merely buy and sell  the commodities it needs to participate in trading venues.
As an example, Enron bought Portland General (which owns  2,000 MW of generation and 41,600 kilometers of electric T&D lines) in 1996  as a way to launch its penetration of the West Coast power markets. When  competition fizzled in that region, Enron put Portland General back on the sales  block (a sale of Portland General to Northwest Natural is pending at thisw riting). Likewise in Europe, where it is one of the most prominent tradingc ompanies, Enron has disposed of generation assets such as Sutton Bridge inE ngland and, unlike other U.S. competitors, has refrained from buying additional  generating units in opening countries such as Germany and Italy. According to  its most recent 10K report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,  Enron owns or controls 2,015 MW of generating capacity (including joint  ownerships), which is drastically lower than the average among other companies  operating in the power trading sector.
Dynegy's approach to the market is crystal clear andr adically different from Enron's. In the words of CEO Chuck Watson, "Dynegy's  long-term strategy is to focus on marketing and trading around physical assets,  which supports earnings sustainability." Ever since going public in 1995, Dynegy  has been on an acquisition binge, with each purchase significantly increasing  its generation capability. Dynegy presently owns or controls about 27,000 MW of  generating capacity in the United States, 26 gas-processing plants and 14,000  miles of pipelines, which are located in geographically competitive areas. The  company's goal is to own or control 70,000 MW, or 10 percent of the U.S. market,  within the next five years. Sometimes, Dynegy has acquired assets throughp artnerships with other companies such as NRG Energy, but just as often it has  purchased assets independently. Most notably, when Dynegy acquired Illinova in  early 2000, the purchase doubled Dynegy's generating capacity. Dynegy is now  attempting to replicate this approach in Europe, where it is presently planning  to purchase natural-gas storage facilities in England. Dynegy executives have  argued that natural-gas storage is the best way to back up a natural-gas trading  operation. There's no question that the approach is working. Out of the $286  million that Dynegy reported in the third quarter, $263 million of it came from  the company's main wholesale business.
The issue of asset ownership is probably the centrald efining difference between Enron and Dynegy, and its significance should not be  overlooked. It is not difficult to make a case that supports Dynegy's approach.  Owning physical assets often enables a trading company to gain information in  the course of operating power plants that can help the company to gauge markets  and anticipate small changes in price. In other words, by controlling the actual  output of generation instead of just being involved in buys and sells, a trader  such as Dynegy will theoretically know what the load is going to be in a  particular region, how much power can be produced to meet that load and when  shortages might occur. In addition, in markets that are short on infrastructure,  it may be difficult for a trader to participate in the market unless theya ctually have ownership of physical assets in the region. By the same token,  those companies that do control physical assets often have greater communication  with grid operators, and possible insight to spreads (the difference between  various energy prices). In fact, Dynegy's CEO Watson fully acknowledges that his  company excels at being able to trade around the volatility of price, and being  capable of resolving balances when shortages exist. This may be more difficult  for a company such as Enron to accomplish when it has no physical generation of  its own to meet discrepancies in power bids. Dynegy's strategy of acquiring both  natural-gas pipelines and power plants also gives it the flexibility to trade on  both commodities.
On the other side of this argument, a case could be made  that Enron's approach provides more flexibility in reacting to trading  volatility. Certainly, by investing less in power generation facilities, Enron  has less capital on the line when compared to a company like Dynegy. Under a  scenario when market prices suddenly drop, a company such as Enron that does not  have heavy capital invested in power generation could actually fare better than  an asset-laden company because Enron does not face the pressure to meet thef ixed payments of a generation facility. Asset-heavy companies also may find  that their earnings could be impacted by the investment in generation facilities  in times of extreme price volatility. As the industry becomes increasinglyf ocused on bottom-line results, this could be seen as a potential concern for  investors. Further, some would argue that Enron's approach of establishingp urchasing contracts with various parties to meet its buy and sell requirements  is the rough equivalent of owning a generation facility. What Enron gains by  this approach is the presumed flexibility it has by not being tied down to a  specific generation unit and being able to build its own portfolio.
Consequently, the issue of asset ownership can perhaps be  considered the "great debate" among power traders. However, although Dynegy's  overall performance in the third quarter was better than Enron's, that does not  necessarily provide a clear endorsement of Dynegy's strategy toward acquiring  new generation facilities. Keep in mind that Enron's 3Q losses resulted  primarily from non-recurring charges related to its non-core businesses  (broadband and water in particular). Without these charges, Enron's core  wholesale trading business continues to perform well. This is a point that CEO  Ken Lay has been quick to reiterate to investors. "Our 26-percent increase in  recurring earnings per diluted share shows the very strong results of our core  wholesale and retail energy businesses and our natural-gas pipelines," Lay said.  "The continued excellent prospects in these businesses and Enron's leadingm arket position make us very confident in our strong earnings outlook."
Moreover, perhaps even more than ownership of physical  assets, the key issue that played a role in the current disparity between Dynegy  and Enron earnings in the third quarter is the companies' approach to developing  new lines of business. Telecom is a perfect example to illustrate the point.  Enron, which prides itself as usually gaining a first-strike advantage, plunged  into the telecom sector well ahead of other energy companies. Under the  leadership of then-CEO Jeffrey Skilling, Enron sunk large sums of capital into  purchasing broadband capacity on the expectation that the market would quickly  become lucrative. Now Lay admits that the company "could have gotten into the  broadband business with less capital" and that Enron "spent too much too soon"  in this sector. Nevertheless, Enron recorded an $80-million non-recurringw rite-down for restructuring its broadband unit in the third quarter and isp resently attempting to stop the bleeding in this sector by reducing futurec osts in this sector to $40 million a quarter.
Dynegy took a much more cautious approach toward expanding  into the telecom sector and made a comparatively small amount of investment when  compared to Enron. Dynegy has likewise been impacted by the slowdown of thet elecom sector, but in the third quarter took a $15-million loss in its  broadband business compared to the $80-million loss that Enron reported.  However, Dynegy clearly specializes in marketing and trading two commodities  (electricity and natural gas) and seems to add other businesses in a verym ethodical way that merely supplements its core business.
It is also important to note that Enron gained the  first-strike advantage when it developed EnronOnline, an electronic tradinge xchange. In fact, Enron was the first to create such an exchange in the energy  space, well ahead of its competitors. Dynegy later followed this trend withc reating Dynegydirect. The two exchanges are different in terms of their  trading standards, but it is important to acknowledge that in this particular  case Enron was successful in launching into the electronic trading space well  ahead of its competitors. The latest available information indicates thatE nronOnline has recorded transactions that exceed $590 in notional value. Since  its inception in November 2000, Dynegydirect has recorded $33 billion in  notional transactions.
At this juncture, Dynegy and Enron are very different with  regard to their approaches toward financial reporting. Enron, which has often  been accused of not providing a balance sheet to investors, is currently  struggling from a serious image problem as the Securities and Exchange  Commission pursues an investigation of possible mishandling of funds by Enron's  CFO. To my recollection, no one has ever accused Dynegy of not providing ab alance sheet, and thus the company's status with investors is arguably more  solid. As I don't expect either company to radically alter its competitives trategy any time soon, my projection is that (at least in the near term), we  will continue to see a wide disparity in Wall Street performance between Dynegy  and Enron. That is not to say that anyone should count Enron out of the game. As  noted, the company's core business of wholesale business remains strong, but  clearly has been tainted by the impact of other non-core businesses. Thatd oesn't mean Enron is down permanently, but it will have to find a way to strike  a better balance between the businesses that it does best and those businesses  that former CEO Jeffrey Skilling believed were advantageous.
In many ways, the comparison between Dynegy and Enron is  rather like the tortoise and the hare parable. I am sure you can guess which  company is the tortoise and which is the hare in this analogy. The race between  the two is far from over, although Dynegy is taking the lead at this point,b ased on its more methodical approach. What will be fascinating to observe is  how both companies continue to adapt to changes in the marketplace and possibly  modify what up to this point have been adamantly espoused philosophies.

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


i heard your nickname in highschool was the "virgin surgeon"


Can I get a list of the traders that will make up the new reporting list for the new company as we stand today?  We need to get new books set up, and also we need to get the V@R engine ready to go as well.

Thanks


Start Date: 4/27/01; HourAhead hour: 16;  HourAhead schedule download failed.
Manual intervention required.


Hey John,

Yes and there's a Design Council event with him Tuesday night and a
reception at Sunset Settings on Thursday.  Will we see you at any or all of
the above?

Chris

**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Chris Ballou and/or his relevant affiliates
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 Chris
Ballou at chris_ballou@chrisballou.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 Chris Ballou (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. :-)
**********************************************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: John.Griffith@enron.com [mailto:John.Griffith@enron.com]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 2:19 PM
To: Chris_Ballou@bmc.com
Subject: Marcel Wanders

Hey Chris,

What is going on?  Are you going to go see the Marcel Wanders lecture at
the museum on Wednesday?  Just checking to see what is happening.  Hope all
is well.  Talk to you soon.

John

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


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/19/2001
08:05 PM ---------------------------

webmaster@cera.com on 02/15/2001 09:10:22 PM
To: insights@cera.com
cc:
Subject: The Potential Impact of a Recession on US Gas and Power Markets -
CERA Multimedia Presentation

Title: The Potential Impact of a Recession on US Gas and Power Markets
URL: http://www20.cera.com/eprofile?u=35&m=2269
http://www20.cera.com/eprofile?u=35&m=2270

In a February 6, 2001 CERA multimedia conference call and web
presentation, Joe Sannicandro, CERA Director, Jone-Lin Wang, CERA
Associate Director, and Jennifer Snyder, CERA Associate Director,
discuss:

TOPIC: THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF A RECESSION ON U.S. GAS & POWER
MARKETS

* How are gas and power demands affected?

* Will gas and power price volatility dampen?

To view and listen to a replay of this presentation,
please click on the link above.

**end**

E-mail Category: Multimedia Presentation
CERA Knowledge Area(s): North American Gas, North American Power,

**********************************************************************
To make changes to your cera.com account go to:
http://www20.cera.com/client/updateaccount

Forgot your username and password? Go to:
http://www20.cera.com/client/forgot

This electronic message and attachments, if any, contain information
from Cambridge Energy Research Associates, Inc. (CERA) which is
confidential and may be privileged. Unauthorized disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the contents of this message or any attachments,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited.
Terms of Use: http://www20.cera.com/tos
Questions/Comments: webmaster@cera.com
Copyright 2001. Cambridge Energy Research Associates


Help!  You are wonderfull!
---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 04:01
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Donnie Myers @ ENRON                           09/08/2000 08:13 AM

To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Deal needs to be changed to Clinton Energy Management

Hey Chris,

 It is deal number 348443 that is set up as a sale (for Aug. - Nov.) to
Clinton Gas Marketing and should be Clinton Energy Management.  I couldn't
find the other supply numbers that you were asking about...  Could you get
this changed in the system to reflect Clinton Energy Management?  Thanks...


Pursuant to Jason Williams' request, I am attaching our draft Schedule to the ISDA Master Agreement, together with a draft Paragraph 13 to the ISDA Credit Support Annex.  Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or comments.

Marie Heard
Senior Legal Specialist
Enron North America Corp.
Phone:  (713) 853-3907
Fax:  (713) 646-3490
marie.heard@enron.com


Kam,

Jim called me about this and I asked him to email me.  But all these storage
facilities are on the East desk.

DG
---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 02/07/2001
05:32 PM ---------------------------

	From:  Jim Pond @ ENRON                           02/07/2001 04:19 PM

To: Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Storage

Per our conversation, please advise as to what GD index Enron would use to
value physical storage on the following East pipes:

Cove Point - I think it is in Maryland.  Acquired from CES
National Fuel -
Tennessee - which of the many indices
Napoleonville -
Transco - which of the many indices

Your prompt attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.  I need this for
our auditors.

Thanks.


lHAPPENINGSl
>Enron is underwritingThe Golden Age of Chinese Archaeology: Celebrated
Discoveries from the People's Republic of China at The Museum of Fine Art,
Houston.  Please join us on Saturday, April 15th to explore this incredible
exhibit.  Tickets are available at half hour intervals from 10:30 a.m. - 4:00
p.m.  Please pick up your tickets from Patti Walsh at EB2015a.
>Enron's Blood Drive will take place on April 20.  Call x37514 to schedule an
appointment.  ADDED BONUS:  Men over 40 donating blood can get a FREE PSA
test!

ISCREENINGSl
>MD Anderson Mobile Unit will perform mammograms during the week of April 17
- 21 on Andrew's St.  Call MD Anderson at (713) 745-7000 to schedule an
appt.  Space limited.  Help a less fortunate woman get a mammogram by making
a donation to The Rose!  Enron will match your contribution.

ISAVE THE DATEI
>The Enron Company Picnic is Sunday, May 7, 10:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. @
AstroWorld.  Tickets will be on sale Monday, April 10 - Friday, April 14 in
the Enron Lobby.  The first six tickets are $5 each -- $20 for each
additional ticket.