/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/
Wall of Champs Is Up!   If you've made your playoffs or won your league, let
the world know about it.   We've got our Wall of Champs up and running and
waiting for you.   Check it out here  http://footballguys.com/wall2001.cfm
You can add your team here http://footballguys.com/addwall.cfm   There's not
much better than flaunting your success in front of your league members...
Enjoy.
/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/**/

Hi Folks,

Doing our best to get these to you early in the week as you juggle your
lineups for this final week 17.   Here's how I see the Rushing Game Matchups
this week.

PLEASE NOTE:   See the cheatsheet online www.footballguys.com for exactly
where I rank players and to determine who to start.   I always receive
emails asking me how I can have a guy ranked highly on the cheatsheet but
listed under a matchup that favors the Defense.   Just because one matchup
may be more favorable than another, that doesn't necessarily mean I'd start
the player with the best matchup.   Ahman Green may have a horrible matchup
one week but unless you're sitting on Ricky Williams or Marshall Faulk,
Green's your guy no matter who he's lining up against.  (Yes, even after
last week's performance)  The matchup info is meant to be just one more tool
in your box when it comes to deciding between players.

Stats are provided by Mike Hall's excellent FLM League Management Software.
http://www.fflm.com/ for more info.   Fantasy Points Allowed by position
numbers are from ESPN.com.   Target numbers are from our Footballguy Andy
Hicks.
Let's get to it.

Joe

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

Locks:  These games feature Defenses that have struggled lately.

Baltimore's Terry Allen vs Minnesota Defense

Terry Allen ran hard last week where he rushed 20 times for 74 yards (3.3
ypc) against a tough Buc team.   It'll be much easier this week against the
swiss cheese Vikings ranked # 30 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks.   Although, these Vikings did shut down Ahman Green last week.
For the year, they rank # 31 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Denver's Terrell Davis vs Indianapolis Defense

Terrell Davis looked good again rushing for 89 yards on 18 carries (4.9 ypc)
It's been a tough year and you can bet he'll want to finish strong.   The
Colts rank # 23 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.
For the year, they rank # 29 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

New England's Antowain Smith vs Carolina Defense

A rested Antowain Smith faces the soft Carolina defense that's ranked # 31
in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year,
they rank # 20 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Great matchup.

Pittsburgh's Chris Fuamatu-Ma'afala / Jerome Bettis vs Cleveland Defense

Fuamatu-Ma'afala was a workhorse on the ground Sunday but didn't have a lot
to show for it.   He ran 25 times for 55 yards (2.2 ypc)   He did score on a
receiving TD.   He'll face a weak Cleveland defense ranked # 29 in Rushing
Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 20
in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Washington's Stephen Davis vs Arizona Defense

Stephen Davis looked great rushing for 111 yards on 21 carries (5.3 ypc) and
the score.   He left with a knee tweak but it doesn't look to be serious.
Ki-Jana Carter played great after Davis left.   The Cardinals rank # 21 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 22 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

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

Prime Matchups:  These games feature Defenses that haven't been strong
lately.

Buffalo's Shawn Bryson / Travis Henry / Sammy Morris vs Miami Defense

Bryson ran wild again rushing 28 times for 107 yards (3.8 ypc).   Sammy
Morris spelled him for a few carries and looked good too but it seems Bryson
is clearly the man here.   It's possible Henry could see action so keep an
eye on this one through the week.   The Dolphins have fallen down to # 28 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 17 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Dallas' Emmitt Smith vs Detroit Defense

Emmitt looked very solid again rushing for 126 yards on 26 carries (4.8 ypc)
although he failed to score.   He needs a little over 60 yards to get 1,000
for the season so you can bet he'll be gunning for that.   The Lions rank #
18 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 24 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

New York Giants' Tiki Barber / Ron Dayne vs Green Bay Defense

Barber saw more action with 16 carries and 71 yards (4.4 ypc) but it was
Dayne who scored with 59 yards on 8 carries (7.4 ypc)   Barber was very
active again in the passing game.   The Packers let Michael Bennett run well
Sunday and have slipped to # 27 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 13 in Fantasy Points Allowed to
RBs.

New York Jet's Curtis Martin vs Oakland Defense

Martin put in another Martin Like day with 115 yards on 19 carries (6.1 ypc)
The Jets may have problems, but Martin isn't one.   He'll face an Oakland
defense ranked # 19 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.
For the year, they rank # 21 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Oakland's Charlie Garner vs New York Jets Defense

The Raiders don't look nearly as strong as they did.   Garner only had 9
carries Sunday for 23 yards (2.6 ypc)   Tyrone Wheatley only had 5 carries.
This week they've got a nice matchup as they'll face the Jets ranked # 26 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 27 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Seattle's Shaun Alexander vs Kansas City Defense

Alexander didn't do much Sunday rushing 23 times for 59 yards (2.6 ypc)   He
'll be ok though and gets to face a Chief defense ranked # 22 in Rushing
Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 23
in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

St. Louis' Marshall Faulk vs Atlanta Defense

Start Faulk.   The question will be of course how much he plays but it was
pretty obvious Sunday that Mike Martz lets his guys play.   Trung Canidate
could have really used the work but he warmed the bench while Faulk went
nuts.   I'd say you'll get at least a half, maybe much more out of Faulk and
half of Faulk is worth more than most backs.   The Falcons rank # 24 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 28 in Fantasy
Points Allowed to RBs.

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

Even Matchups:  These games feature no real advantage either way

Arizona's Michael Pittman vs Washington Defense

Just when it looked like Michael Pittman was going to take over the clear
cut # 1 RB role, Thomas Jones steps in with 16 carries.   Pittman rushed 12
times for 89 yards (7.4 ypc) which was bolstered by a 39 yarder.   Jones ran
for 69 yards on 16 carries (4.3 ypc)   This was Carolina, though.   This
week will feature a tougher test with Washington ranked # 8 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they've been pretty
soft though and rank # 25 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Kansas City's Priest Holmes / Tony Richardson vs Seattle Defense

Priest Holmes ran 27 times for 91 yards (3.4 ypc) plus the score.   Tony
Richardson didn't have a carry.   This week, he'll face the Seahawks ranked
# 12 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the
year, they rank # 14 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Miami's Lamar Smith / Travis Minor vs Buffalo Defense

This is getting embarrassing.   Smith rushed 7 times for 4 yards (0.6 ypc)
Travis Minor had 33 yards on 9 carries (3.7 ypc)   He's becoming less and
less of a factor with each game.   The Dolphins are in the playoffs but find
themselves playing a different style of ball than they have been.   Minor's
a threat to go long on the screen passes and Smith is a long shot for a
cheap TD.   They'll face the Bills ranked # 13 in Rushing Yards Allowed per
Game over the last 4 weeks and # 26 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Minnesota's Michael Bennett vs Baltimore Defense

We said Bennett just needed carries and he got them Sunday rushing 25 times
for 104 yards (4.2 ypc)   He'll face a Baltimore defense that's numbers don'
t back up it's reputation this week - they rank # 25 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 2 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

New Orleans' Ricky Williams vs San Francisco Defense

Even though he didn't score, it was a better performance by Williams who
rushed 17 times for 74 yards (4.4 ypc)   The Saints clearly want him to be
more involved as he was Sunday.   This week, he'll face a 49er defense
ranked # 17 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 18
in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

San Francisco's Garrison Hearst vs New Orleans Defense

Garrison Hearst was a non factor Sunday with just 35 yards on 11 carries
(3.2 ypc)   Kevan Barlow didn't do much either so it wasn't like he lost
time to another player.   This week, he gets the Saints who rank # 15 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 19 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Tampa Bay's Warrick Dunn / Mike Alstott vs Philadelphia Defense

Tampa's One-Two punch continues to work.   Alstott had 80 yards on 14
carries (5.7 ypc) and Dunn carried the ball 13 times for 47 yards (3.6 ypc)
Alstott's been more effective on the ground but Dunn seems to be more
involved in the passing game.   This week, they'll face an Eagle defense
ranked # 20 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 9
in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

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

Downside Matchups:  These games feature a Defense that's been pretty strong
lately.

Cincinnati's Corey Dillon vs Tennessee Defense

Dillon showed again he can run on any defense.   He had 91 yards on 21
carries (4.3 ypc) against the Steelers.   He'll face the Titans this week
ranked # 6 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks so it won
't get much easier.   They rank # 15 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Detroit's Lamont Warren / James Stewart vs Dallas Defense

The Detroit RBs were horrible on the ground in this one with Lamont Warren
gaining 19 yards on 6 carries (3.2 ypc).   Cory Schlesinger did catch 11
passes though so maybe he's worth a longshot pick there.   The Cowboys rank
# 14 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks and # 12 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Green Bay's Ahman Green vs New York Giants Defense

Green was shut down on the ground with just 31 yards on 16 carries (1.9 ypc)
although he did score.   Go figure.   He's still too good to sit in my
opinion.   This week, he'll face the Giants ranked # 10 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 3 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs so it's a tough matchup, although I think I'd
start Green unless you really have a solid alternative.

Indianapolis' Dominic Rhodes vs Denver Defense

Again, Dominic Rhodes looked excellent rushing for 83 yards on 20 carries
(4.2 ypc) with a score.   He'll face the Broncos this week ranked # 7 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 4 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   The Broncos are definitely
surging after the win in Oakland but I still like Rhodes.

Jacksonville's Stacey Mack vs Chicago Defense

Mack went off last week with 125 yards on 16 carries (7.8 ypc) and a score.
It'll be tougher this week against Chicago that ranks # 9 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 10 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Philadelphia's Duce Staley vs Tampa Bay Defense

Staley's receiving numbers had been carrying him lately and this week he
paid the price.   He only rushed 8 times for 23 yards (2.9 ypc) and was shut
 down receiving with just 2 receptions for -1 yards.   This week, he'll face
a surging Buc defense ranked # 16 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the
last 4 weeks and # 11 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Tennessee's Eddie George vs Cincinnati Defense

Eddie George looked the old Eddie Sunday with 130 yards on 26 carries (5.0
ypc)   Plus 2 scores.  This week he'll face a Bengal defense ranked # 11 in
Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they
rank # 7 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

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

Defensive Slam Dunks:  These games feature a Defense that's been very strong
lately.

Atlanta's Maurice Smith vs St. Louis Defense

Again, Maurice Smith ran poorly but got a cheap TD.   He managed just 38
yards on 15 carries (2.5 ypc).   Bob Christian stole 10 carries where he
gained 33 yards (3.3 ypc)   They're both a gamble against a tough Ram
defense ranked # 3 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.
For the year, they rank # 5 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Carolina's Richard Huntley vs New England Defense

Huntley ran pretty well last week gaining 62 yards on 12 carries (5.2 ypc).
He just didn't get enough carries for this awful Carolina team.   That won't
get any better this week agains the Patriots ranked # 2 in Rushing Yards
Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 16 in
Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

Chicago's Anthony Thomas vs Jacksonville Defense

Thomas ran 25 times for 76 yards (3.0 ypc) Sunday.   He'll face a tougher
defense in Jacksonville that's been awesome lately ranking # 1 in Rushing
Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4 weeks.   For the year, they rank # 8
in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.   Thomas is still probably a starter in
most leagues, but the Jaguars have been extremely stingy of late.

Cleveland's Jamel White vs Pittsburgh Defense

White only had 42 yards on 21 carries (2.0 ypc) but did score twice.   Corey
Dillon showed the Steeler defense wasn't perfect last week.  They're still
tough though ranked # 4 in Rushing Yards Allowed per Game over the last 4
weeks.   For the year, they rank # 1 in Fantasy Points Allowed to RBs.

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

That'll do it for the Rushing Matchups.   Passing Matchups to follow.

Joe

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

Bryant Analytics, Inc.   All Rights Reserved 1999-2001

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

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


Details.  Do they want one of the turbines before Sept?

	From:  Chris Booth                           03/14/2001 11:17 AM

To: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Northwestern Offer Letter

FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Booth/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 11:15
AM ---------------------------

"Young, Michael" <Michael.Young@northwestern.com> on 03/14/2001 11:16:17 AM
To: "'chris.booth@enron.com'" <chris.booth@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Northwestern Offer Letter

Chris, prior to our call this afternoon, I wanted to alert you to one term
that was discussed in our Monday telephone call that I inadvertently left
out of the letter you received yesterday.  Specifically, we would want the
Enron carry to continue until September 1, 2001.  Thus, Northwestern would
be obligated to close on the transaction (and get Enron its money) on or
before this date.  Again, this specific term was discussed in the Monday
call and left out of the letter.  I apologize for the oversight.  Let me
know if this is a problem.


Julie,

The introduction looks fine. I have made some cosmetic changes
(typos and split infinitives that slipped by). You can safely ignore most of
them.
English is not even my second language.

The corrections are in pink.

Vince

"Julie" <julie@lacima.co.uk> on 08/01/2000 07:43:10 AM
To: "VinceJKaminski" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Preface for book

Vince,
?
Hope you are well.
?
We spoke a while ago about who should write the preface for the book, and
you kindly offered that you would provide this.? Is this still  possible?? We
realise that you are extremely busy, so Chris and Les went  ahead and wrote
something, which is below, and if you want to review, change or  re-write?the
preface, that would be very appreciated.? Let me know  what your thoughts are.
?
Thanks,
Julie
(we're getting close)
?
?

Preface

?

?

?

One of our main objectives in  writing Energy Derivatives: Pricing and Risk
Management has been to bring  together as many of the various approaches for
the pricing and risk management  energy derivatives as possible, to discuss
in-depth the models, and to show how  they relate to each other.? In this
way we hope to help the reader to analyse the different models, price a wide
range of energy derivatives, or to build a risk management system which uses
a  consistent modelling framework.? We  believe that for practitioners this
last point is very important and we continue  to stress in our articles and
presentations the dangers of having flawed risk  management and giving
arbitrage opportunities to your competitors by using  ad-hoc and inconsistent
models for different instruments and markets (see also OTHERS WHO PROPOSE
CONSISTENT  MODELS?).? However, it is not  our wish to concentrate on one
particular model or models, at the exclusion of  the others because we
believe that the choice should rest with the user  (although it will probably
be clear from our discussions the model(s) we  prefer).? We therefore try and
give  as clear account as possible of the advantage and disadvantages of all
the  models so that the reader can make an informed choice as to the models
which  best suit their needs.

?

In order to meet our objectives the  book is divided into 11 chapters.?  In
chapter 1 we give an overview of the fundamental principals needed to  model
and price energy derivatives which will underpin the remainder of the  book.?
In addition to introducing  the techniques that underlie the Black-Scholes
modelling framework we outline  the numerical techniques of trinomial trees
and Monte Carlo simulation for  derivative pricing, which are used throughout
the book.

?

In Chapter 2 we discuss the  analysis of spot energy prices.? As  well as
analysing empirical price movements we propose a number of processes  that
can be used to model the prices.?  We look at the well-know process of
Geometric Brownian Motion as well as  mean reversion, stochastic volatility
and jump processes, discussing each and  showing how they can be simulated
and their parameters estimated.

?

Chapter 3, written by Vince  Kaminski, Grant Masson and Ronnie Chahal of
Enron Corp., discusses volatility  estimation in energy commodity markets.?
This chapter builds on the previous one.? It examines in detail the methods,
merits and pitfalls of the volatility estimation process assuming different
pricing models introduced in chapter 2.?  Examples from crude, gas, and
electricity markets are used to illustrate  the technical and interpretative
aspects of calculating volatility.

?

Chapter 4 examines forward curves  in the energy markets.? Although  such
curves are well understood and straight-forward in the most financial
markets, the difficulty of storage in many energy markets leads to less well
defined curves.? In this chapter we  describe forward price bounds for energy
prices and the building of forward  curves from market instruments.? We
outline the three main approaches which have been applied to building
forward  curves in energy markets; the arbitrage approach, the econometric
approach, and  deriving analytical values by modelling underlying stochastic
factors.

?

Chapter 5 presents an overview of  structures found in the energy derivative
markets and discusses their uses.? Examples of products analysed in this
chapter include a variety of swaps, caps, floors and collars, as well as
energy  swaptions, compound options, Asian options, barrier options, lookback
options,  and ladder options.

?

Chapter 6 investigates single and  multi-factor models of the energy spot
price and the pricing of some standard  energy derivatives.? Closed form
solutions for forward prices, forward volatilities, and European option
prices  both on the spot and forwards are derived and presented for all the
models in  this chapter including a three factor, stochastic convenience
yield and interest  rate model.

?

Chapter 7 shows how the prices of  path dependent and American style options
can be evaluated for the models in  Chapter 6.? Simulation schemes are
developed for the evaluation of European style options and applied to a
variety  of path dependent options.? In order  to price options which
incorporate early exercise opportunities, a trinomial  tree scheme is
developed.? This tree  is built to be consistent with the observed forward
curve and can be used to  price exotic as well as standard European and
American style options.

?

Chapter 8 describes a methodology  for valuing energy options based on
modelling the whole of the market observed  forward curve.? The approach
results  in a multi-factor model that is able to realistically capture the
evolution of a  wide range of energy forward curves.?  The user defined
volatility structures can be of an extremely general  form.? Closed-form
solutions are  developed for pricing standard European options, and efficient
Monte Carlo  schemes are presented for pricing exotic options.? The chapter
closes with a discussion of  the valuation of American style options.

?

Chapter 9 focuses on the risk  management of energy derivative positions.?
In this chapter we discuss the management of price risk for institutions
that trade options or other derivatives and who are then faced with the
problem  of managing the risk through time.?  We begin with delta hedging a
portfolio containing derivatives and look  at extensions to gamma hedging )
illustrating the techniques using both spot and  forward curve models.? The
general  model presented in Chapter 8 is ideally suited to multi-factor
hedging of a  portfolio of energy derivatives and this is also discussed.

?

Chapter 10 examines the key risk  management concept of Value at Risk (VaR)
applied to portfolios containing  energy derivative products.? After
discussing the concept of the measure, we look at how the key inputs
(volatilities, covariances, correlations, etc) can be estimated.? We then
compare the fours major  methodologies for computing VaR; Delta, Delta-gamma,
historical simulation and  Monte-Carlo simulation, applying each to the same
portfolio of energy  options.? In this chapter we also  look at testing the
VaR estimates for various underlying energy market  variables.

?

Finally, in Chapter 11 we review  modelling approaches to credit risk.?  We
look in detail at two quite different approaches, CreditMetrics (J. P. Morgan
(1997)) and  CreditRisk+ (Credit Suisse Financial  Products (1997)) for which
detailed information is publicly available.? Together these provide an
extensive set  of tools with which to measure credit risk.? We present
numerical examples of  applying these techniques to energy derivatives.

?
Before  we begin we stress that the models and methods we present in this
book are tools  which should be used with the benefit of an understanding of
how both the +tool,  and the market works.? The  techniques we describe are
certainly not &magic wands8 which can be waved at  data and risk management
problems to provide instant and perfect solutions.? To quote from the
RiskMetrics Technical  Document &( no amount of sophisticated analytics will
replace experience and  professional judgement in managing risk.8.?  However,
the right tools, correctly used make the job a lot  easier!


This is a Return Receipt for the mail that you sent to
rogertan@swbell.net.

Note: this Return Receipt only acknowledges that the message was
displayed on the recipient's machine. There is no guarantee that the
content has been read or understood.

 - C.DTF
Return-path: <Peter.F.Keavey@enron.com>
Delivery-receipt-to: "Keavey, Peter F." <Peter.F.Keavey@ENRON.com>
Disposition-notification-to: "Keavey, Peter F."
<Peter.F.Keavey@ENRON.com>
Received: from mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta1-pr.rcsntx.swbell.net)
 by sims1.rcsntx.swbell.net
 (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9)
 with ESMTP id <0GN400I687BPAM@sims1.rcsntx.swbell.net> for
 rogertan@sims-ms-daemon; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:55:38 -0600 (CST)
Received: from mail.ngigpi.com ([205.252.36.66]) by
mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net
 (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9)
 with ESMTP id <0GN400DFK72EVD@mta1.rcsntx.swbell.net> for
 rogertan@sims1.rcsntx.swbell.net; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:49:28 -0600 (CST)
Received: from postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com
[192.152.140.9])
 by mail.ngigpi.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA29336 for
 <prices@intelligencepress.com>; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 14:59:16 -0500
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 fAKJsX312636 for <prices@intelligencepress.com>; Tue,
 20 Nov 2001 13:54:33 -0600 (CST)
Received: from nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com (unverified)
 by corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1)
 with SMTP id <T575671cea8c0a86e6e5fc@corp.enron.com>; Tue,
 20 Nov 2001 13:54:13 -0600
Received: from NAHOU-MSMBX03V.corp.enron.com ([192.168.110.41])
 by nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966);
Tue,
 20 Nov 2001 13:54:11 -0600
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 13:53:14 -0600
From: "Keavey, Peter F." <Peter.F.Keavey@enron.com>
To: "Dowjones1 (E-mail)" <dina.omeara@dowjones.com>,
 "Dowjones2 (E-mail)" <john.edmiston@dowjones.com>,
 "Gas Daily (E-mail)" <gas_daily@platts.com>,
 "Iferc1 (E-mail)" <kelley_doolan@mcgraw-hill.com>,
 "Iferc2 (E-mail)" <liane_kucher@mcgraw-hill.com>,
 "NGI (E-mail)" <prices@intelligencepress.com>
Message-id:
 <3891F8E98C93214B9E3E913CB7BF600220DBD8@NAHOU-MSMBX03V.corp.enron.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed ;
 boundary="{43E1E5FC-790A-46F6-BEA2-951FBE907C3F}"
Content-description: Daily Price Sheet.xls
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4712.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Thread-Index: AcFx/Psh71ZhSlpQT8ef6iiwEaLQ0w==
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Nov 2001 19:54:11.0851 (UTC)
 FILETIME=[1FDFCDB0:01C171FD]
X-UIDL: 3a93eab200003152


Just a check, my notes in the database say we had this counterparty open for
power, but when I check on profile manager, they have a read only status.  Do
we want them open for power or not?


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 11/15/2000
07:53 AM ---------------------------

Shirley_Keeney@eogresources.com on 11/15/2000 07:40:26 AM
To: Paula_Corey@enron.net, vfromm7768@aol.com, "Charles Renner"
<crenner@excalibar.com>, vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: The GORE Solution

This isn't the one I was thinking of, but it's cute, too!

The Dems want a new election in Palm Beach County - they've already
submitted the new ballot and gotten approval form those Dems who approved
the original confusing ballot. Here it its:
(See attached file: NewBallot.gif)(See attached file: NewBallot.gif)

 - NewBallot.gif


I am not going with AEP.  So please don't include me in your estimates.

D

From: Dena Pawlowski/ENRON@enronXgate on 03/29/2001 02:47 PM
To: Edward D Gottlob/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elsa Villarreal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg
McClendon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Danny Conner/NA/Enron@Enron, Lauri A
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenny J Soignet/HOU/ECT@ECT, James McKay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary
A Hanks/HOU/ECT@ECT, Silver Breaux/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sam Garner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathy
Hilliard/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lee Pinkston/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sean J Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Earl Tisdale/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Hohl/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael C
Winders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian M Riley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael C
Bilberry/HOU/ECT@ECT, George Weissman/HOU/ECT@ECT, JoAnne
Harris/NA/Enron@Enron, Christy Sweeney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg
Brazaitis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lee L Papayoti/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary W
Lamphier/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael W Morris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve HPL
Schneider/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jack Simunek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nathan L
Hlavaty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ron Green/HPL/Enron@Enron, Gerald Lofton/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Cheryl Marshall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Emma Kam Welsch/HOU/ECT@ECT, John
Towles/NA/Enron@ENRON, Karl E Atkins/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert
Rose/NA/Enron@ENRON, Debbie Boudar/NA/Enron@ENRON, Aric
Archie/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom Shelton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth W Kaase/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Robert Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Handley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Crockett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly L Carriere/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barbara
Sargent/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brad Blevins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lal Echterhoff/HOU/ECT@ECT,
James R Haden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Kuehler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom
Fry/GCO/Enron@Enron, Dick Danes/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Vicente
Sarmiento/GCO/Enron@Enron, Joe Zernicek/GCO/Enron@Enron, J R
Fosdick/GCO/Enron@Enron, Reid Hansen/GCO/Enron@Enron, Calvin
Dodd/GCO/Enron@Enron, Bac Thi Ly/GCO/Enron@Enron, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Irene Flynn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Consemiu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cathy L
Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT, Howard B Camp/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jackie Morgan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Cheryl Dudley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Veronica I Arriaga/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amelia
Alland/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Walters/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mary M Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Acton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Poorman/NA/Enron@Enron, Aimee Lannou/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carlos J
Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sabrae Zajac/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Cotten/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Trisha Hughes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jackie Young/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rita Wynne/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Leslie Robinson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jason Vogler/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen
Lindley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Anita Luong/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thu T Nguyen/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Cynthia Hakemack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gregg Lenart/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charlene
Richmond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Couvillon/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joanie H
Ngo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca Griffin/NA/Enron@Enron, Nick
Moshou/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Yvette Miroballi/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Karen
Gruesen/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Blanca A Lopez/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Anita
Eisenbrandt/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Jacquelyn Azore/ENRON@enronXgate, Erica
Wright/ENRON@enronXgate, Ana Maria Hernandez/ENRON@enronXgate, Donald P
Reinhardt/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Vance L Taylor/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Susan
Smith/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Susie Orsak/ENRON@enronXgate, Carol
Carter/HOU/ECT@ENRON, Liz Bellamy/NA/Enron@Enron, Melanie
Facundo/HOU/ECT@ECT, Saidia Matthews/NA/Enron@ENRON, Monica
Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dena Pawlowski/ENRON@enronXgate, Katie
Washington/NA/Enron@Enron, Suzanne Garcia/NA/Enron@ENRON, Clem
Cernosek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane Coleman/ENRON@enronXgate, Adriana
Peterson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Theresa McKinney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Candace L
Bywaters/HOU/ECT@ECT, James I Ducote/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kreg Hall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rosa
Brown/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eugene Peabody/GCO/Enron@Enron, Bob
Camp/GCO/Enron@Enron, Esther Buckley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric H
Mason/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sherlyn Schumack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ruby
Wagoner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Comello/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lisa Hesse/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Juanita Marchand/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark McCoy/Corp/Enron@Enron, Chris
Riegler/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kimberly Vaughn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Geheb/OTS/Enron@Enron, John Peyton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anna Arnold/HPL/Enron@ENRON,
Tess Ray/ENRON@enronXgate, Megan Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryce
Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jack Peebles/ENRON@enronXgate, Jennifer D
Pattison/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joyce Viltz/ENRON@enronXgate, Willie
Brooks/NA/Enron@Enron, Bob Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael
Olsen/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Potter/NA/Enron@Enron, Karl Stewart/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Buddy Majorwitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charles Howard/NA/Enron@ENRON, William D
Cosby/GCO/Enron@Enron, Jack Kemp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Keith
Tyree/NA/Enron@ENRON, Bud Wolcott/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Travis
Moss/NA/Enron@Enron, Larry White/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cheryl
Jones/HPL/Enron@ENRON
cc: Dena Pawlowski/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject: Parking at 1201 Louisiana

All,

For those of you who have not responded to the prior parking email, please
take a moment in doing do, as I am trying to get a firmed up number for
future parking in our new building @ 1201 Louisiana.  I need to get the name
of the garage that you are currently parking in.  This would include those of
you that ride the bus, participate in the vanpool or park on a surface lot.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Regards,

Dena Pawlowski
ENRON North America
1400 Smith Street
Houston, Texas 77002
Office:  713-853-5073
Pager:  281-631-1310


Hi Daren,

The attached spreadsheet could be used to help you in the collection of the
hours for your group prior to entering into the database sent to you by James
Scribner.  It includes a place for your FTE's, hours by position & activity
and the activity definitions for your cost center.  Please let me know if you
have any questions.

Thanks,
Suzanne


I took a call from a reporter this morning about pricing info for May 9 (the
reporter wants to make the point that the state overpaid for its contracts).
I got the following info from Bob Badeer:

May 9 -- prices at SP15 (location north of LA-south, but excluding LA) for
July forward -- flat price, 7/24
 5-year: $75/MWh
 10-year: $63

today (6/28):
 5-year: $42
 10-year: $41


We are working on some data that will add to the discussion of opportunity
costs.  Those data won't be in final form until tomorrow -- so we will file
Thursdsy ionstead of today.  I have received comments from Mary and Joe
Hartsoe.  I don't plan on having a general conference call, but may have
individual calls with people to resolve any differences.  I will send out a
new draft by the end of day -- without the data.  For you to review.

Sue


RSVP - Melissa Magee 713.507.6707 - Casual

yes, for reception and luncheon, no golf - 10/10/01


Mary,

Set forth below are the provisions that should be included in a margin
agreement whereby ENA will borrow funds from a non-U.S. entity (i.e., ABN
AMRO) and make payments of principal and interest pursuant to the borrowing.
As you'll note, the language provides that ENA will only be required to make
(and be liable for) payments of interest that are net of any U.S. withholding
tax and, thus, ABN AMRO will bear the burden of any U.S. withholding tax.

All payments under this Agreement shall be made without any deduction or
withholding for or on account of any Tax unless such deduction or withholding
is required by any applicable law, as modified by the practice of any
relevant governmental revenue authority, then in effect.  If a party is so
required to deduct or withhold, then that party ("X") shall (a) pay to the
relevant authorities the full amount required to be withheld promptly upon
the earlier of determining that such deduction or withholding is required or
receiving notice that such amount has been assessed against Y, (b) pay and be
liable to Y for only the net amount owed after reduction for any Tax, and (c)
promptly forward to Y an official receipt (or a copy thereof), or other
documentation reasonably acceptable to Y, evidencing such payment to such
authorities.

"Tax" means any present or future tax, levy, impost, duty, charge, assessment
or fee of any nature (including interest, penalties, and additions thereto)
that is imposed by any government or other taxing authority in respect of any
payment under this Agreement.

Please contact me at ext. 35777 with any questions.

Best regards,

Jeff

MARY COOK
07/14/2000 11:18 AM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jeff Blumenthal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jason Peters/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: Margin Lines:   Bank One and ABN

Bank One Line is closing today, with give up agreement to be finalized early
next week.  If there is any particular "file" processing for credit lines
applicable to this group, please advise.  Otherwise, I will have file with
originals set up and provided to Kay Young for central file room.

ABN further comments are due Monday and phone conference indicates very few
issues.  Should close next week.

By copy to Jeff, please provide tax comments on ABN on Monday.  Thank you.
Mary


Our last physical volumes from Wiser was March 2000.
Our last physical volumes from Riceland was July 2001.

KLJ is a producer on Gatherco which flows into Columbia Gas.  Our last month to receive gas from KLJ was November 2001.  We don't know if they have sent Enron a termination letter or not but I do have a deal with KLJ in Sitara (#250668) that goes through Oct 31, 2002.

Wade Price notes:
Germany, Chris says:
k.l.j., Inc is a gather co supplier, do you know if they have terminated their contract with us?
Price, Wade R. says:
I don't know that we received a termination notice from KLJ in the Settlements shop.  No gas was allocated for KLJ from Gatherco from Dec-01 forward.  Riceland has nothing in Unify since July-01 and Wiser has notheing since May-00.
Germany, Chris says:
cool, so all 3 of these are Appalachian producers then correct?
Price, Wade R. says:
KLJ-yes.  Riceland - No (ANR pipe), Wiser - on CGAS (Mar-00 not May), but production was 139000dth, more than a normal appalachian metered production.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dicarlo, Louis
Sent:	Tuesday, June 04, 2002 3:01 PM
To:	Germany, Chris
Cc:	Gregory, Paul
Subject:	Physical Deal Research

These physical CPs show up as live.  However myself and others are not aware of any activity with these CPs.  Please investigate.  (Any gas taken or delivered?  Last month of activity? Etc.)

CP Short Name		CP Name
KLJ			K.L.J., Inc.
RICELANDPETCOM	Riceland Petroleum Company
WISEROILCOM		Wiser Oil Company, The

Thanks

Louis R. DiCarlo
ENA Gas
Phone: 713-345-4666
Email: louis.dicarlo@enron.com


GADSDEN RESEARCH SERVICES'
FERCwatch
 February 27, 2002

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN STRICKEN FROM THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S OPEN MEETING:

E-19

EL01-19-001 EL02-16-001

H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.), Inc. v. New York Independent System Operator

E-32

ER01-2020-003, et al.

Carolina Power & Light Company and Florida Power Corporation

E-35

AD02-6-000

California Infrastructure Update

GRS' FERCwatch e-mail notification is a free courtesy service of Gadsden Research Services, energy research and document retrieval specialists.  Periodically (generally once or twice weekly), GRS will broadcast FERCwatch with descriptions of major FERC issuances or filings such as rulemakings, policy statements, mergers, new rate filings, major rate changes, and certificate filings.

GRS can provide hardcopies of any of the above listed items at nominal charges; for document requests or estimates of charges, please reply to grs4ferc@starpower.net <mailto:grs4ferc@starpower.net> or call 202.210.4771).

For an e-mailed copy of a brochure of GRS services and rates for FERC and other federal agency research please e-mail your request to grs4ferc@starpower.net <mailto:grs4ferc@starpower.net>.  For a mailed copy, please include your name, firm name and street address.  For a faxed copy, please include your fax number.

The FERCwatch subscription list is used for the sole purpose of providing information on FERC and energy industry activity and will not be sold or otherwise distributed to any other business or organization.  For additions or removal from the FERCwatch notification list, please reply to grs4ferc@starpower.net <mailto:grs4ferc@starpower.net>.

Send suggestions on how GRS' FERCwatch can better serve the energy community to grs4ferc@starpower.net <mailto:grs4ferc@starpower.net>.


Testing was done in the test database; however, once they released the new
version of deal entry into production, they tested one more time to make sure
that the new fields were pulling into our scheduling reports. It was a
precautionary measure taken so that we wouldn't enter deals all day long only
to find out that they wouldn't show up in the Enpower to CAPS report at the
end of the day. Sorry for the confusion.

Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/09/2001 10:34 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: deal 541638

Hi Kate,

Can you please let Phil know that he should be testing deals in the enpower
test database not the actual system.

Thanks

   Kate Symes @ ECT                03/09/2001 12:20 PM

To: Evelyn Metoyer/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: deal 541638

This was just a practice deal entered by Phil yesterday to test our new
version of deal entry. He zeroed out the volume, but neglected to kill the
deal or at least change it to no confirm. So this is NOT a good deal - I'm
killing it now.

Thanks,
Kate

Evelyn Metoyer@ENRON
03/09/2001 09:46 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: deal 541638

Kate can you ask Phil Platter is Dane Energy Corp the correct broker on this
deal?

Thanks


Hello,

 I just spoke with Lorraine @ PG&E and she informed me that there is going to
be some 3rd party maintenance done which will affect meter 6040 Riverside.
This will begin @ 2:00 A.M. on the 28th but PG&E will keep the noms whole for
the 28th.  09/29/00 & 09/30/00 should have no noms.


Yes,  the agreement was under ENA.  The confirmation / contracts are on Stacy's desk for signature. The customer signed the contract/confirm with ENA !!  I question if this is really suppose to be ENA Upstream?    This deal was done with John Singer??  Can you speak with these guys?  Let me know as the contract and confrim has been signed.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wallumrod, Ellen
Sent:	Friday, June 29, 2001 3:20 PM
To:	Singer, John; Perlingiere, Debra; Dickson, Stacy E.; Thorne, Judy
Cc:	Richardson, Stacey
Subject:	RE: DeBrular/Stevens Oil

The Stevens Oil & Gas deal (06/01/01 - 05/30/02 - Sitara # 892828)) was only entered in the system today. Mary (Terry) Franklin entered it, but under John Grass instructions they entered it under ENA Upstream Company LLC  -  we need to send out revised Confirmation.

The question is, do we need to revise the Master to ENA Upstream too  -  John ?

Regards,
Ellen

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Perlingiere, Debra
Sent:	Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:17 PM
To:	Singer, John; Dickson, Stacy E.; Wallumrod, Ellen
Subject:	DeBrular/Stevens Oil

     The attached confirms/ contracts have been sent to Stephen DeBrular / Stevens Oil

  << File: Stevens Oil & Gas.doc >>  << File: S. De Brular.doc >>  << File: Stevens Oil.doc >>  << File: S. De Brular.doc >>

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


I need your help with a quick survey of how many interns you'd like to have
this year.  Sally needs to forward this number to Rick Causey by noon
tomorrow.  Please send me your rough count by 11:30 AM (Wednesday).

Thanks for your help,
Patti x39106


Start Date: 4/14/01; HourAhead hour: 22;  No ancillary schedules awarded.
Variances detected.
Variances detected in Load schedule.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001041422.txt

---- Load Schedule ----
$$$ Variance found in table tblLoads.
     Details: (Hour: 22 / Preferred:  10.89 / Final:   7.89)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  LOAD_ID: SCE1
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 4/14/01
  SC_ID: EPMI


Start Date: 1/15/02; HourAhead hour: 19;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2002011519.txt


http://www.business2.com/content/magazine/ebusiness/2001/03/12/27491#

Settle This
Which technology resolves disputes best?
March 20, 2001 issue

Michael Grebb

St. Louis retiree David Hubert couldn't have been happier to score a replica
of a $3,000 Charles Eames leather chair on eBay -for only $450. When it
arrived, he tore open the box, pulled away the bubble wrap, and immediately
sunk into the chair to ease his bad back. "As soon as I sat in it, I could
tell...whoa, this isn't right," he says. "It had a bad mildew smell-I mean, a
really bad mildew smell." Distraught, Hubert emailed the seller to demand
that he either pay to clean the chair or take it back. The seller refused.
"He basically stonewalled me," Hubert says. So Hubert filed a grievance with
SquareTrade, a San Francisco-based startup that helps resolve disputes on
eBay.

A SquareTrade online mediator-a real person who corresponds with both parties
via email-immediately began negotiations. After a week of back-and-forth, the
seller finally agreed to send Hubert $150 to have the chair cleaned. Hubert
and the seller never were in contact. "I think it went really smoothly,"
Hubert says.

Mediation has been a popular alternative to lawsuits to resolve disputes,
especially those involving small amounts of money. For businesses, conflicts
between state and international laws have made dispute resolution costly, no
matter how big the transaction.

With $657 billion changing hands through Internet transactions worldwide, it
comes as little surprise that a raft of new dot-coms plans to move the
mediation process further online. Everyone expects online mediation to grow
as the number of transactions conducted online continues to grow. "Regardless
of the market fluctuations and a fair amount of blood on the street,
ecommerce is here to stay and is growing at a steady pace," says Steven
Abernethy, president and CEO of SquareTrade. "There is wealth of commerce
online to keep us and others busy for a while."

The American Arbitration Association estimates that dispute resolution is a
$200 million-a-year industry, but there's no way to know how much of that
would migrate online. "I'm not sure it would necessarily shift," says
association spokesperson Toni Griffin. "Online transactions may simply
generate more disputes, which would grow the whole market." American
Arbitration-the largest dispute resolution company with 140,000 cases per
year as of 1999 and $65 million in annual revenue-recently announced its own
online mediation business.

Online mediators agree that easier dispute resolution will drive faster
adoption of ecommerce by businesses and consumers, many of whom may now avoid
online transactions for fear of getting hosed. According to Forrester
Research, two-thirds of businesses say they would not conduct an online
transaction with a party they don't already know.

What they can't agree on is how to use technology to resolve disputes. Some
companies, such as SquareTrade, eResolution, or Online Resolution, have had
experience resolving disputes. They are mediating disputes online simply by
substituting an online chat session or email for the conference table or
telephone. But a few upstarts say these companies aren't harnessing new
technologies that allow mediation to be automated.

"This is not as simple as slapping up a Website," sniffs Charles Brofman,
president and CEO of Mount Kisco, N.Y.-based Cybersettle.com. He doesn't
mediate disputes but offers an automated blind bid system to negotiate
settlements when liability has already been established. Here's how it works:
The aggrieved party enters a demand; the liable party enters the most it will
pay (Neither side sees the other's entry, hence the term blind bid.) If the
numbers are within 30 percent of each other, the software automatically
splits it down the middle and settles the claim. For each dispute, the
parties get three tries, after which they must start over if their entries
still haven't come within 30 percent. The company says the site can handle as
many as 10,000 simultaneous sessions per second.

Brofman says he has signed insurance companies to flat-rate subscription
plans in which Cybersettle offers discounts for a certain number of claims
per year. "This system just takes all of the ego and personality and whittles
it down to what it should have been-settling the claim," he says. That's
especially important, he says, for international disputes in which cultural
differences can muddy an otherwise objective claims process.

Rival clickNsettle.com offers a service similar to Cybersettle's, but doesn't
limit parties to three bids per cycle. Instead, it uses a monetary
disincentive to stop parties from gaming the process. ClickNsettle doesn't
set a bid limit, but charges a small fee for every settlement offer made. CEO
Roy Israel says the fees are just annoying enough to keep parties from
wasting bids on outlandish demands. "It eliminates the ridiculous," he says.
"It keeps someone from asking for millions of dollars. It causes people to
get real-real quick. No one wants to waste $100 on bids that don't go
anywhere."

Israel criticizes Cybersettle's three-bid process, calling it inflexible
because it "artificially terminates" the process even when parties haven't
settled. And as you might expect, Brofman is equally skeptical of
clickNsettle's unlimited bid system. "If you go to infinity, people just try
to game the system," he says. "And once insurance companies realize you can
game the system, they're not going to use it."

His clickNsettle.com was called National Arbitration and Mediation for eight
years before adopting a dot-com moniker last year. "We're not just an
Internet startup trying to capitalize on dot-com hysteria," Israel says.
"We're a mediation business evolving into a Web-enabled business." In fact,
its existing mediation infrastructure allows the company to give users the
option of moving disputes offline if necessary.

The question is whether either Cybersettle or clickNsettle-or any of the
other mediation sites-will catch on. "I'm skeptical of these automated
mechanisms," says Forrester analyst Charles Rutstein. "It's a little too
'Let's-let-the-machines-do-it.'" He wonders whether all the messaging
back-and-forth makes sense for many disputes that could be easily settled
using traditional means. "Just pick up the friggin' phone," he says.

Web Judges
clickNsettle.com , Great Neck, N.Y.
Specialty: Traditional claims process goes online
Selling point: Allows each side to bid until settlement is reached (with a
60-day time limit)
Size: About 8,000 law firms as clients, as well as 500 members using its
online component
pricing: The first party pays a $15 registration fee, each subsequent offer
costs $10 for the first 20 days, $15 for the next 20 days, and $20 for the
final 20 days

Cybersettle.com , Mount Kisco, N.Y.
Specialty: Automated blind-bid mediation service
Selling point: Future plans include an "online small claims court" to handle
minor disputes
Size: 90 employees; claims more than 16,000 registered users
pricing: Fee scaled to size of settlement. If plaintiff receives up to
$5,000, there is a $100 "success fee"; $5,000 to $10,000 costs $150;
defendants' fees start at $100 for a settlement up to $5,000; more than
$10,000, a $200 fee.

eResolution , Montreal
Specialty: Is also an applications service provider, licensing its software
to other dispute resolution companies
Selling point: Honed experience settling domain name disputes
Size: About 30 employees
pricing: A sliding scale ranging from 1 percent for the biggest cases
($150,000 or more) to more than 20 percent for small potatoes ($500 or less).

iCourthouse , Lafayette, Calif.
Specialty: Online jurors judge the case
Selling point: "At this point, we're doing this for entertainment," says CEO
Clyde Long.
Size: 10 employees
pricing: Free. Another service, JurySmart, costs $189 per case.

Online Resolution , Cambridge, Mass.
Specialty: Disputes of more than $2,000 involving insurance, employment, and
B-to-B commerce.
Selling point: Tailored for common B-to-B disputes
Size: 13 employees; 500 mediators
pricing: For disputes of less than $10,000, each party pays $50 per hour; for
disputes $10,000-$50,000, each pays $75 per hour; disputes of more than
$50,000 cost $100 per hour; organizations that sign up for packages receive
major discounts per case.

SquareTrade , San Francisco
Specialty: Mediation for the masses
Selling point: Offers mom-and-pop online merchants a "Square Deal"
certificate-a seal of approval-for as much as $6,400
Size: More than 250 mediators and arbitrators on contract; claims to have
processed more than 35,000 disputes
pricing: $20 per dispute for mediation; if the transaction is valued at more
than $1,000, it also takes a 1 percent fee. Mediators are paid on a
per-dispute basis.

WebMediate , headquarters: Boston
Specialty: Focused exclusively on business-to- business exchanges and
marketplaces
Selling point: Brainiac board includes several Harvard and MIT law and
management professors.
Size: 8 employees and 100 online mediators under contract
pricing: Will charge clients an hourly rate for mediators; will take a cut of
the mediator's fee or a percentage of monetary disputes when the automated
system is used.
Michael Grebb (cablegrebb@aol.com) is a Washington, D.C.*based contributor
for Business 2.0.


MWilczek@nyiso.com writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

The NYISO is reserving the following hours per ECA 20001006B in the
October 22, 2001 Real-Time Market to verify prices:

HQ:  6:00 and 7:00
OH:  6:00 and 7:00
NE:  6:00 and 7:00
PJM: 5:00, 6:00 and 7:00

In addition, the NYISO is reserving all ancillary service prices for hour
beginning 22:00 in the October 22, 2001 Hour-Ahead Market.

Prices in the October 23, 2001 Day-Ahead Market are correct.

This e-mail information is a copy of the official posting which can be
found at the following address of our website:
http://mis.nyiso.com/public/htm/OperMessages/CurrentOperMessages.htm#mm


Joshua:

I found the Enron staff who have had the conversations with the Oregon PUC so
believe the attached Q&A meet your request.  If you need additional
materials, just let me know.

In addition, EPSA sent some questions they would like the Senator to ask of
any of the EPSA witnesses (Reliant, Calpine, Williams, or Enron) dealing with
the Impact of the Recent changes in the Management of the California
Independent System Operator:

Background:  The Cal ISO acts as the "air traffic controller" for the
interstate electric power grid in California.  The ISO determines who gets
access to the grid and under what terms and conditions.  It is the ISO that
helps ensure that access to the grid is truly open and non-discriminatory.
When the ISO was initially constituted several years ago, a "stakeholder"
management board was created that represented a wide range of market
interests---power sellers, generators, consumers, political leaders, etc.
After the power emergencies began last summer, this board was criticized as
too splintered and indecisive.  In a response to this perception and in an
effort to impose greater control over the ISO, the California state
legislature replaced the stakeholder board with a five-person board that
serves at the request of the California Governor.

QUESTION:  The Cal ISO has recently seen its management board changed from
one with broad stakeholder representation to one appointed by the California
Governor.  Given that California is a critical part of a larger western
regional power market, how can we ensure that regional power needs are
reflected in the decisions of the new state appointed Board?

ANSWER:  We really can't.  Most of the time, the Board has a limited role.
However, the "traffic controller" role becomes crucial when the power crunch
comes.  Every market participant needs to be worried that, during times of
real power emergencies, the Cal ISO Board will be too willing to shoot first
and ask questions later.  Companies with firm transactions involving
out-of-state entities may find their needs and commercial interests
sacrificed to prevent local political problems.  Instead of robust,
competitive regional markets, politicizing transmission decisions practically
guarantees an increasingly balkanized market.


While incentivizing the deal may be helpful from a business perspective, I'm
not sure it will do much with the timing at the SEC.  As you know, there are
two major issues: (i) the integration, which we believe we have more or less
under control, and (ii) the capital structure of the resulting system, which
is dependent in the first instance on the timing of the Sierra auction.

The cap structure is a very serious issue.  There is a perception on the part
of the staff that Sierra is significantly overextended.  As you know, the SEC
generally requires registered holding companies to maintain a minimum of 30%
common equity.  Currently, the best that Sierra can offer is that they will
be at 20.8% common equity at closing, with a representation that Sierra will
increase its consolidated common equity to approximately 29 percent as a
result of: (a) proceeds from the sale of generating assets of Sierra Pacific
and Nevada Power aggregating approximately $1 billion, 100 percent of which
will reduce debt of the consolidated company; (b) proceeds from divestiture
of non-core assets, or some combination of common equity and divestiture of
non-core assets, which together would be approximately equivalent to the
issuance of $260 million in terms of impact on Sierra Pacific's equity ratio;
(c) issuance of up to $600 million of hybrid securities; and (d) increased
retained earnings realized from the combined operations of Sierra and PGE
aggregating approximately $80 million in 2000 and $100 million in 2001.

In other matters, the SEC staff has indicated that it would give "credit"
toward equity capitalization if the company has executed definitive
agreements for sale of the subject assets.  What is the status of the Sierra
auction, and how quickly will they have signed agreements?

Concerning state issues and the intervenorts, Steve Oldham and the folks from
Skadden are meeting with the GC of the Nevada Commission (at his request)
next week to clean up the Nevada issues so I don't think that will be a
problem.

What remains is the monkey wrench intervenors throw into any 1935 Act
proceeding.  Regardless of how successful we are on the above issues, the
presence of the California intervenors means that the matter must be
presented to the full SEC for consideration.  Because of the delays inherent
in that process, we will need all FERC and state issues resolved by
September, or early October at the latest, in order to have a realistic
chance at a year-end order.

The only other thing that might prove helpful would be a price escalation
provision so we could tell the SEC that there is a significant cost
associated with their failure to act in FY 2000.  There are a number of
concerns with this approach: among other things, we would have to explain to
the SEC why we're inserting it now.

I realize this is a bit long-winded but it seems we're getting close to our
last best shot at year end and I'd think we'd want to plan our strategy
carefully.

Best,

Joanne

>>> <Dwight.Larson@enron.com> 08/16/00 10:20AM >>>
A meeting with Walt Higgins has been scheduled for Thursday in Las
Vegas and attendees from Enron will be Mark, Mitch and Steve.  The
discussions will probably be more global than specific, however I'ld like
everyone to forward to me their wish list  of items so I can summarize them
for Mark prior to their meeting.  I'ld also appreciate input from everyone
on the impact of amending the stock purchase agreement ( i.e. incorporating
some incentive type payment if the deal closes this year) and the
sensitivity to the timing of that amendment. What is the impact if it is
done 1) prior to OPUC settlement, 2) prior to the Oregon Commission ruling,
or 3) before or after the FERC addresses our filing.
After collecting peoples input, I'll circulate the summary this
afternoon.
Paul , could you please forward this to Mike Morgan - I didn't have
his e-mail address.
thanks
dwight


Cool.

FYI - Jim has also asked for a daily DPR for open & performing Gas & Power contracts. Kristin is covering Power & Sally is assigning the Gas DPR responsibility.

We will filter to you - for potential consolidation if required - as and when they are completed - target is for close today.

B.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wilson, Shona
Sent:	Wednesday, January 16, 2002 8:34 AM
To:	Thapar, Raj; Beck, Sally; Pearce, Barry; Apollo, Beth
Cc:	Abel, Chris; Considine, Keith; Ayala, Susie; Trevino, Susan
Subject:	priorities for 1/16 and accomplishments for 1/15

1/15 -
curve val: we have scoped the curve val project and have discussed it with PwC.  I've talked to E&Y in general terms and have a meeting with them on this at 10 today.  We have also had initial discussions with the different risk groups about the holes in the curve construction & upload process and our deliverable for the end of today is a list of where the holes are and a plan to fill those holes.

We spent significant time with E&Y to go over the  make up of the DPR.

We are working with the different groups on the 12/31 DPR information.  So far, we have only had one request for it.  My gut feeling is that EIM & ENA are complete, but ECTRIC & EGM need a bit more time.  Chris should have a complete status ready for today.

Our systems are fixed (hooray!).  Yesterday we caught up on the Enovate and Bridgeline DPRs as well as spent significant time with IT to get the systems fixed.

Susie is still working on the SEC VAR for 10/31, 11/30, and will start 12/31 as soon as all of the information is available.  She has also started the net assets work.

Lastly, the whole group had CAS training so once we get access to the system we can start pulling info by counterparty.

Today our goals are:

Curve val - finalize memo (getting agreement from PwC, E&Y, and Enron estate), put listing of curve construction plan fwd, start determining what the different buckets of curves are and what tools are available to perform analysis

Field more E&Y DPR qus

Have a complete status report on the 12/31 DPR.

Prepare ongoing reporting (Enovate, Bridgeline etc).

I also hope to get some time to familarize myself with the CAS environment.

Regards

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thapar, Raj
Sent:	Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:38 AM
To:	Wilson, Shona
Cc:	Abel, Chris; Considine, Keith; Ayala, Susie; Trevino, Susan; Pearce, Barry; Apollo, Beth
Subject:	RE: priorities for today

Looks good.  Thx

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wilson, Shona
Sent:	Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:05 AM
To:	Thapar, Raj
Cc:	Abel, Chris; Considine, Keith; Ayala, Susie; Trevino, Susan; Pearce, Barry; Apollo, Beth
Subject:	priorities for today

Dear Raj,

To keep you up to date with what we are spending time on, here is what I would like to accomplish today:

Shona
letter for PwC re curve validation
work with Gary Peng re requirements for 12/31 SEC reporting
work with Susie on 11/30 Net asset reporting
get trained on CAS (for all group members)

Chris
start on booklets by talking to each risk group re timing of when they can get us info
work with risk groups to determine when they can get us 12/31 DPR info

Keith
Work on determining what system tools are available for curve vals

Susan
get Risktrac systems working again
catch up the Enovate & Bridgeline reporting

Susie
work on getting the revals for the merchant assets
work on net asset reporting by meeting risk & accounting groups to determine what needs to be done for 11/30 info

Thanks

Shona
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thapar, Raj
Sent:	Monday, January 14, 2002 5:22 PM
To:	Wilson, Shona
Subject:	RE: E&Y Request

Thanks

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wilson, Shona
Sent:	Monday, January 14, 2002 5:17 PM
To:	Thapar, Raj
Subject:	RE: E&Y Request

Let me get with the risk guys to discuss the timing on this.  I'll give you an update tomorrow.

Regards

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Thapar, Raj
Sent:	Monday, January 14, 2002 4:41 PM
To:	Albrecht, Kristin; Wilson, Shona; Puchot, Paul; Pearce, Barry; Funkhouser, Shanna
Subject:	E&Y Request

Guys:

Here is the spreadsheet with names of EWS lead persons name.  Please forward it to all the other people who would be working on different pieces of it so that they can start working on this asap.

Thx

Raj
 << File: Info Request_Ene_Jan 11_021.xls >>


I never wrote nor implied that I was intending to hedge currency exposure with a third party.  I implied that I will hedge with you guys when and where I deem appropriate in the term structure.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shankman, Jeffrey A.
Sent:	Monday, October 22, 2001 12:31 PM
To:	Zufferli, John
Subject:

John,

I don't have all the facts around this transaction, but I don't think you are authorized to hedge currency exposure with outside counterparties as you've outlined in your email to Hickerson, etc.  I'd appreciate some information.

Jeff


I talked to Susan last Friday and she gave me her changes which I put into
the doc.  So I am only waiting on Foti and Dushinske's changes.

Attached is the Vector term sheet.

	Jamie Ginsberg@ENRON
	06/19/2000 09:08 AM

		 To: Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Various Outstanding Documents

gerald,

i have a couple of questions for you:

1)  susan scott told me that she would get back to you with some of the nits
that she had on the hubbard document.  i am waiting for the final comments
from dushinske, but they should come today.  i would like to get everything
signed today because we want to make sure that we can book the gas at these
high prices.

2)  vector term sheet.  i seem to have deleted my copy of the most recent
draft we had circulating.  can you send me your most recent update, please?

if i hear anything from dushinske, i will let you know,

thanks,

jamie


Paula,

No, I drove.

Vince

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Corey, Paula
Sent:	Thursday, May 17, 2001 5:17 PM
To:	Kaminski, Vince J
Subject:

Did you ride the bus today?


We will need to allocate individual seats early next week.

Don't worry about john on offices we are done.
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


Angela,

I would like to go ahead and execute the below agreement for Juniper's production.  Below you will find the Juniper information needed to process this agreement.

Name			Juniper Energy L.P.
Address		600 Rockmead, Suite 211 Kingwood, TX  77339
Contact			Kathy Kelly
Phone			713-853-5858
Fax			713-646-3037
Federal ID		76-0571735
Acct. Contact		Kathy Kelly 713-853-5858 or Don Rollins 713-853-9176

Please let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks,

Kathy Kelly

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Angela Raguso <ARaguso@eprod.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Thursday, May 02, 2002 2:11 PM
To:	Kelly, Katherine L.
Subject:	BID FOR JUNIPER PRODUCTION AT BURNS POINT

Kathy,

Following is Enterprise's bid for Juniper's production at Burns Point
beginning 5/1/02:

E/P Mix			OPIS monthly average for Napoleonville ep-mix on the
last 5 days of the month prior to production less T& F according to the
formula below
Propane 		OPIS monthly average for Napoleonville propane less
T& F according to the formula below
Iso-Butane	 	OPIS monthly average for Napoleonville isobutane
less T& F according to the formula below
Nor-Butane		OPIS monthly average for Napoleonville normal butane
less T& F according to the formula below
Nat-Gasoline	 	OPIS monthly average for Napoleonville natural
gasoline less T& F according to the formula below

T & F Fee:  [(x+.07)(0.6)/2.00] + 2.15

x = Henry Hub gas futures price as published in Inside FERC's Gas Market
Report for the first day of the month in question
Minimum T & F fee = 2.75 cpg

Please call me if you would like to execute a formal contract with these
terms.

Regards,

Angela M. Raguso
Manager - Marketing and Supply
Enterprise Products Operating, LP

Phone: (713) 880-6591   Fax:  (713) 880-6965
Cell:  (713) 410-1432  E-Mail:  araguso@eprod.com


----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 06/05/2001 06:45 AM -----

	"Welsh, H. Ronald" <rwelsh@velaw.com>
	05/16/2001 06:26 PM

		 To: "'Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com'" <Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: RE: Trial Lawyer

Richard,

I know two top flight trial lawyers in New York:

Greg Joseph
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver, & Jacobson
One New York Plaza
New York, New York 10004
212-859-8584
josepgr@ffhsj.com

Norm Kleinberg
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP
One Battery Park Plaza
NY  10004
212-837-6680
kleinber@hugheshubbard.com

In addition, VE has a lateral partner whom I have not met:

James Serota
VE
NY
917-206-8004
jserota@velaw.com

Jamie's bio says that his area of practice is antitrust and business
litigation,particularly concentrated on industries
that are evolving fromregulation to competition, including electric
utilities.  It says he chaired the Fuel and Energy Industry Committee of the
ABA Antitrust Section from 94-97.

When are you in town, so we can have dinner?

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com [mailto:Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 5:39 PM
To: rwelsh@velaw.com
Subject: Trial Lawyer

I anticipate that Enron may have some legal issues in New York similar to
the issues Enron has faced in California.  Can you recommend a top notch
trial lawyer (similar to yourself) at any firms in New York?

Thanks.
          ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged.  This
email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization
named above.  If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized
representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any,
or the information contained herein is prohibited.  If you have received
this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email
and delete this email from your system.  Thank You


Good morning, and FYI.

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 11/29/2000 08:57
AM ---------------------------

"Taylor, Rob" <robtaylor@akllp.com> on 11/28/2000 07:46:24 PM
To: <kay.mann@enron.com>, <roseann.engeldorf@enron.com>,
<mary.cilia@enron.com>, <mary.kimball@enron.com>,
<cheryl.lipshutz@enron.com>, <david.mitchell@enron.com>,
<peter.n.anderson@enron.com>, <brett.wiggs@enron.com>
cc: "Seve, Paul" <paulseve@akllp.com>, "Porto, Frederico"
<fredericoporto@akllp.com>, "Popplewell, Tom" <tompopplewell@akllp.com>,
"Bunk, Sean" <seanbunk@akllp.com>

Subject: GE Consent - Elektrobolt Turbines

 Attached is a draft of the GE consent to the assignment of the
LM6000 Turbines to the Owner Trust.  A draft of the Purchase Option
Assignment and Assumption Agreement for this transfer will follow
shortly.

Please let me know if you have any questions or comments regarding the
attached draft.

Regards,

Rob Taylor
Andrews & Kurth L.L.P.
600 Travis Street
Suite 4200
Houston, Texas  77002

Tel: (713) 220-4436
Fax: (713) 238-7273
e-mail: robtaylor@andrews-kurth.com

This e-mail is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the
recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient, please
(i) do not read, copy, use or disclose the contents hereof to others
(any of the foregoing being strictly prohibited), (ii) notify the sender
immediately of your receipt hereof, and (iii) delete this e-mail and all
copies of it.
 <<GE Consent (SouthAmerica).DOC>>
 - GE Consent (SouthAmerica).DOC


Steve et al.

Mary sent out FERC presentations earlier today (see note copied below) that
provide backup for the 9 Nov presentation.  We have updated the chart
(appears on p. 12 or so) that shows year 2000 PNW hydro production relative
to 1999.  You definitely want to use the updated data in the attached chart
because it shows that hydro production continues to be at a depressed level.

Alan Comnes

Mary Hain
11/07/2000 08:58 AM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Cooper Richey/PDX/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron,
Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES

Subject: Your request for presentations

Here are the FERC presentations.  The first one is Tim's.  It corrects some
information in my presentation.  For example, Tim's presentation corrects the
hydro generation numbers to reflect the fact that not all hydro capacity
equates with hydro energy, if there isn't sufficient water to produce it.  My
presentation includes more verbal explanations.  Cooper and Alan - does any
of the data in these presentations need to be updated?

From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 11/07/2000 08:59 AM CST
To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT,
Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy
Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject:

I will be on the first panel of the FERC California conference on Thursday.
The format allows a 5 min presentation and then 60 min of Q&A.  I need your
help to make sure I have "Gore-like" command of the details.  Please help
with the following information:
Enron project information (Parquet/McCubbin) -- please give me any
presentations or summaries you have on the generation, or firm purchases, we
have under way (or planned).  I'll talk with you to find out what we are
comfortable disclosing but please err on the side of giving whatever
information you have.
Updated Belden presentation (Hain/Belden) -- I believe the latest information
was as of August; I think some of the information on the cost of peaking
facilities is particularly eye-opening on the price cap issue.
Comparison to PJM (Hartsoe/Novosel) -- Is the information we are seeking from
the ISO and PX similar to information PJM already provides?  If so, it would
be nice to tie our requests back to something the Commission has already
approved.
Cancelled DSM projects (Mahoney) -- Again, I'll only use what we feel
comfortable with, but it would help make our point if we can give examples of
how price caps backfire when it comes to encouraging conservation.
ISO/PX reports (Dasovich).  I have the ISO market surveillance report.  Is
there another ISO report?  If so, please get me a copy and provide a copy of
the PX report too.
CEC/Proposed generation update (Mara/Parquet) -- Need the basic information:
proposed, waiting for permitting; how much/little the legislation did to
expedite siting (ie are we still comfortable saying that it applies to less
than 10%)?
Soft cap(Belden/Hain) -- need a crisp explanation of why the "soft" nature of
the cap is not sufficient.  Also, would we be OK if the Commission revised it
to say that bids can be taken above 150 without special filing or reporting
requirements, but those bids will be accepted at the price bid rather than
applying to all lower bids as well (ie the highest bid at or below 150 clears
the market, bids above 150 accepted at price bid as needed)?
Offers we have made/deals done (Parquet/Dasovich/ Mccubbin) -- Roseville plus
any others, offer made to SDG&E -- I want to make the point that the market
will provide solutions (below the retail price cap) if we get the utility
(and the regulators) out of the merchant function.
Herding the cats(Hartsoe/mccubbin/mara/dasovich):  We are asking FERC to be
courageous, do the right thing and ignore the politics.  To be even halfway
credible, we can't have IEP, EPSA, Dynegy or anyone else "squishing" on the
price cap issue..  We have never been closer to reform in California, we need
these guys on board.
Thanks.


Casey,

Here is the file we need to fill out for Ramesh to download into RisktRAC.


Greg Piper, Mark Pickering, Vince Kaminski, Brad Richter, Jay Webb


Will,

I moved  the new version of PathConfirm.Exe into P:\PowerSys\Stage, Please migrate this version into stage.

In new version of Path Confirmation following items are fixed

?	Fixed - Provide an option to delete bogus confirmation records
?	Added radio button - Cut Type Code. is vague, I think we need a button here.  Now we have a forced choice button of Hour-Ahead or Real-Time which works well.
?	Fixed  - Scheduled path quantity is vague, this should be Cut Volume.
?	By default it shows the original path now, New Path Text - If we make the New Path cut part of the Expanded view of the original path, then we could show Original Path, New path, and the user could copy  and make small changes to the new path instead of typing the whole thing in.
?	Follows Deal Entry Standards - The Counterparty list is just too confusing and cumbersome to be practical. It should mimic the deal entry list.
?	Fixed - The Annuity field currently does not recognize any number. It also should be able to function with NO number in it, as a typical resupply will not need an annuity.
?	Resupply Deal # - This also needs a choice. It will either be a New supply or a New Sink. This should need a deal number to proceed. Right now it does not like the deal number plus decimal.  I think to be consistent we need to require it everywhere a deal number is required
?	Fixed - Reason Text-this is not spelled correctly,  and the text box could be much smaller.  Most Reasons are probably a sentence at most.

Thanks,
Vish
x 53209


Attached is a memo regarding my discussions with OGE and the revised Master
and GISB agreements.

 - GISB Spec Prov - enovate L.L.C..doc

I am also including their comments to our form of guarantee (they have no
revisions other than entity and amount) and their proposed form of guarantee.

 - Enron Guaranty (from Master).doc - to enovate, llc.doc

Let me know what you think.

Thanks - Gregg


SE RTO:  FERC heard a presentation of the report by the ALJ at the Oct. 24 FERC meeting.  The Commissioners stated that they plan to take some action at the next meeting on Nov 7.

ICAP:  On Oct 17, Enron filed its response opposing the continuation of icap as a separate product.  Awaiting FERC action.

Dynegy v. ComEd:  On Oct 26, Enron filed a protest against Dynegy's protest of ComEd's current practice allowing Firm LD contracts to be designated as network resources for the Illinois retail program.  Dynegy argues that only "capacity" contracts should be allowed to used.  Awaiting FERC action.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gottfredson, Bryan
Sent:	Monday, October 29, 2001 10:42 AM
To:	Nicolay, Christi L.
Cc:	Steffes, James D.
Subject:	Monthly Report

Christi - Would you please update me on the following issues.  I am putting together Jim's November report, and any new information (if there is any) on the SE RTO and FERC-ICAP project would be helpful.  Thanks so much, Bryan

 << File: ENA Christi.xls >>


Hi, Kelly,

Yes, I probably am the person to contact on this.  In fact, I am getting
ready to circulate a draft data protection policy that would put Enron in
compliance with EU directives.  Look for it in the next few days!

Michelle

	Kelly Noel Higgason@ENRON
	05/19/2000 03:13 PM

		 To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject: RE: nextlaw

Michelle:
 It occurred to me as I sent the message below to Michael Brown that you may
be the lawyer I need to coordinate with.  Is that true?
---------------------- Forwarded by Kelly Noel Higgason/Corp/Enron on
05/19/2000 03:08 PM ---------------------------

Kelly Noel Higgason
05/19/2000 03:11 PM
To: Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON

Subject: RE: nextlaw

Michael:
 Please see message below in which Christopher Millard of Clifford Chance
indicates that a project that CC is working on with Enron Europe may involve
subscription to the Nextlaw subscription service.  Sharon Butcher and I are
working on a project for Enron Corp. HR that requires research on data
protection laws in the various countries in which Enron has employees.  It is
likely that we will subscribe to Clifford Chance's Nextlaw service, a
database of data protection legislation in various countries.  One of the
advantages of Nextlaw is that it is a more cost-effective approach than
engaging local counsel in each jurisdiction to provide the legal research,
and subscribers are entitled to quarterly updates of the information on the
database during the annual subscription period.  At the end of my message to
Christopher, please see the list of countries that we need information
about.  My guess is that any of the jurisdictions you need are covered.  If
so, I would propose to Christopher that if (as I anticipate) Enron Corp.
subscribes to Nextlaw for the project Sharon and I are working on, Enron
Europe should be entitled to access and use the information for the other
project Christopher references.  We certainly don't want Enron to pay for the
subscription service twice! Please tell me which lawyer in your group I
should include in discussions.  Thanks
---------------------- Forwarded by Kelly Noel Higgason/Corp/Enron on
05/19/2000 02:23 PM ---------------------------

Christopher.Millard@CliffordChance.com on 05/19/2000 01:55:23 PM
To: Kelly.Noel.Higgason@enron.com
cc: Sharon.Butcher@enron.com, Ben.Ebdon@CliffordChance.com

Subject: RE: nextlaw

Kelly

Very good to hear from you after all this time. Enron's subscription to
NextLaw has indeed expired, though we are starting to do some data
protection work with Enron Europe and were planning to show them NextLaw
soon as we believe it would be very useful to them. In the meantime, I would
be pleased to talk with you and Sharon on Monday at 09.00 Houston time about
how we might assist you with your new project.

We have indeed expanded the coverage of our NextLaw service over the last
few months. Of the 29 jurisdictions you list below, 17 are now covered by
NextLaw. Don't quote me on this but, to my knowledge, of the remaining 12
only Columbia has a data protection law which is currently in force and
Canada has a new law which is not yet in force.

I am copying this to my colleague Ben Ebdon in our Clifford Chance Online
group in the hope that he will be able to join us on the call on Monday.

In the meantime, I hope you have a good weekend.

Best regards
Christopher
___________________________________________

Christopher Millard, Clifford Chance
Limited Liability Partnership
200 Aldersgate Street, London, EC1A 4JJ, England
Voice: +44 20 7956 0023 / Fax: +44 20 7600 5555
Email: christopher.millard@cliffordchance.com
___________________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly.Noel.Higgason@enron.com
[mailto:Kelly.Noel.Higgason@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 5:41 PM
To: christopher.millard@cliffordchance.com
Cc: Sharon.Butcher@enron.com
Subject: nextlaw

Christopher:
     You may remember me from our conversations about 18 months ago, which
resulted in Enron subscribing to Clifford Chance's Nextlaw subscription
service.  Enron's annual subscription lasped several months ago, but we are
in need of similar services again for a different HR project.  Enron senior
management has tasked the HR department with the creation of an internal
"expert directory" with which all Enron employees can identify other Enron
employees who have specific skills (such as language capabilities,
experience with particular kinds of projects, political contacts, etc.)
that may be useful for new intiatives.  As you can imagine, the data that
must be collected from all Enron employees worldwide is significantly more
complex than the information we were gathering from international employees
when we engaged your firm previously.  We would now like legal advice about
what consents must be obtained from employees in various foreign
jurisdictions in order to collect and publish the information, whether
certain information gathered must be requested on a voluntary basis (and
conversely, what information we can require that employees provide), etc.
[Please note that all information to be requested will be collected for
business purposes (our internal legal department has already informed HR
and management that certain information about personal interests, hobbies,
and non-professional memberships should not be collected or asked for.)]

     I am hopeful that in the time since we last spoke, your firm has added
additional jurisdictions to the subscription service, since many of the
countries in which we have employees were not on the database in early
1999.  I will list the jurisdictions that are relevant for this project at
the end of this message; however, in certain jurisdictions, Enron has only
a few employees, and we may elect not to include those employees in the
expert directory if we determine that the cost of the legal research for
that jurisdiction is not justified by the benefit to Enron.  I am also
wondering whether the information included in the database is sufficient
for this more complicated project.

     My colleague, Sharon Butcher, and I would like to discuss our new
project with you to see if Clifford Chance is again willing and able to
provide the local research that we require, and to get an estimate of the
cost involved.  We were hoping to call you at 9:00 am Houston time on
Monday, May 22nd.  Please let me know if this time is not convenient, and
we will arrange for another call.  I can be reached by telephone
(713-853-5698), fax (713-646-5847), or email (kelly.noel.higgason@enron).
I hope you are well, and look forward to our work together.

Regards,

Kelly Noel Higgason

Argentina
Australia
Brazil
Canada
China
Colombia
Finland
Germany
Guatemala
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Mexico
Netherlands
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Puerto Rico
Russian Federation
Singapore
Spain
Sweden
Thailand
Turkey
United Kingdom
Venezuela
******************************************************************************
**************************************

This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or
otherwise protected from disclosure.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any
attachment from your system.  If you are not the intended recipient you must
not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other
person.

For further information about Clifford Chance please see our website at
http://www.cliffordchance.com or refer to any Clifford Chance office.


The Buzz  Thursday, September 14, 2000

Due to server difficulties, The Buzz was sent out Thursday.

In The Buzz this week:

EES Closes Sony Electronics Deal: EES just closed a fixed-price commodity
deal with San Diego,s largest energy user, Sony Electronics, Inc. Sony is
just one of many deals that closed in August through the collaborative
efforts of the Market Development group. The objective of the group is to
streamline processes and procedures to close more commodity deals faster.
Market Development, Origination, Commodity Structuring, Risk Management,
Account Implementation Planning (AIP), Legal, and Regulatory Affairs joined
forces to create an easy-to-close scenario for the California markets. A
daily executable price sheet and ready-to-use short form contract are
products that were developed from this effort. EES Market Development scored
their first hits in San Diego last month. Four additional deals that have
recently closed include Burlington Coat Factory, WW San Diego Harbor Island*
Travel Lodge, Martin Furniture, and La Jolla Pharmaceuticals. Congratulations
to the deal team and to Market Development. Click on link to learn who was
involved:
http://inet.ees.enron.com/vision/comm/eespeople/

Enron Building Services Takes on 100 New Employees from Springs: As part of
our agreement with Springs Industries, Springs has contracted with Enron
Building Services for facilities management work that includes the operation
of Springs, in-house power plants as well as their heating and
air-conditioning systems. About 100 workers at Springs will be assumed by
Enron Building Services. Springs reported that this is part of a continuing
effort to bring a higher level of expertise to their mechanical
infrastructure. Springs spokesman Ted Matthews stated that &Springs is
proficient in making home fashions and sheets, but doesn,t have experience in
running power plants.8

Two of Our Customers in Wall Street Journal Cover Articles: Two of our EES
customers are getting bigger. Chase Manhattan has agreed to acquire J.P.
Morgan for approximately $36 billion. Chase, with over $360 billion in
assets, is one of the world,s leading financial institutions. The Wall Street
Journal also reported that Quebecor World was negotiating an acquisition of
the cable company Videotron. Quebecor World is a diversified global
commercial printing company offering customers state-of the art- printing
capabilities, plus related value added printing services.

Skilling Makes Plea for FERC to Control Monopoly Transmission System Abuses:
Enron President and COO Jeffrey Skilling told a National Press Club
conference in Washington, D.C., that &the U.S. wholesale market for
electricity is the most screwed up8 of all the deregulating markets in which
Enron participates globally. Skilling urged the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) to use its influence to ensure open access to the nation,s
transmission grid. According to Skilling, Enron,s attempts to schedule power
transactions have often been denied because of &alleged capacity shortages,8
yet transmission-owning utilities turn around and use the requested capacity
for their own generation facilities to move power along the same route.
Skilling pointed to the fact that access to the transmission grid is hindered
by barriers controlled by monopolies, stating &We need some very strong
action to ensure that the system is open and that people can get power from
places where it is available to places where it is needed.8 Skilling, who
went on to say that the solution would be for FERC to eliminate inconsistency
in the application of market rules to participants and ensure that the
transmission system is opened up and nondiscriminatory. Click on link to read
article:
http://eeshou-dowj1.ees.enron.com/pagebuilder/viewarticle.asp?folderid=1&AN=RT
R0025031699

Some Interesting Facts: Peak demand for electricity has risen 11 percent in
the U.S. since 1995, while reserve margins for excess power capacity dropped
14 percent since 1997. Instances of so called transmission loading reliefs*or
system failures*have soared 300 percent since 1998.

California Update: Two electric utilities, Southern California Edison (SCE)
and Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), who serve 90 percent of Californians,
want to renege on the deregulation deal from 1996 that prevents SCE and PG&E
from passing high electricity costs onto their customers until 2002. Last
week, SCE and PG&E lobbied unsuccessfully to pass legislation that would have
allowed them to add a surcharge to consumer bills from 2002 to 2006. Instead,
the legislature passed a relief bill last week for the states,s smallest
utility, San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). Through the law, which imposes
rate freezes in San Diego, SDG&E consumers and state taxpayers are expected
to repay the higher prices over time, including interest. PG&E has paid $2
billion from May through June for higher electricity prices without passing
those costs to its users. That amount is expected to rise to many more
billions until the rate ends, if prices stay at high levels. Wholesale prices
have soared to 25 cents a KWh, which calculates into five times the six cents
a KWh charged just a year ago.

Seeking Nominations for the EES Chairman,s Award: Recognizing an individual
who has gone above and beyond the parameters of his or her job and has
demonstrated exemplary performance, EES Chairman's Award nominations for the
third quarter are due September 30. Nomination forms can be found on the
vision site under EES people.

If you missed Mark Harada,s Brown Bag Check it out Online: Mark,s Brown Bag
discussed electric deregulation in Illinois and how Commonwealth Edison
services to customers fall short of those provided by EES: Click on link to
view video of Brown Bag:
http://eeshou-etv02.ees.enron.com/brownbags/bb_marcharada/index.html


Thanks, Lynn, for the update.  If they have no interest in putting a settlement offer out there, then I suggest that we schedule the plaintiff's deposition.  Let's turn up the heat.  Michelle

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Neely, Christine" <cneely@dsda.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Friday, November 09, 2001 3:38 PM
To:	Cash, Michelle
Cc:	Mattson, Lynn Paul; Goode, Diane
Subject:	Casey v. NEPCO

 <<cash letter3.doc>>  <<discovery requests.doc>>  <<med.rel.doc>>
Christine Neely,
Secretary to Lynn Paul Mattson and Kristen L. Brightmire
Doerner, Saunders, Daniel & Anderson, L.L.P.

Information in this message may be privileged or confidential.  Information is intended for the sole use of the addressee.  No consent is given for unauthorized viewing or distribution.

 - cash letter3.doc << File: cash letter3.doc >>
 - discovery requests.doc << File: discovery requests.doc >>
 - med.rel.doc << File: med.rel.doc >>


OK. On it.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Monday, December 31, 2001 12:54 PM
To:	Colwell, Wes; Hodges, Georgeanne; Milnthorp, Rob; Zufferli, John; Hedstrom, Peggy; Myers, Thomas; Bradford, William S.; Will, Lloyd; Beck, Sally; Hall, Bob M; Presto, Kevin M.; Forster, David; Reeves, Leslie; Gaskill, Chris; Superty, Robert; Lagrasta, Fred; Luce, Laura; Tycholiz, Barry; Redmond, Brian; Vickers, Frank; Gossett, Jeffrey C.; Arnold, John; Grigsby, Mike; Allen, Phillip K.; Neal, Scott; Martin, Thomas A.; Shively, Hunter S.; Wynne, Rita; Rub, Jenny; Webb, Jay; Haedicke, Mark E.; Buy, Rick; Calger, Christopher F.; Duran, W. David; Robinson, Mitch; Curry, Mike; Heizenrader, Tim; Belden, Tim; White, Stacey W.; Steffes, James D.; Aucoin, Berney C. ; Roberts, Mike A.; Oxley, David
Cc:	Lavorato, John
Subject:	NETCO

The New Year has arrived and we really to finalize a lot of the work with regards to moving into NETCO.  Obviously we still do not have a deal but the deadline is approaching and preparations need to be finalized.

The main areas to focus on over the next week are:-

(i) 	Re-start/Integration Plans (due on Jan 7)				To be forwarded to Louise
	These plans need to be detailed and show clear detailed timelines and detailed responsibilities for getting us up and running as soon as possible.
	The current restart date is January 21, 2001 but may be pushed forward to January 14, 2002.
(ii)	Budget (due Jan 3, 2002)						To be forwarded to Faith Killen
	First year budget to include all start up costs (some of which can be amortized)
(iii)	Seating Plans								Tammy Shepperd to co-ordinate
	We need to start the planning process for seating as we will be living on floors 5 & 6 of the Enron South building.
	I have asked Tammy Shepperd to commence the seating plan and we would look to start the moves as soon as possible but with a large number occuring around January 11,2002.
(iv)	Due Diligence
	We continue the process with two new companies this week (Wednesday and Thursday). Andy Zipper is taking the lead for the company arriving on Wednesday, please help him with his requirements.

I would ask that both John and I are notified of any changes to the Netco personnel list on a timely fashion and that the list is maintained on a continual basis.  Please forward all alterations to Jeanie Slone who has responsibility for the master list.

Communication - I believe that the New Year combined with a internal communication issues may be a good time to review what we want to say on Netco and what our policies are.  I am asking David Oxley to co-ordinate with all of you on this.  I know a lot of you believe that we need to only communicate once we have retention programme in place for the estate which may be a good idea but we we need to make sure that we lose as few people as possible.

If you are unavailable this week, please ensure you delegate this work out.

Happy New Year

Louise


what's up?  had a good time thursday, it was good seeing you again.  i have
a feeling i'll be seeing you a lot more often now that i owe you 15(i
think????) dinners.  anyway, sorry for getting a little freaky.  i
unfortunately saw that bridget jones movie and i can probably see why you
liked it.  anyway, hope the meeting with long beach was better than the
previous one, let me know when you'll be in town again and i'll start paying
off my dinners..........

E

-----Original Message-----
From: Kim.Ward@enron.com [mailto:Kim.Ward@enron.com]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 2:49 PM
To: estrickland@mieco.com
Subject: RE:

E.

Make sure the reservations are for the ocean blvd. patio side. ( not the
patio in the back)  I hope this is not too much trouble.  We want to sit
with the rock stars!!

Thanks,

Kim

Eric Strickland <estrickland@mieco.com> on 04/23/2001 10:30:15 AM

To:   "'Kim.Ward@enron.com'" <Kim.Ward@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:  RE:

we had a great time.  ed knows a lot about wine and took us to a lot of
boutique wineries where we were in the proprietor's houses hanging out,
drinking wine with them.  it was awesome.  my favorites were pride
mountain,
paloma, and guilliams.  they are all very small but make incredible wines.
the place we stayed was nice, nothing great.  we ate at La Trevigne, napa
valley grille, and bouchon.  they were all very good, la trevigne was by
far
the best though.  had a lot of fun.  i'll pick you up thursday, are you
checking any bags?

-----Original Message-----
From: Kim.Ward@enron.com [mailto:Kim.Ward@enron.com]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 8:20 AM
To: estrickland@mieco.com
Subject: RE:

That would be cool - I get in at 5:59 pm on United from San Jose.  So how
was napa?  I think that I need a napa trip sometime this year.  How was the
place you stayed and where did you eat.  Did you buy any good wines?  What
was your favorite?

Eric Strickland <estrickland@mieco.com> on 04/23/2001 09:29:54 AM

To:   "'Kim.Ward@enron.com'" <Kim.Ward@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:  RE:

if you want i can just pick you up at the airport and take you to dinner
from there, i have to go right by the airport on my way to santa monica.  i
think my teeth are still purple from all the wine i drank this
weekend.........

-----Original Message-----
From: Kim.Ward@enron.com [mailto:Kim.Ward@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 12:52 PM
To: estrickland@mieco.com
Subject: RE:

what is the closest airport to ivy on the shore?  and what is a good hotel?

Eric Strickland <estrickland@mieco.com> on 04/12/2001 10:44:47 AM

To:   "'Kim.Ward@enron.com'" <Kim.Ward@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:  RE:

i forgot i have a broker from bloomberg in town the same night so if it's
cool with you then dinner is on him.  i'm going to make reservations for 3
at ivy on the shore.....

-----Original Message-----
From: Kim.Ward@enron.com [mailto:Kim.Ward@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 8:07 AM
To: estrickland@mieco.com
Subject: RE:

What is the next closest airport.  No direct flights from San Jose.  I
think dinner at Ivy on the Shore is in order.  I will tell me boss Barry he
is out of luck and on his own!