================================================================
As requested, your News Alert for YHOO
follows from EquityAlert.com.
To edit/discontinue your alerts please refer to end of message.
PLEASE REVIEW THE NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER BELOW
================================================================

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-= Paid Advertisement -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Natural gas prices double the national average!

Micron Enviro Systems, Inc. (OTC BB: MSEV) is advantageously
positioned to benefit from the California energy crisis.

Click here now to find out why:
http://205.210.134.51/a1.asp?ID=1609aa

AOL USERS: copy & paste the link above into your browser.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Search Engine War? Microsoft's MSN Web Portal Climbs Into the No. 2 Spot
Behind Yahoo as Top U.S. Search SiteMSN Quietly Moves Into Top Search Site
Ranks Nationally and Worldwide, According to WebSideStory's StatMarket

SAN DIEGO, May 30, 2001 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- WebSideStory Inc.
(www.websidestory.com), the world's leading provider of outsourced e-business
intelligence services, today reported that Microsoft Corp.'s (Nasdaq:MSFT) MSN
Web portal has quietly risen to become one of the top referring search sites on
the Web.

Among U.S. surfers, MSN is now the second most popular referring search site
behind Yahoo (Nasdaq:YHOO) with 15.90 percent of all search referrals as of May
21, 2001, according to WebSideStory's StatMarket (www.statmarket.com), the
leading source for global Internet user trend data.

Worldwide, MSN ranks number three behind Yahoo and Google with 12.91 percent of
all search referrals, up from just 1.13 percent in January 1999. Since early
1999, MSN has passed the likes of Excite, Alta Vista, InfoSeek, WebCrawler,
HotBot, GoTo, Lycos and Snap. AOL currently ranks fourth both nationally and
worldwide, StatMarket reported.

"This could be shaping up as another Microsoft market share war," said Geoff
Johnston, vice president of product marketing for StatMarket. "Although Yahoo is
still the dominant search referrer, MSN has risen dramatically."

StatMarket is an optimization service for Web site designers and software
developers who need accurate data to build the most effective sites and products
possible. StatMarket publishes data gathered from more than 50 million Internet
users a day to more than 150,000 sites actively using WebSideStory's HitBox(R)
Enterprise (www.hitboxenterprise.com) and other HitBox real-time e-business
intelligence services.

StatMarket is the first and only user trend analysis service that segments
information from visitors in 245 countries to sites in 120 industry categories.
With StatMarket, Internet professionals can save thousands of dollars in
man-hour costs by ignoring obsolete or rarely used browsers, operating systems
and plug-ins. They can also make sure they are supporting appropriate variations
in browser technology to optimize their sites or software for enough of their
target market.

For information about a StatMarket subscription, visit www.statmarket.com or
call 877/421-4234.

As of May 21, 2001:

Search Site                Search Referral Percentage (U.S.)

Yahoo                      38.75 Percent
MSN                        15.90 Percent
Google                     11.29 Percent
AOL                         7.77 Percent

Search Site                Search Referral Percentage (Global)

Yahoo                      41.47 Percent
Google                     13.87 Percent
MSN                        12.91 Percent
AOL                         5.40 Percent

Note: StatMarket's search referrals are the percentage of Internet surfers that
a search site refers or directs to other sites on the Web.

    About WebSideStory

Headquartered in San Diego, WebSideStory is the world's leading provider of
outsourced e-business intelligence services. WebSideStory's solutions help
companies profit from their Web presence. Founded in 1996, the company analyzes
billions of page views for its clients each month, delivering actionable Web
intelligence across the entire customer life cycle. For more information,
contact WebSideStory Inc. Voice: 858/546-0040. Fax: 858/546-0480. Address: 10182
Telesis Court, 6th Floor, San Diego, CA 92121. E-mail: press@websidestory.com.
Web: www.websidestory.com.

Note: WebSideStory and HitBox are registered service marks of WebSideStory Inc.
Other trademarks used belong to their respective owners.

CONTACT:          WebSideStory Inc., San Diego
                  Erik Bratt, 858/546-0040, ext. 365
                  erik@websidestory.com

URL:              http://www.businesswire.com
Today's News On The Net - Business Wire's full file on the Internet
with Hyperlinks to your home page.

Copyright (C) 2001 Business Wire.  All rights reserved.

-0-

KEYWORD:          CALIFORNIA
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: COMPUTERS/ELECTRONICS
                  INTERNET

****************** TO EDIT YOUR EQUITY ALERTS ********************
To unsubscribe or edit your alerts, visit
http://www.equityalert.com/alerts.asp?uid=alewis34&xid=40352
******************************************************************

***IMPORTANT NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER REGARDING THIS COURTESY EMAIL**

At your request, as a subscriber to our service, this email alert
is being sent to you as a courtesy and is for information
purposes only.  We are a financial news re-distributor.  We are
not an investment advisory and do not purport to tell or suggest
which companies you should monitor or which securities you should
purchase or sell.

In addition to the information regarding the company you are
monitoring (the "Monitored Company"), this email contains an
advertisement describing a product, service or company for which
we received a fee, at our normal advertising rates of $55 per
1,000 e-mails (subject to volume and other discounts), from the
advertising company. In the case of Micron Enviro Systems, Inc.
we received a fee of three hundred and sixty thousand free
trading shares of Micron Enviro Systems, Inc. from Clarion
Investments, Inc. We reserve the right to sell all or part of
these shares at anytime, either before, during or after the
advertisement period.

In addition, not withstanding our policy of prohibiting employees
from buying or selling securities of an advertising company for a
period of 20 days following dissemination of the advertisement, we
may not be able to effectively monitor our employees to ensure
compliance with the same. Consequently, there may be sales and/or
purchases of such securities by our employees prior to, during and
immediately following the dissemination of the advertisement.

Please note that (1) this email may not contain the full text of
the press release issued by, or the research or other reports
regarding, the Monitored Company; and (2) the text of the
advertisement, the press release and/or reports were obtained
from third party sources and were not written, generated or
edited by us; accordingly, we make no representations or give
any assurance as to the accuracy or completeness, nor have we
conducted any independent investigations of, the disclosures
regarding the subject matter of such releases and reports.

Please note that links to the advertising company and/or
Monitored Company are provided for your convenience.  We
assume no obligation for the content of such sites.

All information contained herein should be independently
verified by you with the advertising company or with Monitored
Company or any other sources you prefer.

[THIS IS ONLY A SUMMARY OF, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO, THE "EQUITYALERT SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT AND
DISCLAIMER." PLEASE VISIT

http://www.equityalert.com/home/disclaim.asp

FOR ACCESS TO OUR COMPLETE DISCLAIMER]
****************************************************************


In a message dated 2/25/02 14:38:12 Eastern Standard Time,
Susan.Bailey@ENRON.com writes:

>
>  But please let me know how Dorothy's mother is doing, as I had received 2
> emails this morning. Her condition did not sound so good.
>
I WILL KEEP YOU INFORMED.

LEONARD


Tanya:  Please see page 7 of the attachment (Par. 5, part C) regarding
setoff.  ENA was about to have this agreement executed just as I received
your email.  I'll call you after 5 pm.  We need to discuss today.  Thanks.

Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
sara.shackleton@enron.com
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 05/31/2001 04:07 PM -----

	Nancy.K.Callahan@chase.com
	05/31/2001 01:45 PM

		 To: Sara.shackleton@enron.com
		 cc: Gennaro.Contella@chase.com
		 Subject: Enron Global Custody and Clearance Agreement

As requested, attached is the final Agreement which I believe reflects the
revisions we discussed this morning.  If this is acceptable, please have
the Agreement executed on behalf of Enron and return the necessary
counterparts to me for signature by Chase.  I will then return fully
executed copies to you.
(See attached file: Enron.doc)
 - Enron.doc


Attached please find the final versions of the above-referenced
documents.  You will note that Exhibit H-2 is not included in the
electronic copies.  It is included, however, in the execution copies
being sent to you via Federal Express.

Should you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to
contact me.

Peter Thompson

<<00).DOC>>  <<00).DOC>>
 - 00).DOC
 - 00).DOC


Shelly:
I received your e-mail regarding this years Super Saturday's.  I am currently
an Associate, but as an Analyst I participated in a couple of Super
Saturday's, but haven't done any in a little while, so I wanted to offer up
my services.  Please let me know if there is anything I can do, because I'll
be more than happy to help out again.  Thanks!
Ben


you were right about my flight time.  i will see you at the passenger pickup.


Mont, thanks for the status report.  I will stand by.  JIm

"Hoyt, Mont" <hoytm@HughesLuce.com> on 12/12/2000 11:37:46 AM
To: "James V. Derrick (E-mail)" <james.derrick@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Your Calls on My Behalf

Jim,

This is a note to let you know what happened as per your calls on my behalf.

The short answer is not much.

I had lunch with John Keffer and Randy Coles of King & Spalding.  We had a
cordial conversation, but I concluded and stated that the firm was well
covered regarding the skills that I might offer.

John Klauberg and I had a most enjoyable breakfast.  He seemed interested.
However, I haven't heard any thing.

Pat Oxford didn't return my call. I spoke with Lynn Coleman, but didn't hear
any thing back.

Vicky Price and I have exchanged calls, but haven't had a chance to speak.

On another fronts, I was contacted by Strasburger regarding their Mexico and
other Latin work.  They claim to have done a little work for Enron.  Also, I
am still in discussions with Shook, Hardy & Bacon, the Kansas City firm with
about 40 lawyers here in Houston.

Before anything get finalized, I would like to run it by you just to get an
independent reaction.

Thanks for your support and help.

Mont


Thanks I'll take care of it.


Thanks Kay.  I'll forward them on the Westinghouse by e-mail first.

Mitch

Kay Mann
11/13/2000 10:47 AM
To: Mitch Robinson/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Westinghouse letters

Hi Mitch,

My suggested changes are highlighted.

Please let me know what else I can do.

Kay


Attached, please find this article "California Power Costs Hijack New
Campus Funds Science institutes, UC Merced out of proposed budget" from
today's San Francisco Chronicle.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/03/09/M
N221037.DTL


Bill is a great guy but I have no interest in a presentation.


I sent this along to Molly, because, while I hate to admit it, I think she
might be better suited to such a daunting task.

K

Anna Symes <annasymes@yahoo.com> on 04/11/2001 09:54:14 AM
To: "Kate.Symes@enron.com" <Kate.Symes@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: I thought you might be interested...

  To: Kate.Symes@enron.com
From: Anna Symes

I thought you might be interested in this job.  It's just one of the
more than 250,000 great jobs on Headhunter.net:

  http://www.headhunter.net/share/det.asp?d=J26K66D0YJBB4DWPWJ

Comments:


---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Booth/NA/Enron on 03/23/2001 01:17
PM ---------------------------
From: Chip Schneider/ENRON@enronXgate on 03/23/2001 11:47 AM
To: Chris Booth/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Final Blue Dog DASH

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Booth, Chris
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 8:55 AM
To: Schneider, Chip
Subject: 7EA Dash

Chip,

Here is the latest copy of the DASH.

Chris

 << File: 7EA Dash rev 4.doc >>


z/f 10/12


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Riordan, Sean
Sent:	Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:48 PM
To:	Tholt, Jane M.
Subject:	FW: Oct. 2001 Price Discrepancies - MGI

I repriced the deals  and changed them in sitara

Ms Tholt,

There are two price discrepancies with the October 2001, EPNG sales to MGI Supply Ltd. First, deal number 1077216 has a rate of $1.705 on day 10/04. MGI claims the rate should be $1.80. Secondly, deal number 1093983 has a rate of $1.785 for day 10/10. MGI claims the rate should be $ 1.775. Sitara shows Jane Tholt as the trader for deal # 1077216. Can you please research and advise?

Thanks
[Riordan, Sean]


Carol St. Clair
EB 3892
713-853-3989 (Phone)
713-646-3393 (Fax)
----- Forwarded by Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT on 05/16/2000 09:50 AM -----

	Taffy Milligan
	05/16/2000 09:19 AM

		 To: Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan Flynn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Suzanne Adams/HOU/ECT@ECT, Erica Braden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kaye
Ellis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Taffy Milligan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Becky Tlucek/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Form Review Meeting

Form review meeting will be held in EB38c2 on Wed., 5/17, a 9-10:30 a.m.


Hi, I'm back from vacation, give me a call (Clint is out today) so that I can
catch up.
Have you heard anything from Lehman Bros. about this?

Thanks

Jeff Nogid
Enron Global Finance
713-853-4782


Please see the attached revised list.  Sorry for any inconvenience.

Below is an updated Restricted List for your review.  The following
prohibitions apply to securities on the Restricted List:

Neither ECT/ECM employees nor family members or others living in their
household or financially dependent on the ECT/ECM employee may purchase or
sell securities of any entity (or derivatives thereof) listed on the
Restricted List for your or their personal or related accounts or recommend
the purchase or sale of such securities to any person, except with the prior
approval of the Compliance Department in consultation with the ECT Legal
Department.

In addition to the trading restrictions above, should you at any time possess
non-public material information about any public company, you, your family
members and anybody that is financially dependent on you, are restricted from
trading in that issue, and you may not disclose the non-public material
information to anyone that does not have a business need to know.

Company Name Stock Symbol

Adrian Resources
Alliance Resources PLC
Beau Canada Exploration Ltd BAU CN
Belco Oil & Gas Corporation BOG
Bonus Resource Services Corp BOU
Brigham Exploration BEXP
CanFibre Group Ltd. CFGL
Carrizo Oil & Gas Inc. CRZO
CGAS, Inc. CGAS
Costilla Energy COSE
Crown Energy CROE
Cypress Energy CYZ
Esenjay Exploration ESNJ
Forest Oil Corporation FST
Hanover Compressor Co. HC
Highridge Exploration HRE
ICE Drilling Enterprises Inc. IDF
Industrial Holdings, Inc. IHII
Inland Resources, Inc. INLN
Kafus Environmental Industries, Inc. KS
Nakornthai Strip Mill Public Co Ltd NSM SET
Paladin Resources PLC PLR LD
Paradigm Geophysical PGEOF
Place Resources, Inc. PLG CN
Quanta Services Inc. PWR
Queen Sand Resources, Inc. QSRI
Quicksilver Resources Inc. KWK
Repap Enterprises, Inc. RPP & RPAPF
Repap New Brunswick, Inc.
Rhythms Netconnection Inc. RTHM
Saxon Petroleum, Inc. SXN CN
Sheridan Energy, Inc. SHDN
Steel Dynamics STLD
Startech SEH CN
Syntroleum Corp. SYNM
Tejon Ranch Corp. TRC
Titan Exploration TEXP
TransCoastal Marine Services, Inc. TCMS
Zargon Oil & Gas ZAR CN

The Restricted List is solely for the internal use of ECT/ECM.  No one may
engage in discussions regarding whether a security is or is not on the
Restricted List with persons outside ECT/ECM without specific clearance from
the Compliance Department in consultation with the ECT Legal Department.

In addition to the above, you are reminded that pursuant to Enron Corp.'s
Risk Management Policy ("Policy"), no ECT/ECM employee may engage in the
trading of any "Position"  ("Position" means any  commodity, financial
instrument, security, equity, financial asset or liability that are
authorized for trading in the Policy for the benefit of any party other than
ECT/ECM, whether for his/her own account or the account of any third party,
where such Position relates to (i) any commodity,  financial instrument,
security, equity, financial asset or liability which falls within such
employee's responsibility at ECT/ECM or (ii) any energy commodity.

The prohibitions listed above do not replace or modify the policies set forth
in ECT's Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and
Securities Trading, Enron Corp.'s Risk Management Policy, or Enron Corp.'s
Conduct of Business Affairs.  Should you have any questions regarding the
above, please contact me at ext. 31939.


Are you coming? You are the last one to RSVP.  I need to know so I can make the reservation.

-Eric


Shelley,
       I haven't seen any invitation list for Friday's Plan Review with Stan yet, but we are up at 10:00 and will go until 1:00.  I'd like you to be in through the whole thing if possible.  After that, do you think that you and I should walk through the whole plan with the key people in your group (and maybe Steve's)?  Give me a call if you haven't received the Plan handouts by tomorrow.  Thanks.

Dan


The new pooling point will be handled by Robert Lloyd, with Jackie Young as
his backup.
Please call either of them with any updates.   Thanks,   Pat


I need the WSS meter number.  I would like to get that from VNG.  I'm sure we
don't have that set up in our system.


At least one change was made on the mark-up that wasn't flagged in the
Summary.  In C.1.e; maintain records of the 'Core Procurement's' storage
activity, was changed to maintaining records for 'all storage accounts'.  Is
this because PG&E would consider Core Procurement to be just another storage
account?  If so, the original intent is still accomplished.  However,
although the Parties obviously thought there might at some point be value in
examining the historical info on the core's use of storage, I don't think
any of us would feel we ever would have any business examining data on a
third party's use of their negotiated storage account.

Paul Amirault
VP Bus. Dvlpt., Wild Goose Storage Inc., and
Manager, Marketing  PaulAmirault@aec.ca
AEC Storage & Hub Services (403) 266-8298

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas, Dan (CGT Mgr) [mailto:DFT1@pge.com]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 1:04 PM

DEAR OII AND OFO SETTLEMENT PARTIES:

Thank you to the parties who worked very hard to develop the September 15,
1999 OFO Settlement Proposal in response to PG&E's August 18 proposal.  We
have carefully reviewed your settlement offer and sought clarification where
needed.  As a result, PG&E is able to accept most of the changes and
provisions contained in that proposal, and is offering back a few
modifications which we think should allow us to reach closure on a
multi-party OFO Settlement Agreement.  We encourage all parties to sign this
settlement.

Our September 24, 1999 response is attached in two forms.  One is a summary
of the items we agree with and those where we have changes, including the
reason for our changes.  The second is a revision-marking of the September
15 proposal to show all the specific changes, including some minor edits.
We have not included the tariff revisions to support this package, but will
provide them once we have a final agreement.  At this point, the changes to
the prior tariff drafts are straight forward.

Also attached is a draft Joint Motion for your review and approval.  Our
suggested approach is to have Settlement Parties sign the motion as the
means of signifying their approval of the Settlement and the need for
expeditious Commission action.

We have scheduled a Settlement Conference next week on Tuesday, September
28, starting at 10:00 a.m. in Room 308, 77 Beale Street, San Francisco.
HOWEVER, the attendance of a couple key parties is problematic, and we may
need to move this settlement meeting to accommodate their schedules so we
can ensure a productive day.  We will advise you no later than Monday
morning of the meeting status and possible next steps.

We appreciate your continued active participation in this settlement process
and look forward to your feedback on our modifications.

Sincerely,

Dan Thomas
PG&E California Gas Transmission
Manager, Products and Sales

cc: Kirk Johnson
 Ben Campbell
 Patrick Golden
 Randy Litteneker
 Steve McCarty
 Chris McManus
 Roland Risser
 Dave Rubin
  Al Torres
 Ron Stoner
 Eric Eisenman
 Geoffrey Bellenger

Attachments

 <<Sept 24 Summary of PG&E OFO Settlement Response.doc>>  <<Sept 24 PG&E OFO
Settlement Response.doc>>  <<Sept 24 Draft Motion for OFO Settlement.doc>>


Jeff,

Mark Elliot in Legal here in London is concerned that there may be tax or
legal implications depending on how involved in the process London gets.  It
would be helpful to Mark if you could let him know what the problems you are
experiencing with your clearing function are and what exactly London will be
doing, this way Mark and tax can investigate.

Monday is a bank holiday in London so Mark and myself will be out of the
office.

Regards,
Maria.

---------------------- Forwarded by Maria Nartey/LON/ECT on 30/04/99 17:46
---------------------------

Mark Elliott
30/04/99 15:24
To: Maria Nartey/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Sage/LON/ECT@ECT, Barry Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Maria,

Not necessarily - it is just that the OMLX got hold of the idea (I am not
sure wherefrom) that Enron wanted Merrills - I have previously asked Mark
Taylor, the VP in Legal in Houston,  whether or not Merrills would meet with
the commercial peoples' approval and I know that Mark has been trying to find
this out, but I have not received word on this as yet.

May be you can endeavour to find this out??  As I say, I have already
forwarded to Mark Taylor in Houston the signature versions of the Clearing
Agreements in the name of Merrills - so if we want to change, no problem, it
will just take a few days for us to get new docs raised from the OMLX and
then to pass them on to Houston.

Kind regards

Mark

Maria Nartey
04/30/99 02:22 PM
To: Mark Elliott/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Sage/LON/ECT@ECT, Barry Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Mark,

Does this mean that you would prefer it to be Merrill Lynch?  If so I can
pass this on to Jeff Harbert and see if he and Bob Crane are OK with this.

 I'm not sure what the clearing problems they are having in Houston are but
it might mean that you will have more legal points to finalise.  I tried to
contact Jeff to get some more information for you but he is out of the office
until Monday.

I can try him again on Tuesday but if you have any legal question or queries
you might want to speak to him yourself, his no is 001 713 8536979.   Either
way please keep me updated.

Regards,
Maria.

Mark Elliott
30/04/99 12:19
To: Maria Nartey/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Richard Sage/LON/ECT@ECT, Barry Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark - ECT Legal
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Maria,

The Clearing docs we got in from the Exchange showed Merrill Lynch in London
as Houston's clearer.  This is not to say this is fixed, but for some reason
the OMLX were under the impression that it would be Merrills.  By the way, we
can have as many clearers as we like (provided, of course, that they are
General Clearing Members at the OMLX).

If you could let me now quite swiftly on this issue I would be very grateful
as we finalised the legal points on Clearing docs a couple of weeks ago and I
have already couriered the final  versions for signature to Houston.

Kind regards

Mark

Maria Nartey
04/30/99 09:00 AM
To: Richard Sage/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Elliott/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Maria Nartey/LON/ECT on 30/04/99 09:03
---------------------------

Maria Nartey
29/04/99 19:22
To: Jeff Harbert/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Barry Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Jeff,

We only use two London clearing houses, Bank Paribas and Carr.  The back
office at Carr was not very good when I used to deal with them but I've been
told that they are much better now.  Paribas was definitely the better of the
two from a back office point of view.

Let me know if you need anything else.
Regards,
Maria.

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  Jeff Harbert                           29/04/99 18:45

To: Barry Pearce/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Maria Nartey/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Hi Barry,

Regarding our upcoming Pulpex "market maker" role, we're running into a few
problems with the clearing function.  I mentioned to Bob that it may make
more sense to use one of the existing London office clearing houses.  Under
an arrangement like that I would see the following:

a.  London uses an existing "clearing house" for the Pulpex margining
activity.  A new account would be required to separate paper from your other
business.
b.  London admin. maintains the account from a support standpoint on behalf
of ECT Houston Pulp & Paper including 1) daily margining requirements, 2)
cash account reconcilation, and 3) other accounting requirements.
c.  Houston office would be responsible for the electronic trading, reporting
positions, reconcile trading activity, report Profit/(Loss), etc.

ECT Pulp & Paper would reimburse London office for expenses incurred in
connection with support requirements.

Maria,  Would you provide me with a list of the "clearing houses" you use
today.  I'll give this to Bob Crane to see if he has a preference or other
comments.

Call or write if you have a chance early next week so we can figure this
out.  I'll be out of the office tomorrow (Friday).

Thanks for your help.

Jeff

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. - Europe

	From:  Barry Pearce                           02/24/99 11:22 AM

To: Bob Crane/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Harbert/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Documentation from OM

Thanks

London Team in Support of your activities

Barry Pearce - Administration & Accounting
Maria Nartey - Settlements/Margining
Mark Elliott - Legal
Brigitta Millard - Documentation


ha ha .  well i guess i will talk to you later.   i am leaving now.      : - (

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Griffith, John
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 5:27 PM
To:	Villarreal, Alexandra
Subject:	RE:

damn I knew, those freakin floor techs they know nothing (j/k, I like Pablo, I used to work with him at PG&E)

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Villarreal, Alexandra
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 5:26 PM
To:	Griffith, John
Subject:	RE:

no it does not work

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Griffith, John
Sent:	Thursday, October 18, 2001 5:25 PM
To:	Villarreal, Alexandra
Subject:

This is a test, I got a new computer and I am testing it, does it work?


---------------------- Forwarded by Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT on 11/22/2000 11:27
AM ---------------------------

Chris Germany
11/19/2000 12:39 PM
To: Dan Junek/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy Townsend/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott
Goodell/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steve Gillespie/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott
Hendrickson/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: A&M Demands Recount

-

> Subject: OU/A&M Game
> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:34:46 -0800
>
> College Station, TX (AP) - R.C. Slocum and the Texas A&M Aggies are
> demanding a recount of the game in which Oklahoma
> won 35 to 31. "The end zones were confusing," says Slocum. "I'm sure that
> some of the touchdowns that went in Oklahoma's end zone were meant to go
> into ours. We were scoring in those end zones also.  Oklahoma would never
> have scored thirty-five points. There's no way we lost this one. A&M
> demands
> a recount."
>
> Oklahoma officials are calling this "outrageous".  "They agreed to the
> size,
> shape and locations of the end zones prior to kick-off," replies OU coach
> Bob Stoops.  "If they had a problem with them, they should have said so
> before we started. You don't get to keep playing until you're happy with
> the
> outcome. Someone had to lose. We've scored over thirty-five points many
> times."
>
> A&M has sent lawyers, farmers, and those guys in the funny boots as well
> as
> Reville down to Kyle Field, where the scoreboard will be tested.
> "We
> are confident that when the points are re-totaled, we will be the winner
> of
> the game," says Slocum.
>
> OU also points out that in many games prior to this one, the same end
> zones
> were used. "They didn't have a problem with the end
> zones until they lost," says Stoops.
>
> Outside of Kyle Field, A&M student protesters have gathered bearing signs
> such as, "A&M wants a fair game!
> WHOOOOOOP!"  Students' thoughts echoed their signs. "All we want is a
fair
> total of the points before we declare a winner," says student Karen Hays,
> an
> Aggie from Marfa. "We need to proceed cautiously and not rush to judgment
> before we declare a winner."
>
> ABC, around 2:00pm central time, had mistakenly declared A&M the winner,
> despite the slim 3 point lead the Aggies held at
> that point. At about 2:30 pm, with the game still to close to call, ABC
> had
> to back off its prediction.
>
> College Football analyst Brent Musburger made the call. "We felt that
with
> a
> number of points still not added in by Jamaar Tombs
> and the Aggies, we were certain A&M would carry this game. We may have
> been
> premature in our prediction."


Stephen  is trying to set up a conference call at 200 re Delta.  Please
advise if this doesn't work for you.

Thanks,

Kay


UBS, Enron Plan Quick Moves on Deal
Swiss Bank, Enron To Seek Approval of Deal From FTC, Justice Department Within Five Business Days
By ALAN CLENDENNING
AP Business Writer
NEW YORK (AP) -- Enron Corp. (NYSE:ENE <http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=ene&d=t> - news <http://biz.yahoo.com/n/e/ene.html>) will give up its crown jewel energy trading business to a Swiss investment bank in return for a third of the division's profits, and experts expect the bank will try to remake the division with a new name and management.

Documents filed in bankruptcy court Tuesday show that UBS Warburg, a division of Switzerland's largest bank, won't pay anything upfront to acquire the trading operation or assume any Enron debt.
Traders and other employees deemed crucial to the division's success will be kept on, but the documents didn't specify whether top Enron managers are among the group of workers that will be asked to stay.
Some of those employees will be awarded bonuses from an $11 million fund as an incentive to stay with the company, and Enron will supply $6 million of the cash, according to the documents filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.
A spokesman for Enron didn't immediately return a telephone message seeking comment about Enron's future or the future of the trading operation. UBS Warburg spokesman David Walker said his firm would not comment until after Judge Arthur J. Gonzalez decides whether to approve the deal. A hearing is scheduled for Friday.
Key among the changes UBS Warburg will probably make are a name change for the trading operation, a decision to show top managers the door, and the effort to retain the traders, said Mark Baxter, director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University.
``I think those people will stay and they'll have a new boss,'' he said. ``As for top management, almost everybody is a liability now.''
Enron officials have said that about 800 of the division's workers will be asked to stay on at offices in Houston, and court documents indicated that UBS Warburg also wants to take over the division's offices in Portland, Ore., Toronto and Calgary, Alberta.
Enron itself will become a much smaller company because it received 90 percent of its revenue from the trading operation, and creditors are likely to demand the sale of other assets.
But the nature of the profit-sharing agreement between Enron and UBS Warburg gives Enron an opportunity to attempt to rebuild, said Charlie Sanchez, energy markets manager for Gelber & Associates in Houston.
Under terms of the deal, Enron and its creditors will initially get 33 percent of the new business' pretax profits and UBS Warburg the remainder, the documents said.
After three years, UBS Warburg can begin to buy out some of those profit-sharing rights and eventually buy the rights to all of the profits. And after five years, UBS can sell the business.
``It all seems very much like an attempt at least to keep a string of hope alive that UBS won't in fact won't be interested in purchasing them and they will accumulate enough proceeds to revive themselves, that they can become a rebranded phoenix,'' Sanchez said.
And in a statement, a top Enron official made it clear that the company hopes to eventually emerge from bankruptcy protection as a viable business concern.
``This is an extremely positive deal for Enron and its creditors that confirms the substantial value of Enron's trading operation,'' said Enron chief financial officer Jeff McMahon. ``We believe this is a first step among many towards an overall plan of reorganization and planned emergence from bankruptcy.''
UBS Warburg and Enron will file for approval of the deal with the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department within five business days.
Hours after the documents explaining terms of the deal were filed in court, the New York Stock Exchange delisted Enron stock, which sold for $83 a year ago but have changed hands at no higher than $1 since December. In a statement, the exchange said Enron's ``securities are no longer suitable for trading on the NYSE.''
The move was ``due to the expected protracted nature of the company's bankruptcy process and the uncertainty at this time as to the timing and outcome of this process as well as the ultimate effect on the company's common shareholders,'' the NYSE said.
Enron collapsed late last year amid revelations of complex partnerships used to keep billions of dollars in debt off its books and mask financial problems so it could continue to get cash and credit to run the trading business.
A creditors' committee supports the deal with UBS Warburg, but other Enron creditors have questioned it, saying they want more information about how the agreement was reached and how the proceeds will be allocated.
Some two dozen Enron creditors had already filed objections to the sale before the selection was announced. Dissatisfied creditors will have 10 days to appeal Gonzalez's ruling.
The deal does not include existing contracts Enron has to supply power, valued at between $6 billion and $7 billion.
Before its collapse late last year, Enron was the world's largest energy merchant and the nation's seventh largest company by revenue. Enron differed from competitors in its penchant for complex bets on everything under the sun -- advertising space, broadband, paper, the weather and more than 1,000 other products.
U.S.-traded shares of UBS AG fell 31 cents to close at $48.90 Tuesday on the NYSE.


FYI in respect of our futures accounts.

Cordially,
Mary Cook
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith, 38th Floor, Legal
Houston, Texas   77002-7361
(713) 345-7732 (phone)
(713) 646-3490 (fax)
mary.cook@enron.com
----- Forwarded by Mary Cook/HOU/ECT on 06/04/2001 11:32 AM -----

	Tana Jones
	06/01/2001 02:29 PM

		 To: Mary Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Whiting/Enron@EnronXGate, Sarah
Wesner/Enron@EnronXGate
		 cc:
		 Subject: (01-186) Implementation of Amendments on Use of Letters of Credit...

----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 06/01/2001 02:29 PM -----

	exchangeinfo@nymex.com
	06/01/2001 03:07 PM

		 To: tana.jones@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: (01-186) Implementation of Amendments on Use of Letters of Credit...

Notice # 01-186
June 1, 2001

TO:
All NYMEX Division and COMEX Division Clearing Members

FROM:
Neal L. Wolkoff, Executive Vice President

RE:
Implementation of Amendments on Use of Letters of Credit, Certain Securities
and Deliverable Warehouse Receipts as Margin  for NYMEX and COMEX Transactions

DATE:
June 1, 2001
===========================================================

1. Implementation of Rule Amendments. As previously announced in Notice to
Members #01-147 (May 4, 2001), this Notice is to remind NYMEX and COMEX
Clearing Members of rule amendments that become effective today, June 1,
2001, that expand the types of non-cash assets that customers may deposit
with their Clearing Members for margin purposes.

2. Exchange Form for Pass-Through Letters of Credit. Clearing Members are
further advised that a form has been prepared by the Exchange that will serve
as the authorized  uniform form for irrevocable letters of credit for use on
a pass-through basis at the Exchange.  This form may be obtained from the
Exchange,s Clearing Department.

3. Exchange Form for Pass-Through Letters of Credit: Specification of Joint
Beneficiary. The Pass-Through Letter of Credit differs from the Standard
Letter of Credit in that the Pass-Through Letter of Credit provides for Joint
Beneficiaries.  In this regard, a Pass-Through Letter of Credit to be used as
margin on the NYMEX Division should specify NYMEX as one of the Joint
Beneficiaries.  By comparison, a Pass-Through Letter of Credit to be used as
margin on the COMEX Division should specify the COMEX Clearing Association as
one of the Joint Beneficiaries.

4. Restriction on Issuers of Letters of Credit. Please note that, under
applicable NYMEX and COMEX rules, a Clearing Member that is a bank subsidiary
or is an affiliate of a bank may not deposit with the applicable Clearing
House a letter of credit issued or confirmed by such bank, bank parent or
affiliate bank.

As to the actual rule amendments, which are attached below, these rule
changes permit the use of letters of credit, certain securities and
deliverable warehouse receipts by customers to meet their margin
requirements. The rule changes provide for consistent treatment in the use of
such assets for both NYMEX and COMEX Divisions.

Letters of Credit.  As a result of the rule changes, letters of credit (LCs)
now will be allowed for customer margin on both divisions.

Use of Letters of Credit on Pass-Through Basis.  In addition, the rule
changes allow letters of credit to be used on a "pass-through" basis on both
divisions.  In other words, Clearing Members on both divisions will be able
to pledge to the applicable clearinghouse certain LCs posted by customers. It
should be noted that while securities and deliverable warehouse receipts, as
detailed below, may be used by customers for margin purposes, such assets may
not be used on a pass-through basis by a Clearing Member to meet its margin
obligations with the clearinghouse.

Securities. Customers also will be able to deposit with their Clearing
Members certain types of securities as margin. The types of acceptable
securities are the kinds of securities that have been accepted for some time
on the COMEX Division.  Specifically, the rule changes will permit customers
to deposit the following types of securities as margin with Clearing Members
on either division:

securities listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. or the
American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in the over-the-counter
market approved for margin by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
Board except that such securities must be free from liens and encumbrances;
can represent no more than 5% of the issued and outstanding shares of any one
issuer; and will be valued for purposes of margin at 75% of their market
value.

Deliverable Warehouse Receipts. On both divisions, deliverable warehouse
receipts for any of the commodities traded on the Exchange will be accepted
as customer margin provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at no
more than 75% of the value of the commodity.

If you have any questions concerning this change, please contact Bernard
Purta, Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Operations, at (212)
299- 2380; Arthur McCoy, Vice President, Financial Surveillance Section,
NYMEX Compliance Department, at (212) 299-2928; or Charles Bebel, Vice
President, Clearing Department, at (212) 299-2130.

AMENDMENTS TO NYMEX RULE 4.01 ("CUSTOMER'S MARGINS"), NYMEX RULE 9.05
("MARGINS") AND TO COMEX CLEARING ASSOCIATION RULE 48 ("DEPOSIT OF SECURITIES
AND LETTERS OF CREDIT AS ORIGINAL MARGIN")

(Asterisks indicate additions; brackets indicate deletions.)

Rule 4.01. CUSTOMER'S MARGINS

(A) Initial margin at least equal to the level set for customers shall be
required of all customers. In no case shall a customer's initial margin be
less than a specified amount per contract, or a specified percentage of the
market value at which any commodity is bought or sold, such customer's margin
to be determined and announced by the Board of Directors or its designee.

 (B) Once the required initial margin has been deposited for each individual
transaction, such trade and such margin shall, for the purposes of this rule,
lose their individual identity and be commingled with all other trades and
margins in the same commodity for the same customer account.

 (C) When the margin (Net Liquidating Value plus Non-Cash Deposits) in a
customer's account declines below the maintenance margin requirement
applicable to the open positions carried in such account, the Member Firm
carrying said account is required to collect (call) from the customer such
funds, which when deposited, will restore it to the then prevailing initial
margin requirement.

 (D) A Member Firm shall not accept orders for new trades on behalf of an
undermargined customer account other than those which reduce its initial
margin requirement unless such Member Firm has been given assurances by said
customer that funds sufficient to restore the account to its then prevailing
initial margin requirement are forthcoming and will be received in a
reasonable amount of time not to exceed one business day for Floor Members
and three business days for all other customers.

(E)(1) A Member Firm may accept deposits from its customers in one or more of
the following forms as margin to cover open NYMEX Division positions:

 (a) United States Currency; or any currency freely convertible to United
States currency; provided that if foreign currency is deposited, its value
shall be calculated so that at the current rate of exchange the U.S. dollar
equivalent of the foreign currency satisfies the customer's margin obligation.

 (b) securities issued by the Department of the Treasury of the United States
maturing within ten (10) years of the date of the deposit and guaranteed as
to principal and interest by the United States Government. Such securities
shall be valued at ninety five percent (95%) of par value.

*(c) securities which are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange,
Inc. or the American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in the
over-the-counter market approved for margin by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve Board provided that such securities; (i) are free from liens
and encumbrances; (ii) represent no more than 5% of the issued and
outstanding shares of any one issuer; and (iii) are valued at 75% of the
market value thereof;

(d) a letter of credit in favor of a clearing member carrying an account, or
in the case of any letter or credit to be used on a pass-through basis with
the Clearing House a letter of credit in favor of the Exchange.  All letters
of credit shall be issued in such form as may be prescribed by the Exchange
and by a depository which has been approved by the Exchange for issuance and
confirmation of letters of credit drawn in favor of the Clearing Members or
in favor of the Exchange, as applicable.

(e) deliverable warehouse receipts for commodities traded on the Exchange
provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at no more than 75% of
the value of the commodity.*

[(c)] *(f)* The net liquidating value in a customer's account over the
initial margin requirements for the positions carried for such account.

(2) A Member Firm may accept deposits from its customers in one or more of
the following forms as margin to cover open COMEX Division positions:

(a) United States currency, checks payable in United States currency, or
currency freely convertible to United States currency; provided that if
foreign currency is deposited, its value shall be calculated so that at the
current rate of exchange the U.S. dollar equivalent of the foreign currency
satisfies the customer's margin obligations;

(b) the net liquidating value in a customer's account over the initial margin
requirements for the positions carried for such account;

(c) securities issued or guaranteed by the United States, provided that such
securities shall be valued at the lower of the par or market value thereof;

(d) securities which are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange,
Inc. or the American Stock Exchange, Inc., or which are traded in the
over-the-counter market approved for margin by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve Board provided that such securities; (i) are free from liens
and encumbrances; (ii) represent no more than 5% of the issued and
outstanding shares of any one issuer; and (iii) are valued at 75% of the
market value thereof;

(e) *deliverable* warehouse receipts *for commodities traded on the Exchange
provided that such receipts will be valued as margin at no more than 75% of
the value of the commodity*; [provided that such warehouse receipts shall be
valued in accordance with the following:

(i) if the warehouse receipt is for a deliverable grade of the commodity
underlying either the futures contract sold or the futures contract which is
the subject of the call options sold, not more than 90% of the value of the
commodity may be considered as margin; and;

(ii) if the warehouse receipt is for a deliverable grade of the futures
contract purchased or the put options sold, not more than 75% of the value of
the commodity may be considered as margin; and;

(iii) if the warehouse receipt is for either: (A) deliverable grade of a
commodity other than the commodity underlying the futures contract or option
to be margined; or (B) a form of silver or gold not deliverable under a
futures contract, then not more than 75% of the value of the warehouse
receipt may be considered as margin.]

(f) physical commodities (but not forward contracts therefor) if the carrying
member is in possession and control of negotiable documents covering such
commodities, provided, however, that the value of such commodities shall be
based upon the contract market price for the grade of such commodity or if
the commodity is not of a grade deliverable on a contract market, then at the
price for the grade of such commodity on the spot market;

(g) a letter of credit in favor of a clearing member carrying an account*, or
in the case of any letter or credit to be used on a pass-through basis with
the Clearing House a letter of credit in favor of the Exchange.  All letters
of credit shall be* issued in such form as may be prescribed by the Exchange
and by a depository which has been approved by the Exchange for issuance and
confirmation of letters of credit drawn in favor of the Clearing Members *or
in favor of the Exchange, as applicable.*

 (3) Calls issued by Member Firms for additional margin from customers may
only be met by: deposits conforming to the requirements of Rule 4.01(E)(1)
for open NYMEX Division positions, or conforming to the requirements of Rule
4.01(E)(2) for open COMEX Division positions, or, for open positions on
either division of the Exchange, favorable market movements which, when taken
into consideration and combined with any other monies available, enable the
customer's margin to equal or exceed the then prevailing initial margin
requirement.

 (F) Withdrawals of margin from a customer's account may only be permitted by
a Member Firm carrying such account if the remaining funds in such account
are equal to or in excess of the then prevailing initial margin required of
the applicable open positions at the time of said withdrawal request.

(G) The customer's response to a margin call issued by a Member Firm must be
timely and complete. A Member Firm may call, at any time, for margins above
and beyond the minimums required by the Exchange. A Member Firm may liquidate
any or all positions maintained by a customer for failure to meet a margin
call. The customer will be liable for any loss or deficiency resulting
therefrom.

 (H) The margin requirements established by the Board or its designee may
vary for different commodities and may be changed from time to time by the
Board or its designee, and in the discretion of the Board or its designee,
may be made applicable to all open trades as well as new trades.

 (I) Arbitrage

(1) For the purposes of Exchange margin requirements, an arbitrage position
is a purchase or sale of an Exchange futures contract in one delivery month
which futures contract is offset by a futures contract to sell or to purchase
a similar quantity of a related commodity in the same or different delivery
month which offsetting futures contract is executed on or subject to the
rules of a different exchange. In order to qualify as an arbitrage position,
each contract long and short must be carried by the same member firm for the
same account.

(2) The Board of Directors, by resolution, may identify those futures
contracts, that are executable on and/or subject to the rules of a different
exchange, which shall be deemed to qualify as part of an arbitrage position.

(3) The Board of Directors or its designee may set levels of margin for
arbitrage positions at a rate less than applicable to outright positions;
provided, however, that except for interdivision straddles, no such rate
shall be lower than the rates established for clearing members' margins.

Rule 9.05. MARGINS

* * * *
(E) Clearing Members may meet original margin calls by depositing:

(1) Cash (U.S. Currency);

(2) Original Margin Certificates issued by an original margin depository, in
form acceptable to the Clearing House, for delivery to the order of the
Clearing House, representing securities issued by the Department of Treasury
of the United States of America maturing within ten (10) years from the date
of the deposit and guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United
States Government; such securities shall be valued at ninety five percent
(95%) of the par value; or

(3) Subject to a maximum limit of 50% of the Clearing Member's total original
margin obligations, Irrevocable Letters of Credit payable to the order of the
Clearing House *including such Letters of Credit that are deposited with the
Clearing Member in accordance with Exchange procedures by a customer*, in
form acceptable to the Clearing House, issued by or confirmed by an original
margin depository and having an expiration date of not less than three (3) or
more than eighteen (18) months from the date of issuance; provided, however,
that such Letter of Credit may not be used to meet original margin
obligations during the fifteen calendar days prior to the expiration date
thereof (if the fifteenth day prior to the expiration of the Letter of Credit
is not a business day, the period during which such Letter of Credit may not
be used to meet original margin obligations shall begin on the business day
immediately preceding that day); and, provided further, that on the business
d!
ay!
!
 preceding the fifteenth calendar day prior to the expiration of the Letter
of Credit, the Clearing House shall issue a call for original margin to be
deposited in a form and manner acceptable to the Clearing House for positions
held open as of the close of business on that day and margined by the Letter
of Credit. The Clearing House shall have the unqualified right to call on any
Letter of Credit at any time prior to expiration.

CCA Rule 48. DEPOSIT OF SECURITIES AND LETTERS OF CREDIT A ORIGINAL MARGIN

* * * *
(b) Irrevocable Letters of Credit.

(i) The Corporation will accept as original margin for the full face amount
thereof a letter of credit in favor of the Corporation issued by any
institution selected by the depositor *including such Letters of Credit in
favor of the Corporation that are deposited with the Clearing Member in
accordance with Exchange procedures by a customer*, provided that

(A) such  institution has been approved by the Board as an approved
depository or such institution is organized under the laws of the United
States or the laws of any state and the letter of credit issued by such
institution has been confirmed by an approved depository;
(B) that the aggregate amount of letters of credit which may be accepted at
any time from any one approved depository, or for the account of any one
Clearing Member may be limited by the Board from time to time;
(C) that a letter of credit issued on behalf of a Clearing Member by an
institution which is an affiliated firm of such Clearing Member must be
confirmed by an institution which is not an affiliated firm of such Clearing
Member; and
(D) such letter of credit shall be in form and substance approved by the
Board and shall be in such denominations as may be determined by the Board
from time to time; shall be irrevocable, shall be available to be drawn upon
by the Corporation by  a clean sight draft(s) or written demand(s) and shall
run for a period of not less than ninety (90) days from the date of issue.

__________________________________________________
Please click on the link below to indicate you have received this
email.

"
http://208.206.41.61/email/email_log.cfm?useremail=tana.jones@enron.com&refdoc
=(01-186)"

Note: If you click on the above line and nothing happens, please copy
the text between the quotes, open your internet browser,
paste it into the web site address and press Return.


I am going to call the vet school and check the authenticity of this.
PL

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dobbs_Shane <Shane.Dobbs@fctg.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Friday, February 01, 2002 8:05 AM
To:	'jmjaked@mindspring.com'; Love, Phillip M.
Subject:	FW: AU's "Tiger" to be a part of Winter Olympics

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Poe  [mailto:poe77@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 5:26  PM
To: Matt Yates; Josh White; Barnie White; Fielding Watts; Marti  Waters; John Berry Upton; Bryant Traylor; Josh Taylor; Myles Tatum; Kirk  Stevens; Zach Stacey; Bill Reaves; Kylie Rane; Gary Poe; Nicole Pilie; Ty  Parker; Chris Murphy; Mom and Dad; Michelle; Mary McKnight; Chris McKinley; Jack  Mazzola; Misty Lowery; Clay Lane; Chris Korey; Adrian Johnson; Donnashele  Jackson; Ironhead; Ben Herndon; Graham Hage; Gene; Allyson Etheredge; Mary Jo  Esposito; Sally Eddins; Shane Dobbs; Nathan Dobbs; Caleb Dobbs; Bryson Dawson;  Bo Daniel; Ben Daniel; Uncle D; Curt Brown; Bryson Bratcher; Big Boy Work; Tripp  Bowie; George Robert Booker; David Benefield; Craig Armstrong
Subject:  AU's "Tiger" to be a part of Winter Olympics
I am pretty sure that this is true. I know someone that saw it  on Fox Sports.

> > > A friend of my Dad's works with multimedia services at  Auburn and
> > > told him that he is leaving this weekend with Tiger  (War Eagle VI) to
> > > be in the Winter Olympics opening ceremonies. The  opening
> > > ceremonies will be a two hour event and Tiger will be  in the second
> > > hour. Tiger is going to fly down from the top of the  stadium to the
> > > ground - like football games. Too bad Alabama isn't  invited. Maybe
> > > Big Al could just jump from the top of the stadium -  only kidding.
> > >
> > >


Can we expand our meeting tomorrow AM to include this?
---------------------- Forwarded by Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT on 05/17/2001 07:37 PM
---------------------------
From: James P Studdert/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/17/2001 04:15 PM
To: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Booth/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: James L Bouillion/ENRON@enronXgate, Andrew Edison/NA/Enron@Enron, Kay
Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Carlos Sole/NA/Enron@Enron, James P
Studdert/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject: SWPC 501D5A Generator Damager onboard M/V:  INDUSTRIAL BRIDGE

Have just talked with adjuster again, and she has preliminary verbal report
from surveyor who says that drawings merely confirm his prior contention that
this generator was NOT a total loss at the time of the loss, but that further
inspection of the unit would be necessary to prove otherwise.

The comments from Andrew Edison about pressing SWPC on their responsibilities
and ownership of the unit, this has previously been expressed by the adjuster
to Jim Bouillion.  She definitely would like to have a sit down meeting with
Enron people only, not SWPC at this time,  to discuss options and where we go
from here.  She still hasn't signed the CA, but that is not necessary as she
is not looking at the drawings and looking at them by her is not necessary
for the purpose of a meeting with Enron.

I did not check her availability for a meeting at this time because my
schedule for Mon-Tues is still up in the air, and Jim Bouillion has a Mon-Wed
meeting with our captive insurer in Vermont and would not be available before
Thursday.  Do we collectively want to go forward with the sit down meeting
with the adjuster, and if yes, who all needs to be involved and what are
their availabilities?

Concerning the VALUE of the generator, the declared value of the entire
shipment was $24,506,000.  There is no breakdown on the paperwork I have (or
the broker) that puts a separate value on just the generator.  Thus I guess
someone either has that or SWPC can provide that information.  The policy is
not a "replacement cost value"  policy nor an "actual cash value" policy, but
a "valued" policy.  What that means is we get paid what ever we declared the
value to be CIF + 10%.  Hence the need to know what part of the $24,506,000
is the "value" of the generator.

I await further instructions as to how you want to proceed.


The attachment includes the list of environmental companies provided to me,
and companies with "enviro" in the name.  The total spend equals $40,817,587.
 You may find the separate business units spend under each company line.
I included "other companies" in a separate tab for your observation.  These
companies may have similiar names (ex.  agra and agra earth &
environmental).  Please advise.  This involves an extra $3 M.
In another separate tab, are companies that I could not find.  Please let me
know if you have any more information on these companies.

Please call if you have any questions.
Thank you.

Best regards,

Shelley Johnson

Business Analyst
Global Strategic Sourcing
713-345-6528
333 Clay Street  1116d
Houston, TX  77251
shelley.johnson@enron.com


that is real nice.  you hate fat people huh?


Jeff asked that I give you a heads up.  New Power is talking with legislators
in CA about legislation to make retail electric sales more competitive.  We
are hoping to move legislation early next year and expect to fight to kill
bad bills.  Feel free to call if you have any questions as to what we are up
to.


John, as discussed this is what we could do:

   Current:   Proposed:

Term:   Expired March 00  2 years thru Sept 02

Base:   $130,000   $170,000
COLA:   $  23,400   Zero
Cash retention:  $  50,000   None

Bonus:   $110,000 (no target)  No Target
ENE LTI Gurantee: None    $150,000 minimum struck in 1/01
       $100,000 minimum struck in 1/02

Approx annual $313,400   $430,000 (assuming same bonus for illustration)

Let me know if you want a draft prepared.

David

John J Lavorato@ENRON
09/25/2000 10:29 AM
To: David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Greg Wolfe

---------------------- Forwarded by John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron on 09/25/2000
10:24 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Tim Belden @ ECT                           09/20/2000 12:09 PM

To: John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron
cc:

Subject: Greg Wolfe

Here is Greg Wolfe's information.

In addition, he has received the following LT equity:
Date  Type   Term  Number  Strike
12/31/97 KEYSOP Opt  10  1500   20.78
2/7/99  ECT LTCP Opt  10  6508   31.46
2/7/99  ECT LTCP RS  10  2468   31.46

What would you recommend for a contract structure?


Hunter/Chris

Further to John Lavorato's earlier e:mails this is the cofnrim thatt he below A&A have been assigned to you.  Resumes will be sent to you shortly for your records.    The A&A program will be in contact with your office with regard to new hire process set up.

Kind regards,

Karen
EWS- HR
x54667.

Full-time Analysts	Allocated to	Lead	 Supervisor	Orientation Start Date	Business Unit Start Date
Bayer Adam	ENA	Shively Hunter	Chris Gaskill	7/16/2001	TBC
Berutti Aaron	ENA	Shively Hunter	Chris Gaskill	7/16/2001	TBC
Chang Sheila	ENA	Shively Hunter	Chris Gaskill	7/16/2001	TBC

Summer Analysts	Allocated to	Lead	Supervisor	Start Date
Payne Daniel	ENA	Shively Hunter	Chris Gaskill	6/4/2001


Jeff:
Sorry for my cryptic answer in regards to the LNG deal on Friday; I was a bit
confused by the question.
In terms of the gas pricing, this is a deal that should be done.  Market
conditions are very conducive to hedging a fair amount of the gas.
Obviously, a deal this size would require Enron to wear a considerable amount
of the risk in the short term, but the risk-reward of the position looks very
favorable.
I am certainly willing to sign off on this deal around the $3.00 level.
John


---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 03/15/2001 11:43
AM ---------------------------

	From:  Ben F Jacoby @ ECT                           03/15/2001 11:37 AM

Sent by: Ben Jacoby@ECT
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lisa Bills/Enron@EnronXGate, Roseann
Engeldorf/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Mike Coleman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ozzie
Pagan/Enron@EnronXGate, Brett R Wiggs/SA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Turbine 1 and 2 Purchase Agreement

As you may know, we are proceeding with development of the Ft. Pierce, FL
project using one of the MHI 501F turbines. Several contract issues need to
be sorted out with MHI, including the execution of a break out contract for
the Ft. Pierce unit, certain scope changes, and a NOx guarantee of 25PPM.
There are obviously other issues related to off balance sheet financing that
will need attention.

Brett, Mike and I have decided to have a weekly conference call to make sure
these issues are being addressed. We would all appreciate each of you being
available next Thursday at 10AM CST for a kick off call so that we can
hopefully figure out exactly what we're dealing with. If you can't attend in
person, we'll set up a call in number.

Please let me know your availability at your earliest convenience. Also,
please feel free to invite others which you feel should be involved in this
kick off discussion.

Lastly, for purposes of the break out contract, Brett has provided below an
electronic copy of the executed contract for both units.

Thanks and regards,

Ben
---------------------- Forwarded by Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT on 03/15/2001 11:28 AM
---------------------------

Brett R Wiggs@ENRON
03/15/2001 10:26 AM
To: Mike Coleman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Ben F Jacoby@ECT
cc:
Subject: Turbine 1 and 2 Purchase Agreement

Attached is the electronic version of the document.

Brett


These deals should be converted to ENA-IM Texas.  Is there a way that you can
change all of these deals systematically?

D

	From:  Thomas Engel                           08/22/2000 08:54 AM

To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Heidi Withers/HOU/EES@EES, Trisha
Hughes/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Rita Wynne/HOU/ECT@ECT, Russ Severson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott
Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Regina Perkins/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: ECT - IM WAHA ???

Should these not be converted to ENA - IM Texas ???  Some time ago - we were
told this desk was dead and the existing deals would end.  This desk is not
included in any Texas desk portfolios.

The ECT desks are supposed to be inactive - however - these deals keep
rolling - and
someone created some new ones?   If the desk is active - should we change it
to ENA - IM Waha -
as ECT is no more ???


.... is attached for your review, clean and blacklined versions.

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

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

 - Allegheny  ENRON ISDA SIDE LETTER(v4).DOC
 - Allegheny  ENRON ISDA SIDE LETTER(vRED).DOC


Zimin, Stinson

He seems to be really interested.

We should set up a formal interview for him.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/08/2000
03:04 PM ---------------------------

John Hou
02/08/2000 02:30 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: John Hou/HOU/ECT@ect
Subject:

Dr . Kaminski,

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to talk with you and Zimin.  It's my
great pleasure to meet  with you
and your group members.

I met Zimin last week. We had a wonderful talk.  After our meeting, I  handed
in him my current resume.
He may already forwarded my resume to you.  If not, I will be very happy to
send you a copy.

By talking with you, Zimin  and by attending your presentation yesterday at
UH,  I find I am really interesting the
fields that you are working on .  I am deeply impressed by the research works
your team have done and I am
looking forward  I am able to become one of your members.  I am also looking
forward  to be able to do researches
under your guidance.

I strongly  feel that your research department  provides the kind of jobs and
environments that I have been looking
for a long time.  My career objective matches your research fields and
directions.  I believe my training in  mathematics
and computer science will provide me some necessary backgrounds in energy
risk management  .  I am also sure that
by working with you,   I can greatly expand my IT skills and experiences.  I
also can learn tremendously from
 you and your research teams.

Currently after finishing my programing work as an IT spcialist,  I am
reading John Hull's book and try to catch up necessary
background in Finance and related fields.  I am also readingyour "Managing
Energy Price Risk" book.
Thank you for giving me a copy of this book.

Again, thank you  for giving me this opportunity and I am looking forward to
working in your team.

John Hou
713-853-1600


yeah.  you?  we have an extra day also.  i want to go out sat.


Dear Steve, Rick, and Jim,

Thanks for meeting with me last Friday. I appreciate your time and candor.

I'm looking forward to working with you next spring and anytime in the
interim.

Take care,

Doug

Doug Schuler
Associate Professor of Management
Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Management
Rice University
6100 Main Street, MS-533
Houston, TX 77005-1892 USA
office: 353 Baker Hall
tel. 713-348-5472
fax. 713-348-6296
schuler@rice.edu


<<Revised LOI - TFS Energy>> Your message

  To:      akurzer@tfsbrokers.com
  Cc:      Daniel.Diamond@enron.com; Mark.Greenberg@enron.com
  Subject: Revised LOI - TFS Energy
  Sent:    Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:28:40 -0400

was delivered to the following recipient(s):

Alan Kurzer on Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:30:22 -0400

Message-ID: <OF7A674B31.B87FFFE8-ON86256A3B.00674882@enron.com>
From: Tana.Jones@enron.com
To: akurzer@tfsbrokers.com
Cc: Daniel.Diamond@enron.com, Mark.Greenberg@enron.com
Subject: Revised LOI - TFS Energy
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:28:40 -0400
Return-Receipt-To: Tana.Jones@enron.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
X-MS-Embedded-Report:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"


Mark, as we discussed, I see one of the growing legal risks for Canada (and
perhaps elsewhere) resulting from "retail" deregulation and the pressure to
increase transaction flow/market scope in energy markets by transacting
behind and through the distribution company (or at "point of delivery").
Although generally speaking this is described as "retail", it also affects
"wholesale" as (i) EWS will manage risk for EES, and (ii) the distinctions
between "retail" and "wholesale" are not always clear (ex. depending on size
and complexity, traders/originators in EWS will do "point of delivery"
transactions).

The risks tend to be additional to the customary commodity, price, legal and
credit risk management in wholesale transactions, as they also involve: (i)
volume/load balancing risk between the counterparty and the Disco,
particularly for "all requirements", "use" or "load following" transactions
and particularly where the balancing obligation between the counterparty and
the Disco is "unhedged" or "mismatched" (ex. balancing with the counterparty
for excess or unused volumes may be at daily index on the date of
consumption, whereas balancing with the Disco may be at the monthly index for
the next month based on actual, estimated or aggregated data); (ii) terms and
conditions/tariff risk to the Disco (ex. the distribution terms and
conditions/tariffs pass a number of risks on to the commodity supplier, such
as obligations to continue delivery after counterparty default or
termination, options to the Disco to source supply after default or
termination, broad third party indemnifications to the Disco for conduct of
the counterparty, allocation of force majeure risk (that may differ from the
counterparty agreement); (iii) additional or incremental credit obligations
to the Disco; and (iv) pressure in these markets to used more simplified
(often government regulated) non-master contract forms - although the forms
used tend to be more unilateral to the commodity supplier.

The mitigant is to understand clearly both the formal and practical market,
rules, requirements, procedures, regulations and distribution terms and
conditions applicable to delivering the commodity behind and through the
Disco, if possible to get involved in shaping those in a proactive way
through the deregulation process, and developing risk management procedures
around the formal and practical requirements of the market.

For your risk memo you could briefly describe the risk as:  "Point of
Delivery Risk (retail or wholesale) for energy commodities behind and through
the Distribution Company, including balancing commodity use between the Disco
and the customer, distribution tariff/terms and conditions risks, incremental
credit obligations between wholesale markets and the Disco, and commercial
and regulatory requirements for contracting."

Please call if you want to discuss further.  Peter.


---------------------- Forwarded by Angela Cadena/PDX/ECT on 12/14/2000 01:54
PM ---------------------------

Theresa Villeggiante
12/14/2000 11:17 AM
To: Angela Cadena/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Merry Xmas!!!!

---------------------- Forwarded by Theresa Villeggiante/PDX/ECT on
12/14/2000 11:25 AM ---------------------------

Lysa Akin
12/14/2000 11:07 AM
To: Theresa Villeggiante/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Merry Xmas!!!!

 - p1010239.jpg


Attached for your review is a first draft of the Schedule to the ISDA Master
Agreement between Enron Corp. and Lehman Brothers Finance S.A.  Please
contact either Sara Shackleton or myself with any comments.

Stephanie Panus
Sr. Legal Specialist
Enron North America
713-345-3249
stephanie.panus@enron.com


I've updated the Aquila confirmation as we discussed last night.

Please let me know if you agree with these changes and/or have additional
modifications.

Thanks, Dave


For you, anything.  My kingdom for a Kaufman...

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kaufman, Paul
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 1:13 PM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff
Subject:	RE: Budget Spreadsheet

Thanks.  Your attention is appreciated.  I know your swamped and focused on other things.  But these administrative details are important.  It's what keeps the trains running on time ... the electricity flowing through the wires ... it's why you can go into a McDonald's from Poughkeepsie to Pitsburgh and the Big Macs taste the same ... .

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dasovich, Jeff
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 11:10 AM
To:	Kaufman, Paul; Comnes, Alan; Mara, Susan
Subject:	RE: Budget Spreadsheet

Here are my additions.  Tried to turn around quickly, so I apologize in advance for errors. My adds are in yellow.  If anyone has questions, don't hesitate to let me know.

Best,
Jeff
 << File: 100101 Shapiro OS Template with JOD comments1002.xls >>

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kaufman, Paul
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 12:20 PM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff; Comnes, Alan; Mara, Susan
Subject:	RE: Budget Spreadsheet

 << File: 100101 Shapiro OS Template.xls >>

Once again, I've had my inadequacies pointed out and highlighted for all.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Dasovich, Jeff
Sent:	Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:31 AM
To:	Kaufman, Paul; Comnes, Alan; Mara, Susan
Subject:	RE: Budget Spreadsheet

Did anyone else get the attachment?  If not, Paul, could you resend?  Thanks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kaufman, Paul
Sent:	Monday, October 01, 2001 7:44 PM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff; Comnes, Alan; Mara, Susan
Subject:	Budget Spreadsheet

Attached is the strawman.  Note that the Sheet 2--drops participation to bare essentials.  Sheet 3 assumes a 40% budget cut from Sheet 1.   The deleted actions are different in Sheet 2 and Sheet 3.

Jeff:  Please review ASAP, add the gas matters to Sheet 1, delete gas matters that are not essential in Sheet 2, and take a 40% haircut in Sheet 3.  Also add back any other matters that I have deleted that you disagree with, but make sure that Sheet 3 continues to meet the 40% haircut target.  Then send to Sue Mara for review.

Sue:  Please review ASAP after Jeff.  I need to get this into Rick by Wednesday.

Alan:  Please take a look and pass any comments along to me.


I just received this today.

----- Forwarded by Brent Hendry/NA/Enron on 08/30/2000 04:17 PM -----

	"Marcelo Armas M." <marmas@philippi.cl>
	08/30/2000 02:04 PM

		 To: <Brent.Hendry@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: RE: Internet trading

Brent,

I was under the impression that this memo had been sent last week. I
apologize for the confusion. Please contact me for any questions you may
have.

Regards,

Marcelo

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Brent.Hendry@enron.com <Brent.Hendry@enron.com>
Para: Marcelo Armas M. <marmas@philippi.cl>
Fecha: Martes, 29 de Agosto de 2000 12:25 p.m.
Asunto: Re: Internet trading

>
>Marcelo,
>
>Have you had a chance to finalize your review of the ISDA agreement and
>legal survey?  Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the
>materials.
>
>Regards,
>
>Brent
>
>
>
>
>
>

 - Memo Internet final.doc


FYI....

To keep things consistent all of the traders, except the financial group, will use their physical books to log in for EOL.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kenne, Dawn C.
Sent:	Friday, January 11, 2002 10:42 AM
To:	Keiser, Kam
Cc:	Moorer, Torrey; Sweitzer, Tara; Lozano, Melba; Denny, Jennifer
Subject:	Trader Log In

Kam,

As we discussed this morning, the traders will be using their physical books to log onto EOL with the exception of the financial desk (John Arnold and team).  Behind the scenes, EOL will  set these traders up in the Counterparty Alternates table to have the books "flip" to the respective financial book when a financial trade is hit.

Also, any word yet on the traders wanting a different book for price, basis and index.  We are still under the assumption that the trades will book under one book.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Thanks,
Dawn


Rob

Give me a call sometime about this trade.


i got a call this morning about this....

458802  should be 50 mw

call me about this deal when you get in.

Thanks!


Per our conversation last week, I am sending you the latest staffing
assignments for my Diamond folks. Please note that there are two distinct
teams: one for business and one for technology/development. Please review
the attached slides and send comments back directly to me.

Thanks!

Jeff

(See attached file: ENW_StaffingUpdate_101600.ppt)
 - ENW_StaffingUpdate_101600.ppt


Elizabeth:

Christi and I thought you should know about this development in New York
regarding EnronOnline.  Please call me if you have any questions.

Sarah

----- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 04/05/2001 05:41 PM -----

	Sarah Novosel
	04/05/2001 01:37 PM

		 To: Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

----- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 04/05/2001 01:37 PM -----

	Louise Kitchen@ECT
	04/05/2001 11:31 AM

		 To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate@ENRON, Andy
Zipper/Enron@EnronXGate, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject: Re: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

Andy is back now so this is all over to him.  There are lots of issues to
consider in how all of this moves forward.  Let's just make sure Howard keeps
Andy in the loop on this as the traders are not expected to understand the
trading framework of EOL.

Thanks

Louise

James D Steffes@ENRON
04/05/2001 10:26 AM
To: Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, Andy
Zipper/Enron@EnronXGate@ECT, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Re: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

Louise --

Government Affairs was not pushing for this outcome.  The NY PSC seems to
have adopted this on their own (or with the support of the local utility).
Howard Fromer (our NY reg affairs guy) indicates that the NY PSC was simply
looking for a deep market index they could use to establish "non-switching"
customer rates.  Howard has spoken with Dana Davis about publishing off-peak
and on-peak prices and he said that the Desk could do it.

One other thing.  PGE is looking to transact with EPMI through EOL.  We are
preparing a filing at FERC that would modify PGE's Code of Conduct to allow
this.  There is a risk that FERC will use this filing (while small) to look
again at "regulating" EOL.  Remember that APX is regulated by FERC.

I agree that we need to be more coordinated with EOL and state regulators
(FERC is in the loop and we have had discussions with them).

Of course, as our involvement in the markets through EOL continues to grow,
regulators will begin to take a deeper look.

Lisa Yoho and I can come by today to discuss more fully if you'd like.

Jim

Louise Kitchen@ECT
04/05/2001 09:01 AM
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate@ENRON, Andy
Zipper/Enron@EnronXGate

Subject: Re: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

Have we had any interaction with them on this?  This is not good news at all
(as indicated below) and has regulatory implications for EnronOnline - I
presume we did not encourage this in any way or have any agreement in place.

Did we have any involvement in the process at all or is this something one of
your guys picked up - Anyway Andy Zipper is back today so I am sure he will
handle this.

Physically they cannot get the prices and we don't (I think) publish power
indices on EOL.

I hope we haven't been the people pushing this as that would be a real
problem and shows immense lack of co-ordination.

Louise

James D Steffes@ENRON
04/04/2001 06:51 PM
To: Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, John J
Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate
cc:

Subject: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

Not sure if you had seen this language from the NY PSC.  While great, this
clearly means that NY PSC commissioners will begin to think alot about how
EOL  and its relationships with other Enron companies.

Jim

---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 04/04/2001
06:49 PM ---------------------------
From: Howard Fromer on 04/02/2001 04:38 PM
To: Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Brown/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Dana
Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Dutta/HOU/ECT@ECT, John D Suarez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Doug
Sewell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Ring/HOU/EES@EES, Charles Decker/HOU/EES@EES,
Gary Keevill/ECP/Enron@Enron, John Llodra/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom
May/Corp/Enron@Enron, Pearce W Hammond/Enron@EnronXGate, Christi L
Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT,
W David Duran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Lydecker/Corp/Enron@Enron, Steve
Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janelle
Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, Rick Bachmeier/HOU/EES@EES, Lance
Hinrichs/HOU/EES@EES, Jim Meyn/NA/Enron@Enron, Berney C Aucoin/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Patricia Collins/HOU/EES@EES, Fatimata
Liamidi/HOU/EES@EES, Dag Joraholmen/HOU/EES@EES, Dwight Fruge/HOU/EES@EES,
John Campbell/HOU/EES@EES
cc:

Subject: NYPSC approves market-based backout credit for RG&E; Adopts Enron
Online as Index

Another big victory for Enron in New York! In an Order issued by the NYPSC on
March 29, the NYPSC has approved a proposal to modify the existing fixed
backout credit of 2.8 cents per kwh for energy and capacity and replace it
with a market-based backout credit. The additional retail adder of 0.4 cents
per kwh would remain.  Load-serving entities (LSEs) will have the option of
continuing to buy their energy and capacity from RG&E at the market based
backout credit which will be determined 15 days prior to the beginning of
each of the two six-month capability periods, and will be based on "a
forecast of energy prices derived from Enron Corporation's (Enron)
EnronOnline trading platform."  To my knowledge, this is the first occasion
that a regulatory body has agreed to use Enron Online as an index!  LSEs can
elect instead to procure their own commodity and get a market-based backout
credit (MBBC). Under this option, the LSEs will get a market based backout
credit. However, the Enron online prices for the six months determined as
above will be reconciled on a lag basis against actual market prices.  The
PSC has capped the amount of the reconciliation for any LSE to the product of
the LSE's total load for the calendar year and $0.065 per kwh (PSC staff's
estimate of RG&E's embedded power supply cost).  (The PSC Order actually says
$0.015 but this appears to be a mistake since the attached settlement states
$0.065.) A copy of the PSC's Order is available on its website:
www.dps.state.ny.us


Jeff,
Thanks for your quick response. What would you need from us to get the documents prepared for notification.

Thanks

Richard


Attached is the revised working group list.  Feel free to contact the members
of your group and get started.  Keep in mind that some people do not know
that they were "volunteered", so your initial communication should include
that information.

Please keep me posted on your progress (e.g. copy me on e-mail
communications) and please circulate your objectives, deadlines, scope of
your working group and any other general information to your fellow working
group chairs.

Thank you for your willingness to lead and good luck in your efforts.


<< IPX.html >>


Daren,

Charlotte Hawkins is having trouble confirming the volume of 5,733 with El
Paso.  El Paso will not confirm the volume that high.  EOG revised their
nomination as follows:

C/P Name Meter #  Orig Nom Rev Nom

EOG Res. 6296  5,733  2,300

Will you approve revising the volume in Unify down to 2,300?  Please advise.
Thanks.

Bob


FYI

"Seabron Adamson" <seabron.adamson@frontiereconomics.com> on 05/21/2001
09:19:19 AM
Please respond to <seabron.adamson@frontier-economics.com>
To: <Richard.Shapiro@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Memo on policy paper conclusions and staff call

Rick:

Please find attached a short memo regarding last week's call with Jim and
the Enron RTO team. It also has some thoughts on what we might cover with
Steve K. at 2:00 p.m. CDT today.

Some other time I would like to have a quick chat about how we move to the
next step with the RTOs. It strikes me that there has been a real absence of
cleare-headed thinking in the stakeholder chin-wagging sessions. If FERC
will not impose a single design - on an abbreviated timeframe - is there
another way to add some economic logic into the equation?

Speak to you later...

Seabron

This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me at
(617) 354-0060 and permanently delete the original and any copy of any
e-mail and any printout thereof.

Seabron Adamson
Frontier Economics Inc
Two Brattle Square
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
Ph:  (617) 354-0060
Fax: (617) 354-0640
seabron.adamson@frontier-economics.com

 - 01-05-21 SA Memo to Rick Shapiro on RTO conference call.doc


This warning is sent automatically to inform you that your mailbox is approaching the maximum size limit.
Your mailbox size is currently 75537 KB.

Mailbox size limits:

	When your mailbox reaches 75000 KB you will receive this message.To check the size of your mailbox:

  Right-click the mailbox (Outlook Today),
  Select Properties and click the Folder Size button.
  This method can be used on individual folders as well.

To make more space available, delete any items that are no longer needed such as Sent Items and Journal entries.

You must empty the Deleted Items folder after deleting items or the space will not be freed.

To turn Journaling off,
 click Tools | Options | Journaling Options and de-select all items.

See client Help for more information.


Phone number is (713) 853-3512.

	arlanz@mexis.com (Armando Lanz)
	05/30/2001 02:28 PM

		 To: <Gerald.Nemec@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: RE: Agency Agreement

The By-Laws are the ones we sent by fax to Barry L. ??  And yes, these are
the latest that the company has.? The other question  that you have about
having 2 people executing the agreements.? Yes it is  necessary that 2 of
those will need to sign.? One of them will be Genaro  Larrea Mota Velazco and
I believe that the other one will be Daniel Tellechea  Salido (this I will
have to confirm)
?
Which is your phone number ?? I may be calling you  between?the next couple
of hours.

Saludos,
?
Armando Lanz Oliver
Lanz Consultores en Energia  S.C.
Rodolfo Gaona # 6 Despacho 103, Col. Lomas de Sotelo
Naucalpan, Edo  de Mex CP 53390
Tel: 555 757 88
Fax: 555 757 95
Cel: 044 5502  0308
Biper: 5447 1111 cve 801  9581
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From:  Gerald.Nemec@enron.com
To: arlanz@mexis.com
Cc: Barry.Tycholiz@enron.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 2:10  PM
Subject: Agency Agreement

Per Barry's request, attached is the Agency and  Management Services
Agreement to be executed between Enron North America  Corp. and Mexicana De
Cobre.? Also attached is the form of agency  agreement to be attached as
Exhibit B to the Agency and Management Services  Agreement.? This agency
agreement is El Paso's form and must be  executed by ENA, Mexicana, and El
Paso.? The El Paso form requires  that you open as a read only file.
Please review.

(See attached  file: Agency & Management Agreement2.doc)(See attached file:
EPNG  Agency Agr.doc)

We are working on the gas purchase agreement and should  forward shortly.

We received the power of attorney and bylaws you  emailed.? I had a Spanish
speaking attorney in our office assist me  with their review.? The bylaws
look fine. We would like you to follow  up with a certified copy in the
mail.?? For now can you confirm  via a response to this email, that these
are the latest bylaws on  file?

?He noted that under the Power of Attorney, it would be  required that two
of the gentlemen listed on page 2 of the power of  attorney documentation,
execute our agreements.? Can you  confirm?? Would be happy to discuss this
with you.

Thank you  for your cooperation.

Gerald Nemec
Attorney
ENA  Legal


Kurt at AECI showed AECI purchasing 96 mws at $38 for HE 9.  The P&L showed this deal at $40.  I offered to meet in the middle at $39.  Kurt preferred to pull the tapes and review the deal with his day guy that did the deal.  This is a heads up on the situation.


Rhonda,

You are correct!

Rhonda L Denton@ECT
03/14/2001 03:40 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Wendy Conwell/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Enmax

540039, 541695, 541715, and 541737 are booked to Enmax Corporation.  I think
they should be booked to Enmax Energy Corporation.  Wendy Conwell in credit
has prepared a credit work sheet on this CP so I believe this is the correct
entity.  Can you check?


This request has been pending your approval for  2 days.  Please click
http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000010092&Page=
Approval to review and act upon this request.

Request ID          : 000000000010092
Request Create Date : 12/12/00 3:00:54 PM
Requested For       : diane.goode@enron.com
Resource Name       : Unlisted Application/Software
Resource Type       : Applications


My understanding is that we are going to work Ark.

Jim
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hueter, Barbara A.
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 2:09 PM
To:	Steffes, James D.
Cc:	Nord, Sue
Subject:	FW: Arkansas restructuring delay information

Jim, While covering SE-RTO issues I learned more about the situation in Arkansas.  I wanted to also bring it to your attention b/c there could be large ramifications -- for other open markets and states that might consider retail competition.
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hueter, Barbara A.
Sent:	Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:09 PM
To:	Hueter, Barbara A.; Robinson, Marchris; Staines, Dan; Connor, Joe
Cc:	Migden, Janine; Lassere, Donald; Nord, Sue
Subject:	RE: Arkansas restructuring delay information

 << File: RTO Morning Update 101001.doc >>

Please see first article.

Sue and Janine - I think we need to talk about this apart from the RTO effort and as part of rebuilding momentum for restructuring.  If Arkansas repeals we could face an even more uphill battle in states like Missouri, Lousianna and other states.  The Governor has stated that repeal is ' "a real possibility" unles it's demonstrated that Ark. will see benefits."  From the joint mw/ne staff meeting last week I understand that no decision had yet been made on whether or not Enron would intervene.  The next hearing at the commission is next Thursday the 18th.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hueter, Barbara A.
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09, 2001 3:52 PM
To:	Robinson, Marchris; Staines, Dan; Connor, Joe
Cc:	Migden, Janine; Lassere, Donald; Nord, Sue
Subject:	Arkansas restructuring delay information

Gentelmen, Yesterday's Power Daily reported on filings make in Arkansas regarding delaying restructuring. In preparation for any upcoming meeting with the Commission, we should at least familiarize ourselves w/ various stakeholders and commissioners takes on restructuring.

Following is a brief description of the article:

Entergy Arkansas  - state should take wait and see approach and decide later if it should pusch back the current '05 deadline

AG Pryor - push back beyond '05 - referenced Southwesterns and Entergy's difficulties in being ready for Texas '02 - states law should not be repealed but strengthened w/ consumer protections

SWEPCO (AEP) - starting choice in Oct. '03 might still be possible -- opposes any changes to current law

OK G&E - favors delaying beyond '05

Ark. Elec Coop - favors repeal


Thanks for the vote!  DF

Lee Huber
02/23/2001 05:18 PM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Weekly Report for Feb 20

1. MOPS.  Suggested that the MOPS rehearing be brought to Madden's
attention.  As a result we are looking at filing a motion to expedite.  Spent
much of the week reviewing the MOPS proceeding up to date, reading pleadings
and cases. Drafted a motion to expedite which has been circulated for
comment.  While it is not very compelling for expedition, it is a way to get
the proceeding brought to FERC's attention.  Apparently, there is a push to
clean up old dockets.  Also it brought to my attention that Northern, in this
proceeding, proposed to sell to Enron Gulf Coast Gathering, which I had
forgotten.  so that if we find another purchaser, the filing will have to be
amended. Also the Enron affiliate made the filing for the declaratory order.
Kim Wilkie and  were talking about MOPS and what needs to be done while she
is out on maternity leave.  We were talking about the waiver and ROFR
agreements which John Goodpasture is getting executed.  We need to review
whatever was done, if anything, at the time of the original filing to sell to
the affiliate. Also take a look at the current ones to see if they would be
broad enough to cover  not only Northern but a subsequent sale by Northern
afilliate, if we should want to handle the sale of MOPS in that manner.
  2.  Attended the South End Task Force Meeting Tuesday morning.  It was a
long meeting and quite productive. It was a brain dump by the south end
commercial guys for Shelley and Mike and a man named Mike Gadd who called in
from London who will work with Danny McCarty on asset deals.  It was decided
to go ahead and start presenting potential deals to various Companies who we
think would be interested in the various south end assets.  For exampleBob
burleson is going to present a deal for some Permian assets to SPS.  SPS will
have to divest certain power plants but still would like to maintain some
control.   SPS may be interested in purchasing the pipelines form Northern
and TW that currently serve the plants.  SPS would operate the line as an
intrastate Hinshaw.  We think these asets are a good candidate to get Stans
approval since they are not useful to get gas to California and the COS is
$18 and incremental revenue is $2-3.  I will be involved in putting the
proposal together starting with confidentiality agreements.
Shelley believes that we should actively package and seek out potential
interested buyers.  For example, approach Duke about the Hugoton area because
Duke has a huge helium plant there. Also talk to El Paso because of its
recent acqusition of CIG and ANR   and  interest in getting Rocky Moutain gas
to Cailf.  Also seek out those interested in the Beaver assets and go make a
pitch.
I am reading the existing contracts we have with Oneok as well as GPM/Duke to
determine any adverse terms and conditions which could hinder a sale.
Another meeting is scheduled for the week of March 4 to go over the SPS deal
with Stan.
 3 FERC Audit CWIP.  Continue working with Gary Zahn and Michelle Winckowski
on a futher FERC inquiry on the Sublette work order.  Will prepare a response
next week.

Next week continue work on the above items.
By the way  good luck with getting Mike's job if you want it.  We would be
happy to have you here!!


And their "TradeSpark" page touts "back office functions for end to end
management".

---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Solmonson/HOU/ECT on 11/08/2000
10:56 AM ---------------------------

Mary Solmonson
11/08/2000 10:51 AM
To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas D Gros/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Williams Customer First site

You need to go take the tour of this site.  I believe Williams has put
together what Whalley's vision was a year ago.

http://www.williamscustomerfirst.com/index.jsp#


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W E E K E N D   S Y S T E M S   A V A I L A B I L I T Y

F O R

August 31, 2001 5:00pm through September 4, 2001 12:00am
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SCHEDULED SYSTEM OUTAGES:

ARDMORE DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

AZURIX: No Scheduled Outages.

EB34 DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages.

EDI SERVER: No Scheduled Outages.

ENRON CENTER SOUTH DATA CENTER - FACILITY OPERATIONS: No Scheduled Outages

ENRON NORTH AMERICAN LANS:  SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET: No Scheduled Outages.

MESSAGING: No Scheduled Outages.

MARKET DATA: No Scheduled Outages.

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS:   SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

SITARA:
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Sat 9/1/2001 at  7:00:00 PM CT thru Sun 9/2/2001 at  7:00:00 AM CT
	Sat 9/1/2001 at  5:00:00 PM PT thru Sun 9/2/2001 at  5:00:00 AM PT
	Sun 9/2/2001 at  1:00:00 AM London thru Sun 9/2/2001 at  1:00:00 PM London
Outage:  Sitara CPU Upgrade
Environments Impacted:  ENA
Purpose: CPU Upgrade on Madrid, an application server
Backout: Page Sitara Oncall at 713-288-0101
Contact(s): 	Alex Hsieh  713-853-6561  713-288-1779

SUN/OSS SYSTEM: No Scheduled Outages.

TELEPHONY: No Scheduled Outages

TERMINAL SERVER:  No Scheduled Outages.

UNIFY:  No Scheduled Outages.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
								FOR ASSISTANCE

(713) 853-1411   Enron Resolution Center

Specific Help:
Information Risk Management			(713) 853-5536
SAP/ISC                                                                               (713) 345-4727
Unify On-Call 					(713) 284-3757  [Pager]
Sitara On-Call					(713) 288-0101  [Pager]
RUS/GOPS/GeoTools/APRS			(713) 639-9726  [Pager]
OSS/UA4/TARP				(713) 285-3165  [Pager]
CPR						(713) 284-4175  [Pager]
EDI Support 					(713) 327-3893  [Pager]
EES Help Desk					(713)853-9797 OR (888)853-9797
TDS -Trader Decision Support On-Call                    (713) 327-6032 [Pager]