POWER POINTS:Great News! Long-Term Contracts Jeopardized
Dow Jones Energy Service, 05/18/01

Options Report: Investors Sell Options As Flat Mkt Looms
Capital Markets Report, 05/18/01

Shell "Pleased" On Selection For Saudi Gas Projects 1 & 3
Dow Jones Energy Service, 05/18/01

USA: U.S. pleased American firms win Saudi natgas deals.
Reuters English News Service, 05/18/01

UK: Shell says happy to participate in Saudi gas venture.
Reuters English News Service, 05/18/01

Saudi To Announce Gas Proj 1 & 3 Leaders By Jun 5-Source
Dow Jones Energy Service, 05/18/01

Shell, Exxon Score Big in Historic Saudi Gas Initiative, Energy Intelligence
Group Reports
PR Newswire, 05/18/01

Saudi Arabia Selects International Oil Companies for Three Major Projects
Dow Jones Business News, 05/18/01

Saudi Arabia Picks Foreign Partners for Gas Projects (Update4)
Bloomberg, 05/18/01

POWER POINTS:Great News! Long-Term Contracts Jeopardized
By Mark Golden

05/18/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

A Dow Jones Newswires Column

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Those looking for even the slightest bit of good news
for the state of California can find it in Friday's San Jose Mercury News.
"California is in danger of losing more than 40% of the power it has lined up
in long-term contracts," says the lead of a major article, because
Republicans in the state legislature didn't back the $12.5 billion bond deal
last week.
Getting out of most of those contracts would be the best thing to happen to
California in a long time.
Since the state went on its long-term buying binge, forward prices for power
in the western U.S. have been falling steadily. Gov. Gray Davis announced $43
billion in purchases lasting up to 20 years on March 5. Contracts for summer
power at Palo Verde, Ariz., a key western trading hub that feeds a lot of
power into California, have fallen to $390 a megawatt-hour from a high of
$600/MWh in late March. Further out, power for 2004-2006 at mid-Columbia
River, a key trading hub north of California, has fallen from $58/MWh in
February to $49/MWh today.
Companies like Calpine Corp. (CPN) and Dynegy (DYN) that took advantage of
the state's buying binge are looking pretty fat and happy. In fact, they have
affectionately started calling the governor Gravy Days. Enron Corp. (ENE),
which has been selling aggressively for two months, according to traders, is
looking like a genius as usual. Generators that held out, like Reliant Energy
(REI) and Duke Energy (DUK), may be sorry that they did.
It's been a long time since those long on western power have felt serious
pain in the markets, but that time has come. Power generators may not make as
much profit this summer as last, and power traders that have taken long
speculative positions may liquidate supplies for far less than they bought
them. As was seen in the eastern U.S. power markets last summer, long
positions can turn out just as painful as short positions.
For California, the good news is that maybe spot purchasing costs this summer
won't be as bad as once expected. The bad news is that the state government
is by far the biggest "long" in the bearish forward market. It's safe to say
that the $43 billion in contracts signed in March have declined in value by
15%, or $6.5 billion. That's almost as big of a financial disaster going
forward as everything that has gone on since last summer until now.
Granted, this is a sort of damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation.
Barring the utilities from the forward market during the first three years of
deregulation was one of the most expensive public policy mistakes in U.S.
history. California should do some forward purchasing now, and it's such a
behemoth that it will move the market up when it does so. And, when it gets
done buying, prices will come down simply because it stopped.
But that's a footnote to the mismanagement of the financial side of the
energy crisis. Early this year, when the state started down the path of
mega-purchasing, there was no shortage of advice not to do so. Long-term
prices were embedded with too much of today's supply-demand imbalance. The
state would have been much better off dealing with the imbalance first -
since it would have to do that anyway - and gradually securing forward power
as declining prices reflected the improving situation.
Since then, the state has done a great job of crushing demand. Electric usage
is already down 9% from where it was expected to be thanks to a conservation
efforts and a slowing economy, and people haven't even seen their 30% higher
bills yet. Similar reduction has been seen in power consumption in other
western states and in natural gas usage nationally. This is likely what has
been behind much of the downturn in forward power prices in the West.
This column started with a false "good news" lead. It would be great for the
state if, after the state's credit rating sinks further, sellers exercised
their option to tear up the five- and ten-year contracts. But they won't do
that. The prices are too good from the sellers' perspective. Calpine, which
has signed three such contracts for the state, said immediately that it has
no intention of reneging on its agreements. And Gary Ackerman, director of
the sellers' association, told the Mercury News that he didn't expect power
companies in general to back out of the deals.
But there may be some real good news for California. The Davis administration
hired dozens of people that have little or no experience in energy trading to
purchase billions of dollars of power. Perhaps they are quick learners. This
week presented an excellent opportunity for the state to pick up what it
needs - summer power for this year only - on sale. Low prices in the daily
market Monday and Tuesday drove the summer contract prices down to $325/MWh,
which is cheap by recent standards. The contract price moved up to $390/MWh,
but the state took advantage of the opportunity while the window was open.
"The week's condition in the market place helped. We were able to procure
some energy for June through September," said state spokesman Oscar Hidalgo.
And, hey, there were no blackouts this week.
-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Options Report: Investors Sell Options As Flat Mkt Looms
By Kopin Tan
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

05/18/2001
Capital Markets Report
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Options volatility, already at its lowest level in
some months, edged down further amid the busy trading of Expiration Friday.
But while lower volatility typically means reduced and more attractive
premium for option buyers, many investors continued to sell options. With
market observers expecting stocks to be flat or range-bound for a while as
the economy gropes toward a recovery, these investors were selling options to
generate income upfront and hoping the sold contracts will expire unexercised.
Many investors sold out-of-the-money calls as part of strategies like covered
call writing to help lower their cost of buying stock and the break-even
points for their investments.
In Ericsson Telephone Co., for instance, the June 7.50 calls traded more than
29,000 contracts, with much of Friday's volume accounted for by investors
selling these out-of-the-money contracts. Investors, who earn about $25 for
each contract sold, likely were selling these as part of their covered call
writing strategies.
Ericsson's American depository receipts most recently gained 43 cents to
$6.83. At the Chicago Board Options Exchange, the June 7.50 calls rose 15
cents to 30 cents on volume of 19,967 contracts, compared with open interest
of 7,291. Another 9,415 contracts traded at other exchanges.
In Microsoft Corp., the October 50 puts traded robustly, as they had earlier
this week. It appeared investors were selling these out-of-the-money calls,
earning about $150 for each contract and betting that Microsoft stock will
remain above $50 by mid-October (or they were willing to buy stock at that
price).
With Microsoft edging down 66 cents to $67.51, the October 50 puts traded
20,437 contracts, adding to open interest of 20,297. These puts were up 5
cents to $1.50 at the American Stock Exchange.
Because options volatility already had fallen significantly, some investors
think it is risky to sell options - selling volatility in trader speak - at
this time, since a sudden stock selloff could trigger anxiety and raise
option premium and make it more costly to buy back these sold options.
But with no major economic events on the calendar until well into June, and
with a long holiday weekend coming up later this months, investors also are
wary about being long volatility.
This is one reason why it makes sense for option sellers to focus on selling
longer-dated options that expire more than six months in future, noted
Michael Schwartz, CIBC Oppenheimer's chief options strategist. These
longer-term options pack a greater dollar premium, which translates to a
lower break-even point when sold as part of covered call writing strategies
and give investors more downside protection.
The CBOE's market volatility index, or VIX, fell 0.52 to 25.00.
The options market's tech-sector fear gauges or Nasdaq volatility indexes
also eased to their lowest levels in nearly eight months - a sign of
gathering investor complacency toward tech stocks.
The CBOE's Nasdaq volatility index, or VXN, fell 4.28 to 54.41. VXN has not
reached this level since it closed at 54.25 on October 19 last year.
The American Stock Exchange's Nasdaq volatility index, or QQV, lost 4.35 to
46.20 - its lowest level since it closed at 45.12 on September 29 last year.
Elsewhere in the options market:
- Cree Inc.'s stock and options are active Friday with investors appearing to
make bullish bets on the maker of semiconductor materials.
It isn't clear what drove these optimistic trades, but the company has
indicated it isn't currently in active talks with potential acquirers. Cree
stock was up 12.1% or $3.73 to $34.53 on heavy trading volume, after rising
11.4% Thursday. In the options market, at least one investor was buying
near-month, out-of-the-money calls and selling long-term options that expire
in 2003 - usually a sign he expects stock to appreciate in the near term.
- Enron Corp.'s June options were active as a large spread traded. An
institutional investor bought more than 5,000 contracts of the June 55 calls
and sold a roughly equal number of the June 50 puts to help offset the cost.
The investor likely is bullish about Enron and does not expect the stock to
fall below $50 by mid-June, or is willing to buy stock at that price.
Enron most recently was up $2.02 to $54.24. At the Philadelphia Stock
Exchange, the June 55 calls were up 60 cents to $2.05 on volume of 7,001
contracts, compared with open interest of 4,674. The June 50 puts were at
$1.05 on volume of 5,000 contracts, compared with open interest of 2,353.
-By Kopin Tan, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-2202; kopin.tan@dowjones.com
(Kaja Whitehouse contributed to this report.)

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Shell "Pleased" On Selection For Saudi Gas Projects 1 & 3

05/18/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

LONDON -(Dow Jones)- The Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies is very pleased
to have received notification from HRH Prince Saud al-Faisal, Minister of
Foreign Affairs and Chairman of the Ministerial Committee overseeing the
Saudi Natural Gas Initiative, that it will play a major role in Core Ventures
1 and 3, the company announced in a press release Friday.
These are two of three Core Ventures awarded to international oil companies
as part of Saudi Arabia's multibillion dollar gas value chain investment
program, comprising exploration and production, power generation,
desalination and chemicals projects, the company said.
Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, Chairman of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, said: "Shell
is honored to be given such a significant role in this historic development.
We are delighted to have been selected to participate in both Core Venture 1
and Core Venture 3".
Phil Watts, CEO Exploration and Production, added: "The Saudi Natural Gas
Initiative represents an excellent opportunity for Shell to build upon its
long history of partnership with the Saudi government and the Saudi people.
We look forward to playing a constructive role in the establishment of the
Saudi natural gas industry."
Shell has been active in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia since the 1940s and has
invested over $7 billion with its partners in petrochemicals, refining, and
other downstream business ventures, the company said.
Earlier Friday. Saudi Arabia announced its selection of international oil
companies that will participate in its three gas core ventures.
Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) was been awarded leadership of Core Venture 2, the
Red Sea project. Occidental Petroleum (OXY) and Enron (ENE), who were bidding
jointly in this initiative, were awarded a stake in the Red Sea project.
No leaders were announced for the other two projects, Core Ventures 1 and 3.
However, Saudi Arabia said the consortium for the South Ghawar project - Core
Venture 1, estimated at $15 billion - was awarded to ExxonMobil, Royal
Dutch/Shell (RD), BP Amoco (BP) and Phillips Petroleum
Core Venture 3, the Shaybah project, was awarded to a consortium comprising
Shell, TotalFinaElf (TOT) and Conoco (COCA).

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

USA: U.S. pleased American firms win Saudi natgas deals.

05/18/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

WASHINGTON, May 18 (Reuters) - The U.S. Energy Department on Friday welcomed
Saudi Arabia's decision to award contracts to several large American energy
firms to help develop the kingdom's vast natural gas resources, and said the
move fits in with the Bush administration's new comprehensive energy plan.
Earlier in day, Saudi Arabia opened its natural gas sector to eight leading
international firms, including U.S.-based ExxonMobil , Phillips Petroleum ,
Enron , Occidental Petroleum and Conoco .
"We're pleased that these American firms have been chosen to lead these
natural gas development projects," Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said
through a department spokeswoman.
President George W. Bush's plan to overhaul U.S. energy policies includes a
recommendation to support initiatives by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other
Middle East countries to open portions of their energy sectors to foreign
investment.
"This decision is right on target with the president's energy plan...that
identifies the opening up of energy producing countries to foreign
investment, an important way to broaden our shared commercial and strategic
interests," Abraham said.
The spokeswoman said it is too early to determine if Abraham would travel to
Saudi Arabia for the formal signing of memorandums of understanding (MOUs)
for the projects, which will take place in a few weeks.
"At this point I don't know what his schedule is going to be in two weeks. I
don't have anything definite on that," the spokeswoman said.
ExxonMobil and Royal/Dutch Shell won big roles in three Saudi projects that
are estimated to require combined initial investment of $25 billion.
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Exxon, Shell, BP and
Phillips were given stakes in the biggest of the projects on offer, the $15
billion development in South Ghawar, known as core venture one.
Exxon also secured the leading role in the big natural gas project, on the
Red Sea coast, with Enron and Occidental taking smaller shares.
Shell, TotalFina Elf and Conoco won stakes in the third project, for
development of natural gas at Shaybah in the empty quarter of southeast Saudi
Arabia.
The awards mark the biggest advance in the kingdom's efforts to develop its
gas reserves, the world's fourth largest, since Riyadh unveiled the energy
opening more than two years ago.

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

UK: Shell says happy to participate in Saudi gas venture.

05/18/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

LONDON, May 18 (Reuters) - Royal Dutch Shell said it was pleased to have won
a significant stake in major gas ventures unveiled by Saudi Arabia on Friday.
Supermajors Exxon Mobil and Shell won starring roles in three projects that
are estimated to require combined initial investment of $25 billion, the
kingdom's biggest opening to foreign investors for 25 years.
"Shell is honoured to be given such a significant role in this historic
development. We are delighted to have been selected to participate in both
Core venture 1 and Core Venture 3," group Chairman Mark Moody-Stuart said in
a company statement.
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Exxon, Shell, BP and
Phillips were given stakes in the biggest of the projects on offer, the $15
billion development in South Ghawar, known as core venture one, the Saudi
Press Agency (SPA) announced.
Exxon also secured the leading role in core venture two, on the Red Sea
coast, with Enron and Occidental taking smaller shares.
Shell, TotalFinaElf and Conoco won stakes in core venture three, for
development of gas at Shaybah in the empty quarter of southeast Saudi Arabia.

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Saudi To Announce Gas Proj 1 & 3 Leaders By Jun 5-Source

05/18/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

DUBAI -(Dow Jones)- Saudi Arabia will announce its selection on who will lead
core gas projects 1 and 3 by June 5, an industry source familiar with the
process told Dow Jones Newswires Friday.
Memoranda of Understanding will also be signed in the first week of June and
by June 5 at the latest, he added.
Earlier Friday. the kingdom announced its selection of international oil
companies that will participate in its three gas core ventures.
Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) was been awarded leadership of Core Venture 2, the
Red Sea project. Occidental Petroleum (OXY) and Enron (ENE), who were bidding
jointly in this initiative, were awarded a stake in the Red Sea project.
No leaders were announced for the other two projects, Core Ventures 1 and 3.
The consortium selected to develop the South Ghawar project - Core Venture 1,
estimated at $15 billion - was awarded to ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch/Shell (RD),
BP Amoco (BP) and Phillips Petroleum
Core Venture 3, the Shaybah project, was awarded to a consortium comprising
Shell, TotalFinaElf (TOT) and Conoco (COCA).
The source said the companies selected for ventures 1 and 3 now have to
"recommit" to the projects at hand, essentially reconfirming their
willingness to participate in the ventures, after which the Saudis will make
their leader selection.
Once the MOU's are signed, a clearer outline of what form the projects will
take will begin and a comprehensive project development program will be
"signed" by the end of this year, the source added.

What stake each company will get in each consortia hasn't been decided yet,
the source said.
The Saudis may leave it to the project leaders to direct negotiations with
its consortium members on how to divide up both the stakes and management of
the whole project. But, he added, the Saudis will have to give final
approval.
The source said the downstream segments of the projects will be 100% operated
by the consortia. The upstream segments will be operated by the Saudi
national oil company, Aramco, but may involve participation of the foreign
companies, he added.
And which Saudi governmental bodies will be involved in each project is also
still unclear. Potential participants include Aramco, The Saudi Electricity
Authority and the kingdom's petrochemical giant, Sabic.
Finally, the source said that the project drafts received by the companies
selected Friday, were more detailed and constructive than expected at this
stage.
Saudi Arabia invited international oil companies in October 1998 to make
proposals for what are mostly downstream gas projects, as well as upstream
gas enhancement.
Saudi Arabia currently has around 2.5 billion cubic feet of gas a day in its
system, and is working toward increasing this to 4 billion cubic feet a day
by 2003. By 2025, it will need an estimated 14 billion cubic feet a day to
meet its own consumption requirements.

By Dyala Sabbagh, Dow Jones Newswires; 00-9714-3441-857;
dyala.sabbagh@dowjones.com

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Shell, Exxon Score Big in Historic Saudi Gas Initiative, Energy Intelligence
Group Reports

05/18/2001
PR Newswire
(Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire)

NEW YORK, May 18 /PRNewswire/ -- Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch/Shell are the
big winners in today's announcement by Saudi Arabia of the companies selected
to participate in its so-called Gas Initiative, Energy Intelligence Group
reports in an analysis of the historic decision. The announcement by Foreign
Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal marks the first extensive reopening of the
country's upstream hydrocarbon sector to international investment since
nationalization in the 1970s.
Both Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch/Shell are in the most coveted Core Venture 1
involving the South Ghawar field, along with BP and Phillips. And each is in
one other venture. Exxon is to lead Core Venture 2, in the Red Sea area, with
an Enron/Occidental consortium as a participating partner. No leader has yet
been selected either for venture three, the Shaybah Area development deal in
which Shell will be grouped with Total Fina Elf and Conoco or -- most
critically -- the giant South Ghawar project, EIG reports in the latest issue
of its Energy Intelligence Briefing service.
Chevron, the company that originally discovered oil in Saudi Arabia, has been
dropped from the participants list, as have Italy's ENI and US Marathon.
Initial agreements defining the scope and duration of the projects are to be
finalized over the next two weeks, with signing due early next month. After
that, attention will turn to hard questions of pinning down precise financial
terms.
BP and Phillips are unlikely to be selected for the leadership role at South
Ghawar, EIG understands. The competition is essentially between Exxon and
Shell. The choice at Core Area 1 may depend in part on the decision in Core
Area 3, where any one of the three partners could yet be selected as
operator. Conoco has the advantage of being the first one to propose a
project in the area. The fact that Total is French is said to operate in its
favor.
FOR MORE GO TO http://www.energyintel.com
http://www.energyintel.com is home on the web for Petroleum Intelligence
Weekly, Oil Daily, Natural Gas Week, and other services from Energy
Intelligence Group. The site is perfect for both EIG's clients and newcomers
looking for the best business intelligence on the world of oil and gas. The
site combines the high quality news, analysis and data you expect from EIG
with cutting-edge Internet technology.
MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT -- Click Here
http://tbutton.prnewswire.com/prn/11690X75636851

/CONTACT: Energy Intelligence Group, 212-532-3405, fax: 212-532-4479/ 12:28
EDT

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Saudi Arabia Selects International Oil Companies for Three Major Projects

05/18/2001
Dow Jones Business News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Saudi Arabia announced its choices of international oil companies from both
sides of the Atlantic for three huge natural-gas projects, marking the
reopening of its energy sector to Western investment, a quarter century after
it was nationalized.
Together, the three projects will require investment of some $25 billion.
A consortium comprising Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), Royal Dutch/Shell Group
(RD), BP PLC (BP) and Phillips Petroleum Co. (P) won the plum Core Venture 1
contract, which is projected to require about $15 billion in investment. No
decision has yet been made on who will lead Core Venture 1, also called the
Ghawar project after the world's largest onshore oil field.
Exxon Mobil will lead Core Venture 2, on the Red Sea Coast. Occidental
Petroleum Corp. (OXY) and Enron Corp. (ENE), which were jointly bidding for
the contract, received a stake in the project.
Core Venture 3, in Shaybah, was awarded to a consortium made up of Shell,
TotalFinaElf (TOT) and Conoco Inc. (COCA). Shaybah is a recently developed
oil field in Saudi Arabia's southeastern region bordering the United Arab
Emirates. No leader has been selected for the Shaybah project either.
Negotiations have been under way for the three projects since Saudi Crown
Prince Abdullah invited major oil companies to return to the country in 1998.
The talks until now focused on broad issues, such as the scope of the
projects.
Other issues are still to be negotiated, and it is expected to be months
before final agreements are signed.
Exxon Mobil, leader of Core Venture 2, the only project for which a leader
was announced Friday, said in a written statement that the project includes
development of discovered gas resources in Northwest Saudi Arabia, power and
desalination facilities in that region and exploration in the Northern Red
Sea with the opportunity for additional investment in chemicals, power and
desalination facilities on the West Coast.
Exxon Mobil also hopes to become project leader for Core Venture 1, which
will expand Saudi Arabia's power, water desalination, petrochemical and gas
systems and provide for exploration and development of gas resources in the
Northern Rub Al-Khali region.
Saudi Arabia will announce its selection of leaders for core projects 1 and 3
by June 5, an industry source familiar with the process told Dow Jones
Newswires Friday. Memoranda of understanding will also be signed in the first
week of June and by June 5 at the latest, he added.
Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Saudi Arabia Picks Foreign Partners for Gas Projects (Update4)
2001-05-18 13:56 (New York)

Saudi Arabia Picks Foreign Partners for Gas Projects (Update4)

     (Adds analyst comments in eighth, 10th and last paragraphs.)

     Riyadh, May 18 (Bloomberg) -- Saudi Arabia picked Exxon Mobil
Corp., Royal Dutch/Shell Group, BP Plc and five other oil
companies for $25 billion of investments, opening its natural-gas
fields to foreigners for the first time in two decades.
     Total Fina Elf SA, Conoco Inc., Phillips Petroleum Co.,
Occidental Petroleum Corp. and Enron Corp. were also selected to
help Saudi Arabia convert its utilities from burning oil to gas.
Saudi Arabia nationalized its oil fields in 1975.
     The investments are designed to spur Saudi Arabia's economy
and provide jobs for the estimated 15 percent of the population
who are unemployed. While the projects initially involve gas, the
winners will have a lead should the country open access to its
crude oil reserves, the world's largest.
     ``I don't think it's going to be spectacularly lucrative, but
there are other, pressing reasons to be there,'' said Julian Lee,
an analyst at the Centre for Global Energy Studies in London,
which was founded by former Saudi oil minister Sheikh Zaki Yamani.
``It's part of a long-term play by the oil companies who want
ultimately to get access again to Saudi crude.''
     Saudi Arabia took over its oil fields following the Arab oil
embargo that started in 1973. The awards culminate three years of
talks and lobbying by the companies with Saudi Arabia, whose
natural-gas reserves are the world's fifth largest.
     The South Ghawar project is the centerpiece of the kingdom's
plan and will include Irving, Texas-based Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP
and Phillips, SPA said. No decision has been made on a leader for
the project, which is expected by analysts to cost $17 billion.
     Shell, Conoco and Total were chosen for the Shaybah project,
which may cost $4 billion. Exxon Mobil will lead an estimated $4
billion project, including Occidental and Enron in the Red Sea
development, the official Saudi Press Agency said, citing Saudi
Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.

                         Agreements

     The partners will soon sign preliminary agreements in the
next few weeks, the government said, though terms have yet to be
decided. Fahnestock & Co. analyst Fadel Gheit expects the
companies to see a return on investment of 10 percent to
15 percent.
     Foreign companies had hoped to regain access to Saudi
Arabia's oil fields, though the government instead sought gas
developments.
     ``The ultimate objective is to get a better seat at the table
in terms of the oil,'' said Jurjen Lunshof, an analyst at Credit
Lyonnais Securities Europe. ``But you wonder whether the terms
will make sense.''
     Even so, Exxon shares rose as much as $1.45, or 1.6 percent,
to $90.18, while Phillips advanced $2.13, or 3.2 percent, to $68
and Enron gained as much as $2.20 to $54.40. In London, BP rose
10.5 pence to 625p and Shell Transport & Trading climbed 15 pence
to 615p.
     Three companies -- Chevron Corp., Eni SpA and Marathon-USX
Group -- also bid for projects. Those who aren't participating
either submitted inappropriate proposals or rejected the
government's invitation, SPA said. Also absent is Texaco Inc.,
which Chevron is buying.

                         Economic Woes

     Saudi Arabia has been running budget deficits for most of the
last two decades and has a public debt some 10 percent bigger than
its $120 billion economy. The country needs foreign investment to
help create enough jobs for the 100,000 men entering the market
each year.
     ``The construction of an energy superhighway will provide a
spurt of growth that should carry the kingdom for many years,''
said Brad Bourland, the chief economist at Saudi American Bank,
before the results were announced. ``The spin-off benefit will be
the creation of thousands of new jobs for Saudis.''
     The kingdom's state-owned energy company, Saudi Aramco, will
hold equity and oversee the projects, though it is expected to
bear none of the costs.
     Exxon has already invested more than $5 billion in the
country, including a 50 percent stake in the Yanbu Petrochemical
Co., when more than $2 billion was raised from more than 30 Saudi
Arabian, regional and international banks. Shell has already
invested more than $7 billion.

                         Power Demand

     Saudi Arabia needs about $120 billion for power generation
projects during the next 20 years, with the annual demand growth
for electricity in the kingdom estimated at 4.5 percent, reported
King Fahd University in Dhahran.
     To meet this demand the country must increase power
generation to 70,000 megawatts by 2020 from 21,000 now.
     Saudi Arabia produces 4.5 billion cubic feet of gas a day,
equal to 800,000 barrels of oil a day, all for domestic use. By
using more gas at home, the country will free up about 300,000
barrels of oil a day for export.
     Drilling and production costs for Saudi gas wells will be
30 percent to 50 percent more than for Saudi oil wells, a boon for
service companies already active in the kingdom such as Nabors
Industries Inc. and BJ Services Co.
     ``This is the most significant development possible for the
oilfield-services industry, outside of burgeoning new activity off
Angola and Brazil,'' Robert W. Baird & Co. analyst George Gaspar
said.


Attached please find the following documents:

Thanks,
Lydia

x3-9338


Jeff,

Here is a resume for a potential trader.  Julie Lim, an associate that used to work here before she went to Harvard recommended him to me.  I have not met the guy, but thought it was worth a look.  Let me know if you would like me to contact him.

Thanks,
Justin

-----Original Message-----
From: Mohsin Hayat [mailto:mohsin@webtitude.com]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:59 PM
To: Cornett, Justin
Subject: Re: w/ ref to Julie Lim

Hi Justin,

Heres the resume. If you have a problem with the cell number then just email me and I will call you back. Cellular service is very patchy in NYC these days.

Best Regards,

Mohsin Hayat
mohsin@webtitude.com <mailto:mohsin@webtitude.com>
+1.917.365.5653

----- Original Message -----
From: Cornett, Justin <mailto:Justin.Cornett@enron.com>
To: Mohsin Hayat <mailto:mohsin@webtitude.com>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 3:21 PM
Subject: RE: w/ ref to Julie Lim

go ahead and send the resume.  i will review it and you can give me a call at sometime next week after the market closes....after 3:00 central time.  i look forward to speaking with you.

regards,
Justin

-----Original Message-----
From: Mohsin Hayat [mailto:mohsin@webtitude.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 4:48 PM
To: Cornett, Justin
Subject: w/ ref to Julie Lim

Hi Justin,

Julie Lim said I could get in touch with you in response to my questions on Enron's energy trading business and my interest in working for such a business.

My experience has been in institutional sales & trading of mostly Asian equities, servicing fund managers in Asia, Australia and North America and in the last couple of years I have been helping startups with strategic business development.

Thanks in advance for volunteering to chat with me; let me know when would be good time and if it would be OK to send you my resume.

Best regards,

Mohsin Hayat
mohsin@webtitude.com <mailto:mohsin@webtitude.com>
+1.917.365.5653

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


Gents,

I made the following changes to this model:
I adjusted all the NPV functions to be as of 12/31/2000.
I incorporated the seasonal availabilities and capacities into revenue
calculations.  Previous to this revision, all monthly merchant revenue was
calculated using the Winter availability and Summer capacity.  All monthly
PPA revenues were calculated using annual average availability and Summer
capacity.
I cleaned up the update macro and added a nifty status bar progress indicator
while the thing's running.

Let me know if you have any other revisions or corrections.

Jon


Here are the bank commitments.  To view you may need to install the efax
viewer.

Click on this to install:

Then click on the file below.

---------------------- Forwarded by Stephen Thome/HOU/ECT on 04/02/2001 05:34
PM ---------------------------

"eFax.com" <eFaxAdmin@efax.com> on 04/02/2003 02:29:25 AM
To: stephen.thome@enron.com
cc:
Subject: 7 page efax from 212 277 400

You have received a 7 page Fax document on
04/02/01 at 03:29:25 PDT

  * The reference number for this fax is 986250418-4259306612-3.
This fax requires eFax Messenger or Messenger Plus to open, if you
are still using the Microviewer, please visit http://www.eFax.com/need
to download a free copy of Messenger or Messenger Plus.

With Messenger Plus you can now...

   * Add your signature to outbound documents - easily.
   * Combine, re-order or delete pages in the thumbnail view.
   * Add custom rubber stamp images to each document.
   * Highlight segments of a document.
   * Embed voice & text annotations for personal notes & data.

Please visit http://www.eFax.com/help if you have any questions
regarding this message or your service.

Thank you for using the eFax service powered
by eFax.com!

 - c8fd453.efx


Sherry, I had to change from Chris to Debra on your reviewers.  I will still visit with
	Chris since you did put her name down.

	Thanks. Lynn


Let me know if you would like anything else included.

----- Forwarded by Greg Woulfe/Enron Communications on 01/05/01 07:09 AM -----

______________________________________
FROM 4 JANUARY 2001

Dr Richard Steinberg
University of Cambridge
The Judge Institute
Trumpington Street
Cambridge CB2 1AG
England

tel: +44-1223-339638
fax: +44-1223-339701
e-mail: r.steinberg@jims.cam.ac.uk


---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 08/28/2000 01:44
PM ---------------------------

Mona L Petrochko@ENRON
08/25/2000 08:41 PM
To: Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, James
M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas
Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Greg Cordell, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Gary
Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Peggy
Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc: West GA, Mary Hain@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D
Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Draft Legislative Language

We have seen an early release of legislative language.  It is SB 1433
Alpert/Davis.

1.  It institutes a rate cap of 6.5 cents/kWh for residential and small
commercial retroactive to June 2000 through December 31, 2002.  It leaves the
ability for the Commission to extend to 2003 if in the public interest.  (We
will strike the last part.)

Small commercial customers are all accounts on Schedule A, all accounts who
are general acute care hospitals, public and private k-12 schools and all
accounts on AL-TOU (up through 6000 kWh/billing period)

2.  Provides an opt-in provision for large commercial/agricultural/industrial
customers with an annual true-up.

The sense I got was that CMTA/CLECA may have asked for this.  It gives
legislative cover.  Will be difficult to administer and the true-up will
discourage sign up.

Please let me know if you agree.

3.  Provides that overcollections of PPA/QFs/SONGs will be used to offset
undercollections of cap.

Our comment is that the overcollections, on a pro-rata basis will be used to
offset the cap.  All customers pay stranded costs associated with those
contracts, all customers should receive stranded benefits.

4.  SDG&E is still subject to reasonableness review by the Commission.  To
the extent FERC orders refunds as part of its investigation, such refunds
will go to SDG&E's customers.

Not too bad.


Duke has indicated that the cannot complete the proposed commodity/loan transaction with my proposed collateral threshold exemption.   They have indicated that creates "accounting issues" for there accrual book.

Therefore, I need to know the cost of credit to assign to the proposed cash flows.  In rough numbers, we receive $200 million in the first two years and return $250 million in the last two years.

Because of this, in years 03 and 04, our collateral posting will be significant.

Let me know your thoughts ASAP on Monday morning.


Attached is the game schedule for the Chargers.  Please let me know if you
have any questions or concerns.  Thanks.

(See attached file: Chargers Game Schedule.doc)


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

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

Distillate     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/hoil23.pdf
Unleaded     http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/unlded23.pdf

Scott Mollner Recomendation
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/recom11-21-01.pdf


Your eRequest's password is 4311
To use this password, go to the eRequest website and click on non-Corp logon.
Put in your email address and the password above and click Log In, and you
will log into eRequest.


AGA for 10/27/00 is 70


Several recent developments, and in the interest of economy (mine!), I am
copying all of you, who will have varying interests in this.

First, as soon as the upper house of parliament passes legislation, Austria
will have accelerated their market oppening, to 100% in power by 2001,
October, and by 2002, October for gas.  Sadia, you will want to reflect this
in what you are doing for Kyran/EES, and Kathryn, you will want to note this,
if Investor Relations is updating this data for analysts.  Margaret, FYI to
you, too.

Second, I note that this decision was reached after being supported by a
studyby the Austrian Institute of Economic Research (WIFO), saying
liberalisation would bring down prices by 12-15%.  Paul H., suggest you have
Viviana get a copy, and if in English, send copies to Margaret Carson.

Belgian cabinet has approved draft regulation lowering power threshold to
20GWh p.a.   This goes to 10 GWh on 31 December 2002.  Sadia, I think this is
again an acceleration, to be reflected in your updated numbers.  Margaret and
Kathryn, also note.

Finally, Kyran, I see that EnergieNed has issued a study saying that there is
"not a direct relationship between efficiency and deregulation".  I may take
issue with this, depending upon what the full text says.  Can you work with
Teun/Sadia to obtain a copy, and, if not too lengthy, get it translated for
my review (and presumably your's, too)?  thanks

Please do not hesitate to contact me should any of you have any questions.
thanks  mcs


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

November 17, 2000 5:00pm through November 20, 2000 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:
Impact:  EDI
Time:  Sat 11/18/2000 at  11:00:00 PM CT thru Sun 11/19/2000 at  1:00:00 AM CT
 Sat 11/18/2000 at   9:00:00 PM PT thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  11:00:00 PM PT
 Sun 11/19/2000 at   5:00:00 AM London thru Sun 11/19/2000 at  7:00:00 AM
London
Outage:  EDI HUB DISK VOLUME INCREASE
Environments Impacted:  Corporate
Purpose: Continued EDI volume increases require the addition of more disk
space for EDI operations.
Backout: Utilize current configuration w/o new HACMP configuration
Contact(s):  Jack Metkus
  Jim Nelson  3-7799  713-327-2007
  Karen O'Grady  5-7149  713-327-4805
  Jack Metkus  3-0362  713-288-0743

EI:
Impact:  EI
Time:  Fri 11/17/2000 at  8:00:00 PM CT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  9:00:00 PM CT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at  6:00:00 PM PT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  7:00:00 PM PT
 Sat 11/18/2000 at  2:00:00 AM London thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  3:00:00 AM
London
Outage:  EI Load Balancing
Environments Impacted:  El
Purpose: to stabilize the EI environment
Backout: Remove new 6500s reconnect 5500s as previously installed
Contact(s):  Steve Hardy  713-853-9294  713-415-0672

ENRON NORTH AMERICAN LANS:  No Scheduled Outages.

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET: No Scheduled Outages.

LOTUS NOTES: No Scheduled Outages.

MARKET DATA: No Scheduled Outages.

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS: UNIX
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Fri 11/17/2000 at  5:30:00 PM CT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  7:30:00 PM CT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at  3:30:00 PM PT thru Fri 11/17/2000 at  5:30:00 PM PT
 Fri 11/17/2000 at 11:30:00 PM London thru Sat 11/18/2000 at  1:30:00 AM
London
Outage:  Apply patch to TAS 6.0 on Pluto
Environments Impacted:  UNIX Users
Purpose: Applying patch to fix known issues with 6.0 release.
Backout: Uninstall patch.
Contact(s):  Troy Beyer  713.345.8316  713.406.1782

SITARA:  No Scheduled Outages.

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
(713) 853-5536   Information Risk Management

Specific Applications Help:
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]
All Other Systems    (713) 563-5797  [Pager]
      or (713) 563-5987  [Pager]


Just let Mr. De Dalmas know that I asked someone to respond.  SS
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 09/01/2000 11:43 AM -----

	Sheila Glover
	08/01/2000 09:47 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samantha Boyd/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: CSFB legal docs

---------------------- Forwarded by Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT on 08/01/2000 09:41
AM ---------------------------

"De Dalmas, Guillaume" <guillaume.dedalmas@csfb.com> on 08/01/2000 09:31:17 AM
To: "'sheila.glover@enron.com'" <sheila.glover@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: CSFB legal docs

Dear Sheila

My colleagues have told me that you have received the following CSFB
documents.

* PrimeTrade access agreement
* standardized give ups
* clearing docs
* futures fees.

Please let me know if you need any help or have any questions , I will make
sure that you get answers right away.

Sincerely

G de Dalmas

Guillaume de Dalmas
Director
CREDIT | FIRST
SUISSE | BOSTON
Prime Brokerage & Listed Derivatives
Eleven Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10010-3629
email:guillaume.dedalmas@csfb.com
Tel:      212-325-2730
Fax:     603-250-4916
Mobile: 914-830-4842

[INFO] -- Content Manager:
This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information.  No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.
If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. CREDIT SUISSE GROUP and each of its subsidiaries each reserve
the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.  Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except
where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state
them to be the views of any such entity.
Unless otherwise stated, any pricing information given in this message is
indicative only, is subject to change and does not constitute an offer to
deal at any price quoted.
Any reference to the terms of executed transactions should be treated as
preliminary only and subject to our formal written confirmation.


I believe Barbara's message is amply clear.

Steve
----- Forwarded by Steve Van Hooser/HOU/ECT on 09/27/2000 05:58 PM -----

	Barbara N Gray
	09/27/2000 05:57 PM

		 To: Steve Van Hooser/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

I don't think Brian, the President of HPL should be having any meetings with
Entex................if someone is to meet with Entex, it needs to be an ENA
person; similarly, we should not be asking for a meeting with Entex.  If
ENTEX wants to schedule a joint meeting,it might be okay to
attend............depending on the subject matter...........ANYTHING HAVING
TO DO WITH PRICING SHOULD NOT BE DISCUSSED...........i BELIEVE MORE FACTS
NEED TO BE MARSHALLED.

	Steve Van Hooser
	09/27/2000 05:06 PM

		 To: Barbara Gray
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

Barbara,
I had a chance to look at this again and I have left a note for Dan (he
wasn't in his office) indicating that if by "I think we should involve MidCon
in the discussions" Brian intends a joint meeting among ENA, MidCon and Entex
to discuss the correction fo nomination irregularities, I think that's an
acceptable proposal.  If, however, Brian intends a private meeting between
MidCon and ENA to discuss our respective contractual obligations to Entex,
then I think Dan needs fo advise Brian of the risks attendant to such a
meeting.

Do you agree?

Steve
----- Forwarded by Steve Van Hooser/HOU/ECT on 09/27/2000 05:00 PM -----

	Dan J Hyvl
	09/26/2000 03:18 PM

		 To: Steve Van Hooser/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

Steve,
 Please see Brian Redmond note to Brenda below regarding meeting with MidCon
to talk about their imbalances with Reliant Energy.  This could possible open
both parties up to a torturous interference argument with Reliant Energy.  Do
you agree?  If so, we need to nix meeting idea.
----- Forwarded by Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT on 09/26/2000 03:14 PM -----

	Brian Redmond
	09/26/2000 10:03 AM

		 To: Brenda F Herod/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: James I Ducote/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas A
Martin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet H Wallis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward D Gottlob/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Steve HPL Schneider/HOU/ECT@ECT, Yvette G Connevey/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

Brenda,

Can you send me a copy of Bruce's response.  Also, we need to meet on Entex
this week as you suggest.  In my discussions with Bruce, he feels that Entex
can account for all of their gas nominations/takes - and that these
nominations are not related to intra-month price volatility.

We discussed having an initial meeting next week.  Then, if it makes sense, I
think we should involve MidCon in the discussions as their imbalances seem to
be a key factor in Entex changing their nominations.   These meetings would
be to seek to develop a working protocol that we could use to improve
communication and establish more definitive criteria for changing
nominations.

The end game would be a final meeting with Entex senior management to agree a
solution to past sins and a way forward.

Brian

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Brenda F Herod                           09/25/2000 10:53 PM

To: James I Ducote/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas A
Martin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet H Wallis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian Redmond/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Edward D Gottlob/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve HPL Schneider/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Yvette G Connevey/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

Please read the attached summary of Coogler's response to the audit
findings.  I would like to get the group together later this week to
determine next steps.

Jim, Dan and Janet:  I would appreciate you all paying special attention to
the claims.  Do you all know what Bruce is referring to?  If you all can do
some research before the meeting, I think we'll be able to get to our next
steps quicker.  Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Brenda F Herod/HOU/ECT on 09/25/2000
10:44 PM ---------------------------

richard.j.feldmann@us.arthurandersen.com on 09/18/2000 08:29:49 PM
To: BHerod@Enron.com
cc: danny.d.rudloff@us.arthurandersen.com,
frederick.g.rhodes@us.arthurandersen.com,
matthew.l.thomas@us.arthurandersen.com
Subject: Re: Coogler's Response

Brenda,

Matthew reviewed Coogler's responses and brings up the following questions.

We can do one-of-two things at this point.  We can either add the Reliant
responses to our audit report as "Auditee Responses", or we can have Enron
provide answers and possibly have us do some additional work.  The additional
work is dependent on Enron's answers to the questions.

Please advise.

Rick

To:   Frederick G. Rhodes, Richard J. Feldmann
cc:
Date: 09/18/2000 04:29 PM
From: Matthew L. Thomas, Houston , (713) 237-2629
Subject:  Coogler's Response

Rick and Fred:

I hope things are going well up in Salt Lake City.  I have gone through all of
Bruce's numbers today.  I have come up with a few questions that Enron needs
to
answer.

1. Reliant claims that in East Texas the cut off for complementary customers
is
30 Mcf/ day,  does Enron agree?
2. Reliant claims that the "New Technology Contract" overrides  or is an
exception to the Enfolio Master Agreement.  Does Enron agree that this is a
legitimate exception?
3. Reliant claims that all off the industrial mis-classified gas in the
Houston
Division is under "special contracts" with special pricing, and even though
they
are using less than 100 Mcf /day they receive a lower price of 2.71 per MMBTU.
Does Enron agree that this is a legitimate exception?
4. In the Houston Division it appears that Louisiana Pacific only uses gas for
heating in the winter, about three months out of the year.  Is there total
divided by three to find their average usage, or is it divided by 12?  Bruce
divided by three, we divided by twelve.  They are a customer all year, and are
not a new customer, or a customer that has left.
5. Does Enron want to give Reliant leeway on the 100 Mcf rule?  What will the
actual cut off be?  Bruce backs out 137,000 Mcf that was close, but not quite
100 Mcf.

These are the issues that I see.  The first three questions are things that
Enron may have to ask Bracewell and Patterson.  We were not notified of any of
the special contracts that he mentions.  Let me know what I need to do.  If
you
guys have questions for me, it might be easier if we all got on the phone and
spoke about it.  Thanks,

Matthew

*******************Internet Email Confidentiality Footer*******************

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.  If you
are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery
of
the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to
anyone.
In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent
to
Internet email for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my
firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.


I want verification from Tim, Chris Calger, and you that working on the RTO
West tariff and generation interconnect agreement is consistent with my "new
narrower role" as regulatory attorney for the West power desk and the
apporpriate priority for use of my time.  Should I ask them now or should I
wait until after we meet next week?


<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR>

Be Stress Free; Eliminate Your Debt!

::: SPEAK TO ONE OF OUR COUNSELORS FREE OF CHARGE :::

CLICK HERE TO START

Totally ELIMINATE LATE FEES!

Totally ELIMINATE HIGH FINANCE CHARGES!!!

Reduce  your credit card balances 40 - 60%

Pay off all your unsecured debts in 18 - 30 months*

Reduce  your current credit card payments up to 50%

Our process is successful 100% of the time!
 (This does not apply to home or auto loans.)

CLICK HERE TO START

We are against
                Spam and don't want anybody to receive our mailings who does not
                wish to receive them. This is not Spam. To be removed from this
                mailing list, DO NOT REPLY to this message. Instead, Please
                click here.
                and add
                your address for removal

++++++++++__________|

////_+++u8@@@@

.

+_______//////////+====

 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

////////____


Here is the Schedule B Attachment.
Ben


good luck...I'm sure you'll do well!  Have fun

fletch


Form 144: Filing to Sell 10000 Shares of BEST BUY INC (BBY)

********************************
WATCH A PRO TRADE IN REAL TIME

AmericaInvest.com chief technical analyst Harry Boxer
has averaged returns of 2.5% PER DAY in the last 30 days.

See what Harry's trading tick by tick in his real-time
'Technical Trading Diary.'  Beat the bear market with
with both long and short trading ideas.

Sign up for our FREE 15-day trial at
http://216.133.228.197/harry/harryorderpage2.asp?MID=50009

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

View complete article at: http://news.stockselector.com/newsarticle.asp?symbol=BBY&article=61725211

BEST BUY CO INC  54.000

Jun 01, 2001 (Vickers Stock Research via COMTEX) --

<bs>Report Date: June 01, 2001

<bs>Filer: HOFF, SUSAN S.
<bs>Relation: Officer

<bs>Stock Name: BEST BUY INC
<bs>Stock CUSIP: 086516101

<bs>Stock Symbol: BBY
<bs>Exchange: NYSE

<bs>Trade date: May 22, 2001
<bs>Shares for sale: 100

Other Companies Involved:
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

To unsubscribe, please go to http://www.stockselector.com/modifyportfolio.asp?portnumber=1

? Copyright 1998-99, StockSelector.com


Just wanted to keep you all informed of my recent discussions with Kinder
Morgan regarding potentially selling them 4 LM 6000's.  At first they were
interested in some of the development sites, but became more interested in
the equipment.  They are trying to get their hands on as many LM 6000's as
possible, because of their plant configuration utilizing 6 LM 6000's per
plant.  With my last dicussion as of yesterday (Tuesday the 5th), I gave them
the approximate price at which they could buy the turbines for - $15,000,000
per turbine.  Their comment was it was a little on the high side, but they
still sounded interested because of the quick time frame of receiving them -
1st Qtr. '01.  If they are still interested they will get back with me with a
non-binding term sheet within the next couple of weeks.  Please let me know
if you have any comments.  Thank you!
Ben


FYI.
---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT on 09/30/99 09:12
AM ---------------------------

Robert Quick
09/29/99 05:21 AM
To: Matthias Lee/SIN/ECT@ECT
cc: Anita Fam/SIN/ECT@ECT, Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angeline
Poon/SIN/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: MT Pacific Valour - 3KT PX Daesan to Map Ta Phut

Matt, my thoughts on this which are based on general contractual principles
rather than admiralty matters of which I have no experience (admiralty is to
do with ships hitting each other I think).

a. yes. Clear breach of a condition.

b. I agree with your outside counsel that there is no basis that this clause
somehow overrides the right to terminate for breach of a condition. In my
view you would have to use express language to say that this general right is
excluded. No Court is going to say that all material breaches must have a
cure period - it makes no commercial /legal sense.

c. Affirmation is express must be clear and unambiguous. This conversation
without knowing much about the background does not seem very unreserved. This
is a matter of evidence. I take it there is no question of any implied
affirmation. Otherwise I agree with yr thoughts on this.

therefore I would not be hopeful of success in this one. tks

Matthias Lee
09/29/99 09:20 AM
To: Robert Quick/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anita Fam/SIN/ECT@ECT, Angeline
Poon/SIN/ECT@ECT
Subject: MT Pacific Valour - 3KT PX Daesan to Map Ta Phut

Robert

As spoken, I have been advising Russell Aeria here in Singapore on a
contentious matter.  Watson Farley & Williams ("WFW") have been retained as
external counsel. Because the issues are to be determined under English law
and your experience with admiralty matters, Alan has suggested that we seek
your counsel as well.

Below are the salient facts and issues. If you need and clarification or wish
to discuss, please call me  or let me know if we should schedule a time
tomorrow to speak again.

My numbers are : (65) 838 9103 (office); (65) 96919646 (mobile)

Facts:

1. ECTS purchased 3KT PX from Hyundai Singapore Pte Ltd ("Hyundai") FOB
Daesan, Korea; loading date range  14 - 20 Sept. ECTS sold the same 3KT PX to
Tuntex (Thailand) Public Company Limited ("Tuntex") CFR Map Ta Phut Thailand;
delivery date range 1 - 30 Sept.

2. ECTS chartered the Pacific Valour under asbatankvoy ETA Daesan 11/12 Sept,
Laycan 14 - 20 Sept.  The vessel was not able to meet ETA at Daesan
apparently because of delays at the preceding port in China The vessel
ultimately advised on 20 Sept ETA 22/pm, ie. 2 days beyond loading date
range.

3. ECTS failed to secure alternative tonnage primarily because of a typhoon
on 20 Sept. On 21 Sept, Hyundai terminated the agreemnet to supply the PX on
grounds that loading date range has expired. ECTS cancelled the charter on
the same day.

4. Alternative supply has been arranged for Tuntex. ECTS is considering
possible actions against Hyundai and the vessel owners.

5.  WFW has advised, subject to facts and evidence, ECTS has a reasonable
chance against the vessel owner for failing in their duty of reasonable
despatch to make the itinerary. We are comfortable with this opinion. WFW,
however, has opined that WCTS does not have a reasonable cause of action
against Hyundai, and it is in this regard we seek your comments.

Issues& advice:

a. Whether the loading date range is a condition of the contract with Hyundai
such that ECTS's failure to load within the date range was a breach entitling
Hyundai to rescind.

WFW advise that it is a condition as time in commercial contracts are of the
essence unless expressed otherwise.

b. If prima facie a condition, whether the definition of "Default" in the
confirmation (Enron's buyer form) with Hyundai under "DEFAULT, TERMINATION
AND LIQUIDATION", namely,  "...a material breach of this Agreement and fails
to cure such breach within ten (10) daysafter written notice..." implies into
a contract a cure period for material breaches.

WFW advise that there is no legal basis to argue that the clause overrides
Hyundai's right to terminate.

I attach the Hyundai confirmation for your easy reference:

c. Whether the taped conversation between Russel and Joseph Tan amounts to an
election to affirm the contract on the part of Hyundai such that they cannot
thereafter rely on ECTS's breach to terminate.

I was given the transcript yesterday and examined it closer today. It is
quite short and attached for your reference. The conversation took place on
20 Sept at about 9 am.

I have today asked WFW for their opinion on the same and expect them to
revert before the end of the day.

My view is that it is difficult to construe an election from the conversation
which amounts to Hyundai giving up their right to terminate. Even if it were
an election, I am of the view that it would be limited to an extension untill
21 Sept. In this regard, the vessel did not arrive until 22 Sept and we
advised Hyundai before they terminated on 21 Sept that ETA was 22/pm.  Please
let me have your comments notwithstanding.

If you wish to review WFW's opinions, please let me know and I'll fax them
across. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Many thanks

Matt


Kay - attached is Roy's writeup on our Hub Agency discussion last week.  Let
me know what your schedule looks like today.  If you have time, I would like
to go through this with you and David to get your thoughts and kick-off the
drafting.

Thanks,

Gregg


I believe Vince Kaminski could possibly be of assistance in this matter.

Damon Kovelsky <dkovelsky@meridien-research.com> on 03/12/2001 02:05:06 PM
To: "'scott.neal@enron.com'" <scott.neal@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Follow-up

Mr. Neal,

 I wrote you last week a request to spend some time talking to you
about Enron's Energy Risk Management for a report I am writing on energy
risk management applications.  I understand that you are a busy man, but I
would just like a half hour to talk.  If you would like a list of questions,
I would be happy to provide them.
 This conversation does not have to be on the record if you don't
want it to.  The main purpose for my enquiry is to understand how energy
risk applications are being used "on the ground".  I would like to be able
to write about Enron, but it is not required.
 I look forward to hearing from you.

Cheers,

Damon Kovelsky
Research Associate
Emerging Trading Technologies and Risk Management
Meridien Research
dkovelsky@meridien-research.com
617-796-2830


Thanks.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Perrino, Dave
Sent:	Monday, November 12, 2001 11:52 AM
To:	Steffes, James D.
Cc:	Walton, Steve; Comnes, Alan; Alvarez, Ray
Subject:	RE: EPSA Draft Motion to Intervene and Protest in the WestConnect	RTO filing

Jim,

I was not aware EPSA was filing an intervention to the WestConnect tariff.  After a cursory review of the attachment however, it very much lines up with what I have sent to Ray and Steve.  We focus a bit more on the lack of definition of a congestion management plan as well as hit on "hints" of where WestConnect is probably going to stay (contract path) based upon some clues in the filing.  We focus more on existing contracts (lack of conversion) as well as additional comments on the planning appendix.  They hit just about every other point we cover, independence, or lack thereof being the key.

Thanks,

Dave

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Steffes, James D.
Sent:	Monday, November 12, 2001 9:43 AM
To:	Perrino, Dave
Cc:	Walton, Steve; Comnes, Alan
Subject:	FW: EPSA Draft Motion to Intervene and Protest in the WestConnect	RTO filing

Dave --

I assume you are following this?

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Michael Reddy" <Mreddy@epsa.org>@ENRON
Sent:	Monday, November 12, 2001 10:54 AM
To:	acomnes@enron.com; Hawkins, Bernadette; Nersesian, Carin; Nicolay, Christi L.; Fulton, Donna; Steffes, James D.; Scheuer, Janelle; Hartsoe, Joe; Shelk, John; Noske, Linda J.; Robertson, Linda; Alvarez, Ray; Shapiro, Richard; Novosel, Sarah; Mara, Susan; Lindberg, Susan; Hoatson, Tom
Subject:	EPSA Draft Motion to Intervene and Protest in the WestConnect	RTO filing

MEMORANDUM

TO: Regulatory Affairs Committee
      Power Marketers Working Group

FROM: Jim Steffes, Regulatory Affairs Committee Chair
           Bob Reilley, Power Marketers Working Group Chair
           Julie Simon, Vice President of Policy
           Erin Perrigo, Manager of Policy

DATE: November 12, 2001

RE: EPSA Draft Motion to Intervene and Protest in the
      WestConnect RTO filing
?			Filing due November 15th
?
Attached is EPSA's motion to intervene and protest in the WestConnect RTO filing (Docket Nos. EL02-9-000 and RT02-1-000).  The draft primarily focuses on independence and governance issues, however also highlights the WestConnect tariff, congestion management, market monitoring, pricing and interconnection aspects of the filing.  For example, the draft argues that the participating transmission owners retain too much authority over RTO operations, that FERC should require all RTO load to take service under the WestConnect tariff, and that WestConnect should adopt the GridFlorida market monitoring plan.

Interventions are due to FERC on Thursday, November 15th.  Please have any edits or comments to Erin Perrigo at eperrigo@epsa.org by noon on Wednesday, November 14th.   We'll also discuss the draft on this week's Regulatory Affairs conference call on Wednesday, November 14th, at 3:30 P.M. (EST).  To access the call, dial 1-800-937-6563.  Ask for the Julie Simon/EPSA Call.  If you have further questions or comments, please contact Erin Perrigo at eperrigo@epsa.org or 202-628-8200.

Attachment

Michael Reddy
Policy/Research Assistant
EPSA
1401 New York Avenue, NW, 11th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 628-8200
(202) 828-8260 Fax

 - WestConnect Protest.DOC << File: WestConnect Protest.DOC >>


Hello, Sherri!    I just wanted to let you know that Stan is out of the
office today on a field trip, but I will discuss this with him on Monday.

Cindy

Jeff_Skilling%ENRON@eott.com@eott.com on 04/19/2001 05:18:15 PM
Sent by: Sherri_Sera%ENRON@eott.com
To: Cliff_Baxter%ECT@EOTT.COM, Rick_Buy%ENRON@eott.com,
Ben_Glisan%ECT@EOTT.COM, Steven_J_Kean%Enron@EOTT.COM,
Jeffrey_Sherrick%ENRON@eott.com, Philippe_A_Bibi%ENRON@eott.com,
Michael_Brown%ENRON@eott.com, Wade_Cline%ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@EOTT.COM,
James_A_Hughes%ENRON@eott.com, Louise_Kitchen%ECT@EOTT.COM,
Rebecca_McDonald%ENRON@eott.com, Greg_Piper%ENRON@eott.com,
John_Sherriff%ECT@EOTT.COM, Greg_Whalley%ECT@EOTT.COM,
Janet_R_Dietrich%EES@EOTT.COM, Mark_S_Muller%EES@EOTT.COM,
Matthew_Scrimshaw%ECT@EOTT.COM, David_Cox%Enron_Communications@EOTT.COM,
Kevin_Hannon%Enron_Communications@EOTT.COM, Rod_Hayslett%ENRON@eott.com,
Stan_Horton@eott.com, Danny_McCarty%Enron@EOTT.COM
cc:

Subject:

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

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

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

Sherri :-)


Hap:  Let's discuss further, but my reaction is that, while we don't need to--and shouldn't--actively and openly support John's letter, I don't believe that we should do anything to oppose, or prevent, John from releasing it.  Do you have particular concerns? I'll call you to discuss further.

Best,
Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Boyd, Hap
Sent:	Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:40 PM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff
Subject:	for Board review and comment

Jeff,
John White has proposed to the CEERT Board that we send the attached letter to the Governor attacking the DWR contracts. Would you please take a look at it and let me know what you think of it.  You can reach me on my cell phone at 213-359-0853. Thanks.
Hap
---------------------- Forwarded by Hap Boyd/EWC/Enron on 09/11/2001 06:41 PM ---------------------------

"Rachel McMahon" <rachel@cleanpower.org> on 09/11/2001 04:16:37 PM
To:	"'V. John White'" <vjw@cleanpower.org>, "'Jack Pigott'" <jackp@calpine.com>, <blunden@hotmail.com>, <counihan@greenmountain.com>, <rcavanagh@nrdc.org>, <dank@environmentaldefense.org>, <rich@ceert.org>, <emaddox@seawestwindpower.com>, <jweisgall@aol.com>, <jlevin@ucsusa.org>, <srose@ecovote.org>, <lnelson@westernrenewables.com>, <hap.boyd@enron.com>, <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, <emiller@siliconenergy.com>, <olsendil@concentric.net>, <smitty@greenbuilder.com>, <rachel@rnp.org>, <taschehoug@mnmethane.com>
cc:

Subject:	for Board review and comment

CEERT and Clean Power Campaign Directors - Attached is a revised version of
the letter sent earlier this week regarding CDWR power contracts.  Please
review and respond with comments as soon as possible.  A discussion of
CEERT's plan of action will be scheduled shortly.

Thank you,
Rachel McMahon
CEERT
916-442-7785
916-447-2940 fax
rachel@ceert.org

 - Sept 11 to Governor re contracts.doc << File: Sept 11 to Governor re contracts.doc >>

<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>


COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION
                        NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
                                OCTOBER 09, 2001

Notice ID: 3170
5 - NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

SUBJECT: CAPACITY ALLOCATION-TIMELY NOMINATION CYCLE FOR OCTOBER 10, 2001

PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL ALLOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON THE RECEIPT OF
ANY NEW NOMINATIONS OR INTRADAY NOMINATIONS.

RECEIPTS:

TCO-LEACH:  There is no capacity for new IPP customers.  Flowing IPP customers
received 62.361% of their October 9, 2001 flowing volumes or their October 10,
2001 nominated quantities, whichever was less.

DELIVERIES:

ALGONQUIN:

HANOVER:  There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There is no capacity for
secondary firm customers.

Excess MDWQ               Available +
ISS Withdrawals           Available
SIT Withdrawals           Available
Imbalance Drawdowns       Available
PAL Lends/Unparks         Available

Excess MDIQ               Not Available +
ISS Injections            Not Available
SIT Injections            Not Available
Imbalance Paybacks        Not Available
PAL Parks/Loan Paybacks   Not Available

+ Call Gas Control 24 hours in advance at (304) 357-2606 to request approval.

Columbia Gas Transmission has completed allocating all of its receipt and
delivery points for the gas day of October 10, 2001.  You may now view the
quantities you are authorized to flow on October 10, 2001.  On the Internet
NAVIGATOR, view Nominations, Scheduled Quantity, Scheduled Quantity for Service
Requestor-Summary, Nominations to be Viewed, and select Reduced Nominations.
The quantities confirmed to flow for your account are available on the Internet
NAVIGATOR after 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday,
October 9, 2001.

If you have any questions, please contact your Account Representative.


Please post the attached notice immediately.

(Marketers:  in paragraph 8, I've eliminated the min/max language since we're
willing to do a rate over the max.
In paragraph 10, I've changed the tiebreak procedure.)


Dawn,

I received your email with p&l's.  Please continue to send them daily.

Thank you,
Phillip


Jeff

My interview with Howard will be scheduled on a different day.

Vince

"$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" <jjw@ziplip.com> on 02/16/2001 10:06:24 PM
Please respond to "$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" <jjw@ziplip.com>
To: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Tuesday biz trip

[Vince,]
Jeff,

I cannot interview Howard on Tue (business trip) [OK- I will let London know
this].
I think the organization is very interested in him [Thank you for your
help...I always consider working for you, primarily- not just Enron as a
company...my goal is to make you happy and do what you want; My mission was
to get Howard to you, I understand he will go in front of the directors in
London- what can I do to help you interview him? I understand that ?Melanie?
is doing this...and the Manager of Risk at RW is directing Howard. Do you
want me to set Howard up with you after the second round in Enron London?]

I don't know what "illicts your attention" means [Sorry, mistype in the
car...was traveling to the snow with my girlfriend on a "mini-vacation" today
(I neglect her and took off to make her happy)...I constantly think of my
work (never peace of mind) and because I remain loyal to you...I recieved
this email information on Howard today(form Enron London) and felt it was
important enough for you to be aware of (the 2nd interview) and make sure you
were happy regardless of where I'm going or what I'm doing (you said last
time you were going to interview this guy by video conference and Rachel said
she was going to set it up with you)- I didn't know, otherwise. If I don't
know something then I can't report to you accurate information therefore, I
forward everything to you- so, it is transparent or maybe you knew something
different or something I overlooked. I usually send everything and anything
related to this guy (Howard) because I know you liked him and I can't afford
any mi!
stakes- sorry to be a pest. Anything you want me to do please tell me- I'll
do it. Thanks, Vince. Jeff]

Vince

*  Get free, secure online email at http://www.ziplip.com/  *


Lucy,

Please open this excel file and input the rents and names due for this week.
Then email the file back.


Notice No. 01-108
March 27, 2001

TO:
All COMEX Division Members/Member Firms
All COMEX Division Clearing Members
All COMEX Division Floor Traders
All COMEX Division Operations Managers

FROM:
Michael Campanelli, Vice President
Floor Operations, COMEX Division

RE:
Spot Month Procedures on the Eve of First Notice Day

Please be reminded that Friday, March 30, 2001, is the First Notice Day, for
the Gold, Silver, Copper and Aluminum futures delivery month of April 2001
(the new spot month).

On Thursday, March 29, 2001, the Eve of the First Notice Day, all Brokers and
Clearing Members must have a duly authorized, On-Line Trade Entry (&OLTE8)
system trained representative available until such time as the Exchange deems
necessary.

It is imperative that trades involving the Spot Month are processed and
cleared properly.  Therefore, representatives are expected to make a diligent
effort to process all Spot Month trades accurately.

Failure by any Clearing Member or qualified Floor Trader to show due
diligence involving Spot Month Trade processing may result in severe
disciplinary action by the Exchange.

If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact David
Sherman at (212) 299-2061.

MC/ms

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

"http://208.206.41.61/email/email_log.cfm?useremail=sara.shackleton@enron.com&
refdoc=(01-108)"

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.


Louise,

Attached below please find an overview of the CRRA/FuelCell Energy Connecticut proposal.  This page highlights the major details and emphasizes what Enron brings to the table (why they need us vs. anyone else).

Please call if you need any clarification.

Regards,

Heather


Here we go (?)

Calif Small Generator:To Sign SoCal Ed Bankruptcy Filing
By Mark Golden

03/15/2001
Dow Jones Energy Service
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- One of California's small independent electricity
producers, Coram Energy Group Ltd., will sign an involuntary bankruptcy
petition Thursday against Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California
Edison, the owner of the company said.

The petition is being circulated to five other companies and lists the amount
of money each is owed by the utility, Coram's Brian O'Sullivan told Dow Jones
Newswires. O'Sullivan wouldn't name the other companies on the petition, but
said that they are all "qualifying facilities" as the small generating plants
are called.

The petition, known as a Form 5, could be filed in U.S. bankruptcy court in
Los Angeles as soon as next week, O'Sullivan said.

"I would have liked to have done it myself some time ago, but I couldn't do
it on my own," said O'Sullivan, who received the papers for signing
Wednesday. "(The) planets are in line for this to be filed in court. They
would have to be knocked out of line somehow for this not to be filed."

O'Sullivan said he would have preferred not to pursue a bankruptcy
proceeding, but is running out of cash and will have to shut down his
operations in about a month. That situation, combined with the stalling of
legislation in the California Senate to deal with the qualifying facilities,
have left O'Sullivan with no other option, he said.

Qualifying facilities, from which U.S. utilities have had to buy power since
the 1970s under federal law, supply California with almost 30% of its power.
Southern California Edison hasn't paid these producers for months.

FPL Group (FPL), which owns several qualifying facilities in SCE's territory,
also may join the group to initiate involuntary bankruptcy proceedings.

"We are considering it, but haven't made a determination of whether we would
join such a petition," said FPL spokeswoman Carol Klaussen. "It's extremely
frustrating to us. We continue to supply electricity to the people of
California, but we haven't been paid since November."

As reported, California Assemblyman Fred Keely, D-Boulder Creek, said
legislation to restructure the rates qualifying facilities charge utilities
for electricity is unlikely to be passed by the state's Legislature. Keely,
who is Assembly speaker pro tem and a co-sponsor of the measure, SB47X, said
the bill is still being heard in the Senate's Energy Committee, but the
committee's chairwoman, Sen. Debra Bowen, has no intention of taking up the
bill any time soon, an aide in her office said.

The stalled legislation would reduce the rates charged by the state's
qualifying facilities to about 8 cents a kilowatt-hour from the 17 cents a
kilowatt-hour they've charged over the past few months. It would also
establish a schedule of payments the utilities must make to the qualifying
facilities. The small generators are owed a combined $1 billion from Southern
California Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric.

O'Sullivan said that his and several other companies can't wait any longer.

"From the beginning, I've been hearing, 'Oh, you guys won't start a
bankruptcy proceeding.' And we didn't do it, because SB47x, we were told,
would solve our problem. It was a good faith attempt by us to be part of the
solution," he said. "Why Bowen stopped it, I don't know."

Southern California Edison owes Coram $350,000, O'Sullivan said. He's got
$41,000 in the bank, and has stopped paying most of his bills with the
exception of salaries for his seven staff members and several other
absolutely necessary payments.

"That leaves me with about a month of cash," he said.

But his legal fees would quickly have surpassed the amount he is owed if he
were to have taken the utility to court alone.

"I've got to join with someone who is significantly larger than me," he said.
"That opportunity has arisen."

O'Sullivan wouldn't name the larger company, which he said will make the
final decision about when and if to bring involuntary bankruptcy proceedings
against Southern California Edison.

"This could be the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history, and you can't do it
without spending the next couple of years in court," O'Sullivan said. "This
is not anything I want to do, but I don't have any choice."

-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com

(Jason Leopold in Los Angeles contributed to this article.)

An Edison International spokesman declined to comment specifically on the
petition, as the company hadn't seen it. But he said Edison still aims to
avoid bankruptcy and plans to pay its bills once it's able to do so.

"We're doing our best to avoid bankruptcy," the spokesman said. "We don't
believe bankruptcy serves anyone's purposes. We fully intend to pay our bills
once this situation is resolved."

-By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com

(Jason Leopold in Los Angeles contributed to this article.)

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


never received a pass word.


I am very busy and very important but I will make an exception for you.


---------------------- Forwarded by Don Miller/HOU/ECT on 10/20/2000 08:28 AM
---------------------------

mhhurtado@duke-energy.com on 10/18/2000 02:51:20 PM
To: don.miller@enron.com
cc: japearson@duke-energy.com, jparker@mayerbrown.com, jusow@mayerbrown.com
Subject: Questions regarding PSD permit for Lincoln

Don,

As a result of our review of the information and documents on Lincoln we
are requesting additional documents which are not in the data room.

1.   Relating to the plant's PSD:

     The Mostardi & Platt emissions test protocol for the May 2000
     emissions test
      A report to Illlinois EPA containing the emission test data
     Continuous Emission Monitoring (" CEM") Data ( all data
     developed since start-up)
     Any reports to IEPA required under the permit pertaining to
     exceedances, or
     start-up, breakdown & malfunction ( we have internal memos indicating
     that there
     was a breakdown at # 7 on July 5,2000)

2. Also, we don't have any permits for wastewater discharge. We have been
told that there is no wastewater discharged except
sewage/office wastewater which is going to a septic field. But we have no
verification of this at this point.

Thank you for your attention to these items.

Mario H. Hurtado
Duke Energy North America


Euford said he already spoke w/ Gorte & Randy Pettersen.
And Gorte knew Euford was going to call Rick.


Ben the attached file contains the answers to the questions listed in your
e-mail for Lincoln.

Gus

	Benjamin Rogers@ECT
	10/20/2000 08:30 AM

		 To: Gus Eghneim/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Questions regarding PSD permit for Lincoln

Forgot to include these questions.  Thanks for the call this morning, your
help is very much appreciated.
Ben
---------------------- Forwarded by Benjamin Rogers/HOU/ECT on 10/20/2000
08:29 AM ---------------------------

Don Miller
10/20/2000 08:29 AM
To: Benjamin Rogers/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Questions regarding PSD permit for Lincoln

---------------------- Forwarded by Don Miller/HOU/ECT on 10/20/2000 08:28 AM
---------------------------

mhhurtado@duke-energy.com on 10/18/2000 02:51:20 PM
To: don.miller@enron.com
cc: japearson@duke-energy.com, jparker@mayerbrown.com, jusow@mayerbrown.com
Subject: Questions regarding PSD permit for Lincoln

Don,

As a result of our review of the information and documents on Lincoln we
are requesting additional documents which are not in the data room.

1.   Relating to the plant's PSD:

     The Mostardi & Platt emissions test protocol for the May 2000
     emissions test
      A report to Illlinois EPA containing the emission test data
     Continuous Emission Monitoring (" CEM") Data ( all data
     developed since start-up)
     Any reports to IEPA required under the permit pertaining to
     exceedances, or
     start-up, breakdown & malfunction ( we have internal memos indicating
     that there
     was a breakdown at # 7 on July 5,2000)

2. Also, we don't have any permits for wastewater discharge. We have been
told that there is no wastewater discharged except
sewage/office wastewater which is going to a septic field. But we have no
verification of this at this point.

Thank you for your attention to these items.

Mario H. Hurtado
Duke Energy North America


CALENDAR ENTRY:	APPOINTMENT

Description:
	Sheila/J.Wiltfong/NNG Mktg. Training Session conf. room 50M Lunch will be provided.

Date:		12/14/2000
Time:		11:30 AM - 1:00 PM (Central Standard Time)

Chairperson:	Outlook Migration Team

Detailed Description: