Future of Kyoto Protocol Minus U.S. Is Uncertain
The Wall Street Journal, 07/16/01

As the shakeout proceeds, some business-to-business marketplaces show their
staying power.
The New York Times, 07/16/01

Municipal power firms cleaned up / Public producers charged state far more
than private
The San Francisco Chronicle, 07/16/01

Enron's Lay Visit Fails To End India Dabhol Woes
Dow Jones International News, 07/16/01

INDIA'S NTPC WILL NOT BUY ENRON STAKE IN DAHBOL POWER: GOVERNMENT
Asia Pulse, 07/16/01

INDIA PRESS: Min Rules Out NTPC Buying Out Dabhol Power
Dow Jones Asian Equities Report, 07/16/01

INDIA PRESS: Dabhol Needs $500M To Restart Construction
Dow Jones Asian Equities Report, 07/16/01

ITALIAN PRESS: Montedison Seeking Help In Takeover Defense
Dow Jones International News, 07/16/01

San Jose Mercury News, Calif., Stocks.comment Column
KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: San Jose Mercury News -
California, 07/16/01

Innogy's pounds 300m power-trading lift
The Independent - London, 07/15/01

Finalise terms of reference for Enron probe in 8 days:Munde
Press Trust of India Limited, 07/15/01

Karl Rove, President's Focus Engineer, Finds Self in Spotlight; Eyes of Bush
Critics Turn to Key Adviser If the Message Blurs
The Washington Post, 07/15/01

8 firms plan building vast interstate gas pipelines / But energy experts say
other states could tap into supply first
The San Francisco Chronicle, 07/15/01

Sale withdrawal raises Mitie hopes
The Times of London, 07/15/01

Future of Kyoto Protocol Minus U.S. Is Uncertain
By John J. Fialka and Geoff Winestock
Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal

07/16/2001
The Wall Street Journal
A2
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

Diplomats from around the world gather in Bonn starting today to address a
seminal question: Will there be a Kyoto protocol on global warming without
the U.S., or none at all?
The key player in answering that question appears to be Japan, whose position
may well determine whether other industrialized nations move ahead despite
the Bush administration's vigorous opposition.
The Kyoto protocol will be the central issue at a United Nations convention,
which initially was intended to complete the pact after talks in The Hague
broke down in November over relatively minor differences between the European
Union and the U.S. Since then, however, President Bush rejected the treaty as
"fatally flawed," throwing its future into doubt.
The protocol, brokered by former Vice President Al Gore in 1997 and later
signed by former President Clinton, requires industrial nations to reduce
their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other gases thought to be warming
the planet by 5.2% below 1990 levels. The Bush administration wants an
alternative that is less punishing on the energy-intense U.S. economy, and
that imposes tougher requirements on China, India and other fast-developing
nations.
President Bush on Friday announced a series of steps to reduce the impact of
heat-trapping gases, in lieu of the Kyoto protocol. The president unveiled a
$120 million National Aeronautics and Space Administration project to study
climate modeling, among other things. The Department of Energy, meanwhile,
has signed two agreements to study carbon levels, and the White House also
awarded $25 million in grants for similar studies elsewhere. Finally, the
Department of Treasury started a $14 million forest-conservation program in
El Salvador.
Still, the U.S. turnabout on Kyoto continues to shock Europe, and European
leaders vow to go it alone. "To wait for the U.S. is to wait for someone who
has refused your invitation," European environment commissioner Margot
Wallstrom said this week.
But under the terms of the protocol, the Europeans need ratifications from
industrial nations that emit 55% of the developed world's "greenhouse" gases,
and European nati ons don't account for that level of reductions themselves.
Reaching that amount without the U.S. isn't possible without the support of
Russia and Japan.
Japan's position is most up in the air, and it accounts for 8% of total
emissions. Japan's environmental minister, Yoriko Kawaguchi, paid a series of
last-minute calls on U.S. cabinet officials on Friday. Japanese officials
want the Kyoto protocol to come into force, but they appear reluctant to take
a position against the Bush administration.
To push its case, the EU has spent the past two weeks trying to build a
constituency around the world to put the protocol into effect, a move that
would allow key provisions to acquire legal force, such as an international
emissions-trading system and penalties for noncompliance.
Ms. Wallstrom visited Asia and Australia last week, and British Deputy Prime
Minister John Prescott was in Tokyo on Thursday. The EU strategy has been to
offer to make it easier for these wavering countries to sign up. For example,
the EU was previously reluctant to allow "sinks" such as forests, which soak
up carbon dioxide and hence reduce net emissions of greenhouse gases, to be
counted toward national targets for emission reductions. But in a bid to win
support from key countries, especially Japan, it is now offering more
flexibility on sinks.
Paula J. Dobriansky, an undersecretary of state who will lead the U.S.
delegation, said the U.S. will not block other nations that want to pursue
the protocol, but it will intervene in Bonn if the talks affect other U.S.
interests. "We plan to be very active and constructive in that regard." The
Bush administration is still studying alternatives to the treaty.
Meanwhile, U.S. companies are divided on the protocol. Eileen Claussen, head
of the private nonpartisan Pew Center on Climate Change, has formed a group
of 36 major companies that includes DuPont Co., Enron Corp., Weyerhaeuser Co.
and Boeing Co., to argue for action on global warming. While they don't agree
on every aspect of the Kyoto formula, she explains, "they all want to get
this process started in a way that spreads out the pain but gets something
done."
Meanwhile, the Global Climate Coalition, whose membership includes the U.S.
mining industry, the National Association of Manufacturers and other large
industrial trade associations, supports the Bush antitreaty stance. Taking
more time to discuss the protocol, says Glenn Kelly, its executive director,
"will continue the Kyoto quagmire and allow diplomats to continue to collect
frequent-flier miles."

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

Business/Financial Desk; Section C
E-Commerce Report
As the shakeout proceeds, some business-to-business marketplaces show their
staying power.
By Bob Tedeschi

07/16/2001
The New York Times
Page 4, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company

EARLIER this year, Forrester Research, the Internet consulting firm,
predicted that the universe of business-to-business e-marketplaces would
shrink to a mere 180 in the next two years, from 1,000 or more today. It was
a bleak forecast, but one that surprised few who had watched such sites
search in vain for customers in 2000.
The shakeout is proceeding apace, with the rate of mergers and failures
picking up where the consumer e-commerce sector left off. But just as some
survivors have begun to emerge from the consumer e-commerce rubble, so, too,
have some of the so-called B2B marketplaces started to show some staying
power.
In recent weeks, Pantellos, an online marketplace for the utilities industry,
said it had handled nearly $200 million of transactions since it rolled out
in January. ChemConnect, an online chemicals exchange, recently crossed the
$1 billion mark in transactions handled so far this year. Intercontinental
Exchange, a trading site for electric power, gas and oil, said it had handled
more than $100 billion in trades in the 10 months since it opened.
These companies and a handful of others, analysts said, have managed to
attract buyers and sellers by broadening their service features beyond the
typical marketplace site, which heretofore had focused mainly on the concerns
of buyers. ''While buyers have run to this fairly quickly, suppliers
haven't,'' said Matthew Sanders, a Forrester analyst.
Most of the business-to-business marketplaces, Mr. Sanders said, were created
with the premise that if a corps of powerful buyers in a given market
gathered on one site, the suppliers would come running -- even if that meant
the suppliers had to engage in auctions in which they underbid one another
for the right to sell their wares.
''But attributes that go beyond price, like quality, service, the stability
of the brand, warranties -- all the things suppliers build around their
products -- marketplaces haven't allowed them to offer,'' Mr. Sanders said.
ChemConnect, for one, has countered that trend, said Michele B. Hincks, the
company's vice president for marketing. Ms. Hincks said the site had set up
an online exchange floor, where 5,000 to 7,000 companies negotiate to buy and
sell specialized chemical products.
The site lists companies that are interested in buying or selling certain
types of chemicals, and then sets them up in password-protected negotiation
rooms, where they can deal with such issues as product quality, warranties,
shipping and price. In exchange for enabling such negotiations, Ms. Hincks
said, ChemConnect charges annual subscription fees of $300 to more than
$100,000.
According to a recent report by Gartner's GartnerG2, a business strategy
research firm, e-marketplaces will broaden their offerings even further in
the coming months, to rely on a wider spectrum of business services, like
supply-chain collaboration and demand forecasting.
In the case of e-Steel, such services now dominate the company's business
plan. Michael S. Levin, e-Steel's chief executive, said that about a year
ago, the company changed its focus from a typical e-marketplace to that of a
software seller that also operates an online marketplace for heavy
industries.
Companies like Ford Motor and BHP, the Australian miner, Mr. Levin said,
''told us in their own way that enabling a transaction online is interesting,
but insufficient, and that we had to do more than that for them to become
clients.''
So e-Steel developed software that the companies now use to help integrate
their manufacturing processes with those of their suppliers, using the Web.
Among other things, the software permits Ford to track and manage the
manufacturing steps that begin when it orders steel from a supplier.
The software helps Ford move the steel to plants for processing, while
accounting for the different specifications for rolling the steel, stamping
it, and moving it to various processors and assembly plants.
Mr. Levin would not say how many clients e-Steel had for the software, which
costs each customer millions of dollars a year and requires multiyear
contracts. Nor would he disclose revenue figures for the company, which is
privately held. But he said the company had ''two years' worth of money in
the bank, and way before that, probably within 15 months, we'll be cash-flow
positive.''
As for the site's marketplace, Mr. Levin said it still had value, ''but only
as part of a much more powerful set of tools'' and for serving as a place for
attracting prospective software clients.
Analysts and executives also pointed to the role of experienced -- and
independent -- management for whatever success some e-marketplaces had
experienced so far. Lauren Jones Shu, research director at GartnerG2, said
those were not advantages shared by many of the so-called industry consortium
marketplaces, which are owned by a collection of the major participants in a
given industry.
E-marketplaces like Covisint and Exostar, which are owned by some of the
biggest companies in the automotive and aerospace industries, respectively,
are examples of consortium-owned sites. But Ms. Shu declined to say whether
she thought the ownership structure of those particular sites was a handicap.
Still, Ms. Shu said, ''a lot of them have agendas that are too large, and are
trying to cater to the various needs of different members.''
Apparently, at least one e-marketplace owned by an industry group, Pantellos,
has avoided paralyzing its management. Pantellos, an online exchange that is
owned by 21 large utility companies, was cited by Mr. Sanders, the Forrester
analyst, as one of the few e-marketplaces to find success this year.
The site caters to utility companies and energy service companies like
General Electric, helping utilities and power companies build and manage
power plants, for example, and offering a forum for suppliers of those
services to compete for business. The business is growing quickly, said
Graham Collins, the company's chief executive. ''Virtually all of our
operating metrics are doubling every two weeks,'' he said.
Mr. Collins attributed that growth, in large part, to the fact that the 21
companies with ownership stakes in Pantellos did not have a direct say in how
it operated. ''That's allowed us to stay focused on the interests of our
memberships, not the parochial interests of the shareholders,'' he said.
''There's nothing more mind-numbing than to attend meetings where you have to
vote on whether or not you should vote.''
Luck, of course, has played a role in the early success of some online
exchanges -- perhaps most notably in the success of Intercontinental
Exchange, which in April announced it would buy Europe's largest offline
energy exchange, the International Petroleum Exchange.
Jeffrey Sprecher, chief executive of Intercontinental Exchange, based in
Atlanta, said the core of the site's technology was refined between 1994 and
1997. But at that time, Mr. Sprecher said, ''absolutely no one'' in the
electric power, gas and oil markets wanted to trade in the forward and
futures markets online. ''Everybody thought they were already getting the
best prices,'' he said, and they feared that posting prices on the Web would
destroy that competitive advantage.
Then in October 1999, Enron started buying and selling these products online,
''and the whole argument about pricing went away,'' Mr. Sprecher said.
Shortly thereafter, he offered equity in his site to 13 market makers, like
BP and Goldman Sachs, in exchange for commitments to use the site for
trading.
''I got lucky in that I built this before the Internet revolution,'' Mr.
Sprecher said. ''The last year's been amazing, compared to the early years,
which involved a lot of sitting around.''

Photo: The Dofasco steel company is an investor in e-Steel and one of its
''strategic customers.'' Employees at the Dofasco operations in Hamilton,
Ontario, bind a roll of automotive steel in preparation for shipping. (Taras
Kovaliv)

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

NEWS
Municipal power firms cleaned up / Public producers charged state far more
than private
Mark Martin, Lynda Gledhill
Chronicle Staff Writers

07/16/2001
The San Francisco Chronicle
FINAL
A.1
(Copyright 2001)

From the start of the state's energy meltdown, Gov. Gray Davis and many
lawmakers have cast private out-of-state energy companies -- especially those
in Texas -- as pirates plundering California's economy.
But a Chronicle analysis found that some of the most expensive megawatts
California bought during the bleak winter months actually came from what many
would consider to be sympathetic traders -- publicly owned power producers.
The Chronicle study of spot market purchases shows that as a whole, public
agencies in California and elsewhere charged an average of about $344 per
megawatt hour during the first three months of the year, while private
companies charged less than $250.
More than 80 percent of the power sold by public agencies was above the $269
per megawatt hour average that California paid all power providers. Less than
a third of the power from private companies exceeded that average.
"I think anybody who ripped off the state ought to be investigated," said
Harvey Rosenfield, head of the consumer group Foundation for Taxpayer and
Consumer Rights. "A publicly owned utility shouldn't be prospering from this
crisis. And those munis that did ought to immediately forfeit any excessive
profits."
Yet, like with everything in the power crisis, not everything is always as it
appears, and public utility officials say they're hardly to blame for the
sky-high electricity prices.
Interviews with operators of publicly owned power providers paint a picture
of state Department of Water Resources electricity buyers sometimes so
desperate to avert rolling blackouts that they didn't haggle over price.
"DWR called us and said we're looking for power at $500 a megawatt hour for a
seven-hour period," said Kate Hora, a spokeswoman for the Modesto Irrigation
District, which delivers power to 95,000 customers in the Central Valley.
"There was no negotiation. We just helped them out at the price they named."
Pete Garris, chief of operations for the DWR department in charge of buying
and selling power, said something like that would not have been typical.
MUNIS PROVIDE 'RELIABLE ENERGY'
"I could see offering $500 per megawatt hour when the market was trading at
$650," he said. "One thing munis do for the most part is provide reliable
energy. If they say they are going to deliver so many megawatts, they are
going to deliver."
But that reliability can be expensive.
Much of the public power was hydroelectric from the Pacific Northwest,
usually delivered at expensive peak demand hours. And municipal agencies say
they were forced to press into operation old, inefficient generators.
"(State officials) would call and say, 'We need the energy,' " said Ignacio
Troncoso, director of public service for Glendale Water and Power. "We didn't
really want to give it to them because it meant using some very inefficient
turbines, but they said they needed it. Sometimes, it cost $1,000 or $2,000
per megawatt hour, but they paid it."
S. David Freeman, Davis' top energy adviser, said the state bought a
relatively small percentage of its power from municipal utilities, and it was
at a time when the state was getting nearly all of its electricity in the
volatile spot market.
20% FROM PUBLIC AGENCIES
About 20 percent of the power purchased by California in the first quarter of
2001 came from publicly owned agencies in the United States, Canada or
Mexico.
"You have to consider the volume," said Freeman, whose hiring in April was
controversial because he headed the Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power.
Los Angeles charged California on average $292 per megawatt hour for power.
Before he joined the state in April, Freeman said Los Angeles' rates were
based on cost plus 15 percent.
"I don't say we're angels, but we're being neighborly," he said then. "We're
not giving you a cup of sugar, we're selling it, but not at exorbitant
prices."
Like Los Angeles, Canada's publicly owned BC Hydro sold more than 800,000
megawatts to the state in the first three months of the year at above-average
costs. Spokeswoman Elisha Odowichuk said the utility's rates to California
were higher because of delivery costs.
But the utility made enough money to give their Canadian customers a $130
rebate.
DAVIS WANTS $8.9 BILLION BACK
Davis has demanded $8.9 billion in refunds for electricity prices the state
says were excessive. The state estimates that it is owed about $600 million
from the municipals, Michael Kahn, chairman of the board of the Independent
System Operator, said last week.
The state is hoping that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will order
private providers to issue refunds. But the commission has no jurisdiction
over municipal utilities.
At least one offer was put on the table by municipal utilities and is under
consideration, said Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Davis. If no deal is
reached, the state is prepared to go to court, he said.
"Anybody who is on the list of price gougers, we intend to seek refunds
from," he said.
WHY PUBLIC POWER COST MORE
Energy experts suggested several reasons why public power may have cost the
state more than electricity offered by Enron, Duke and other private
companies.
The state probably bought most public power during peak usage hours in the
evening or during days when rolling blackouts loomed, said Severin
Borenstein, a professor with the University of California's Energy Institute
in Berkeley.
That's how the Modesto Irrigation District briefly got into the business of
selling power to the state. The district sold 175 megawatts to California on
Feb. 13 for $500 per megawatt hour.
The district bought power from an Oregon utility for $375 per megawatt hour
and delivered it to the state from 1 to 7 p.m. during a Stage 3 power alert.
The state avoided blackouts that day.
Seattle City Light earned on average the most per megawatt hour of any public
utility, getting a price of $634. But an official there also said there were
no negotiations with the state.
The utility had a contract to deliver electricity to 35 Nordstrom stores in
California. State power grid officials determined that the stores weren't
using all the power and then snapped up the excess for what is referred to as
the clearing price: the highest price paid for electricity during that hour.
SEATTLE'S CHARGES DEFENDED
But Seattle isn't rolling in money because of its dealings with California.
The utility has raised rates three times this year, spokesman Dan Williams
said.
Modesto's and Seattle's experiences are probably similar to other public
utilities, said Michael Shames of the Utilities Consumer Action Network,
based in San Diego.
"The munis did make a profit," he said. "But there's no evidence that Los
Angeles or any other city made the same kind of sky-high profits that the
Dukes of the world did. We haven't seen any municipal utility officials
taking expensive vacations because of the crisis."
Shames suggested that public utilities' high rates may not have been as high
as private companies' offers.
"When they (state energy officials) got really tight, the private companies
were probably offering to sell at exorbitant prices," he said.
STATE WAS NO CHARITY CASE
Still, several publicly owned agencies acknowledge that they didn't treat the
state Department of Water Resources as a charity case.
When the state was desperate for megawatts, Burbank officials would look for
power on the open market and sell it to the state if they could make a 10
percent profit to cover such things as administrative expenses, said Fred
Fletcher, assistant general manager of the utility. Sacramento Municipal
Utility District did the same, a spokesman said.
Fletcher scoffed at any charge that municipal utilities owe California a
refund.
"It's insulting to ask for any money back. We weren't part of the problem,
and we helped the state in a crisis," he said. "And it's not like we're doing
well."
Glendale residents face a 10 percent increase in electricity rates beginning
this month, and Burbank ratepayers will see their power bills rise 17 percent
beginning this month.
-----------------------------------------------------------
CHART: The cost of power for California Some of the most expensive megawatts
that California purchased on behalf of financially troubled utilities at the
height of the energy crisis came from publicly owned power generators. The
average price paid during the first three months of the year exceeded the
prices paid to private power companies. Name MWh Average price City of
Seattle, City Light Department 3,870 $634.17
Modesto Irrigation District 175 $500.00
Powerex (trading arm of BC Hydro) 804,302 $497.87
Tacoma Power 5,889 $475.43 Eugene Water & Electric Board 151,850 $432.37
Grant County PUD (Washington) 91,209 $348.18
Sacramento Municipal Utility District 47,555 $330.34
City of Glendale 27,325 $326.99
Bonneville Power Administration 461,144 $304.64
Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power 805,479 $292.28 Silicon Valley Power (City
of Santa Clara) 400 $290.00 City of Burbank 28,940 $273.13
MSR Public Power Agency (Modesto) 65 $255.00
Turlock Irrigation District 10,675 $237.31
California Dept. of Water Resources 287,454 $205.25
Commission de Federale Electricidad(x) 50,752 $192.91
City of Riverside 330 $190.00
Northern California Power Agency 27,172 $186.87
East Bay Municipal Utility District 1,424 $173.00
Salt River Project (Arizona) 80,076 $169.17
City of Vernon 22,145 $161.67
City of Anaheim 33,532 $152.60
Megawatts used from public agencies 2,941,763 $343.67
MWh Average price Total megawatts used from private sources 9,943,224 $246.79
Total megawatts purchased from all sources 12,884,987 $268.90 (x) Mexico
Source: California Department of Water Resources, Chronicle research
Chronicle Graphic

PHOTO, CHART: SEE END OF TEXT

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

Enron's Lay Visit Fails To End India Dabhol Woes
By Himendra Kumar
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

07/16/2001
Dow Jones International News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- U.S energy major Enron Corp. (ENE) Chairman Kenneth
Lay met with India's leadership last week in an effort to resume operations
of the company's local power plant, saying the project's future looked good.
Yet, to analysts and the project's lenders, there is still no end in sight to
the problems of Dabhol Power Co., Enron's India subsidiary. Dumped by its
sole buyer, the Maharashtra State Electricity Board over unaffordable
tariffs, the 740 megawatt Dabhol power plant in the western Indian state of
Maharashtra remains shut since May 29.
Work on an 85% complete 1,444 MW Dabhol phase II project - due to start
operations later this year - has also stopped as funds from lenders dried up.
Enron has so far, turned down a government proposal for lower tariffs which
analysts say could end the stalemate.
"The lenders feel the DPC should start renegotiating the power purchase
agreement so that phase I can be restarted at the earliest," said R.S.
Agarwal, executive director of Industrial Development Bank of India (P.IDB),
one of the main lenders to the Dabhol project.
The Indians have lent $1.4 billion out of the project's $2.9 billion total
projected cost. IDBI's own exposure is in the excess of 20 billion rupees
($1=INR47.16) and the bank runs the risk of going deep into the red if the
project goes bust.
Dabhol is India's single largest foreign investment to date.
R.K. Pachauri, director of an independent think tank Tata Energy Research
Institute said: "Enron has to go ahead and just renegotiate its power
purchase agreement with MSEB and cut tariffs, as far as the project's phase I
is concerned. As regards phase II, it needs to talk to interested parties
like power deficit states and keep tariffs at competitive levels. Delays are
not going to help anyone. Action needs to be taken quickly."
Lay indicated that the Houston-based energy major was considering easing its
stance.
"I did not want to leave the country this time without reaffirming my
interest in, and support for India, and my strong belief that there is a
great potential in this country," he said before flying back to the U.S.
"I hope that we will be able to find a resolution to this (Dabhol) problem
that allows us all to move forward and realize that potential," he added.
The Indian government on its part, says, it thinks the dispute is between a
seller and buyer of electricity. The project is guaranteed by the federal
government.
"Dabhol needs to sort out its differences over payments with MSEB before the
government can settle any claims of Enron," said a senior Indian Power
Ministry official.
Dabhol has come under fire because of the relatively high cost of its power.
Critics object to Dabhol charging 7.1 Indian rupees a kilowatt-hour for its
power, compared with INR1.5/kwh charged by other domestic suppliers.
The project has been in trouble since December when the government of
Maharahtra state said the company charged exorbitant prices for electricity,
and demanded a new price agreement. Enron did not bow on the call, the
situation deteriorated and phase I eventually ceased operations in late May.
Enron has a controlling 65% stake in DPC. Other shareholders include the MSEB
with 15% and General Electric Co.(GE) with Bechtel Corp.(X.BTL) with 10%
each.
DPC sent MSEB a preliminary termination notice in May and if no common ground
is reached, phase I could close down for good within six months from the
notice. A London arbitration court would then rule which of the two sides
defaulted on the contract for compensation purposes.
-By Himendra Kumar; Dow Jones Newswires; 91-11-461-9426;
himendra.kumar@dowjones.com

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

INDIA'S NTPC WILL NOT BUY ENRON STAKE IN DAHBOL POWER: GOVERNMENT

07/16/2001
Asia Pulse
(c) Copyright 2001 Asia Pulse PTE Ltd.

NEW DELHI, July 16 Asia Pulse - The federal government has ruled out the
possibility of the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) buying out US
energy giant Enron's stake in the controversial Dabhol Power Company (DPC).
Federal Power Minister Suresh Prabhu said this during the meeting with Enron
Chairman Kenneth Lay, who was here last week to discuss the fate of the US$3
billionr project, which is embroiled in a payment controversy with
Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB), government sources said.
The Enron team, led by Lay, discussed several options, including an exit
route in which the government takes over the beleaguered US$3 billion Dabhol
power project.
Though exact details of the meeting were not forthcoming, sources familiar
with the discussions said that the government takeover could possibly be done
through NTPC or a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) involving NTPC taking over
the plant and selling power to the national grid.
Enron, which holds 65 per cent interest in DPC, is scouting for Indian
companies who can take over its equity worth over US$800 million.
Ruling out the option, Prabhu had pointed out that there was no question of
NTPC buying Enron's stake in DPC saying, "The NTPC was not in the business of
taking over sick companies."
Enron's Indian unit, Dabhol Power Co., and state utility Maharashtra State
Electricity Board, have been locked in a wrangle for more than six months
over payments.
In May, Enron issued a preliminary termination notice after MSEB defaulted on
payments, and the utility, Dabhol's lone buyer, stopped taking power from the
embattled US$2.9 billion plant.
(PTI) 16-07 1851

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

INDIA PRESS: Min Rules Out NTPC Buying Out Dabhol Power

07/16/2001
Dow Jones Asian Equities Report
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- Indian Power Minister Suresh Prabhu has ruled out the
possibility of the state-owned power utility National Thermal Power Corp.
(P.NTP) buying out Dabhol Power Co., the controversial Enron-controlled $2.9
billion power project in the western Indian state of Maharashtra, reports The
Financial Express.
The newspaper report says Prabhu communicated this to Enron Corp. (ENE)
Chairman Kenneth Lay during their meeting last week in New Delhi. Enron owns
a 65% stake in DPC.
The Dabhol project is the largest single foreign investment in India to date.
Phase 1 is capable of producing 740 megawatt electricity. However the power
plant isn't in operation because its sole buyer, the Maharashtra State
Electricity Board, stopped drawing power since May 29 over what it called
"unaffordable tariffs." Work on 1,444 MW Dabhol Phase 2 was suspended June 17
following nonpayment of its bills by DPC to its contractors. Website:
http//www.financialexpress.com

-By Himendra Kumar; Dow Jones Newswires; 91-11-461-9426;
himendra.kumar@dowjones.com

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

INDIA PRESS: Dabhol Needs $500M To Restart Construction

07/16/2001
Dow Jones Asian Equities Report
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- Dabhol Power Co., an Indian unit of U.S. energy major
Enron Corp. (ENE), will need to raise $500 million to restart construction on
the 1,444 megawatt Dabhol plant phase II, reports the Financial Express.
DPC is incurring a loss of at least half a million dollars a day after the
construction work on Dabhol phase II was suspended June 17 following
nonpayment of its bills by DPC to its contractors, the report says.
At $2.9 billion, Dabhol is the largest single foreign investment into India
to date. Enron owns a controlling 65% stake in DPC located in the western
Indian state of Maharashtra. Dabhol Phase I is capable of producing 740
megawatt electricity. However the power plant is currently not in operation
because its sole buyer, the Maharashtra State Electricity Board, stopped
drawing power since May 29 over what it called "unaffordable tariffs."
Newspaper Web site: http//www.financialexpress.com

-By Himendra Kumar, Dow Jones Newswires; 91-11-461-9426;
himendra.kumar@dowjones.com -0-
16/07/01 04-00G

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

ITALIAN PRESS: Montedison Seeking Help In Takeover Defense

07/16/2001
Dow Jones International News
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

MILAN -(Dow Jones)- Montedison SpA (I.MNT) is preparing its defense of a Fiat
SpA (FIA)-led takeover bid and is planning on calling on the Benetton family
or Luxottica SpA (LUX) as partners, Il Sole 24 Ore reported at the weekend.
A U.S. industrial partner, such as AEP (AEPI), Enron (ENE), Entergy (ETR),
Aes (AES) or Mirant (MIR) could also aid in a defense strategy, the paper
says.
Newspaper Web site: http://www.ilsole24ore.com
-Milan Bureau, Dow Jones Newswires; 39 02 7601 5386 -0- 16/07/01 07-51G

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

San Jose Mercury News, Calif., Stocks.comment Column
Scott Herhold

07/16/2001
KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: San Jose Mercury News - California
Copyright (C) 2001 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World
Reporter (TM)

When Calpine (CPN) was selling for around $37 last fall, I suggested it might
be worth considering because it had been unfairly battered by political
winds. It's since gone up, back down, and back up again, finishing Friday at
$44.53. So now might be the time to take a look at its longer-term prospects.
Looking several years out, it's worth listening to the skeptics -- and to how
Calpine responds to them.
The gentle breezes of doubt -- and it has to do with an England acquisition,
of all things -- come from an organization called CreditSights
(www.creditsights.com), which analyzes companies with bondholders in mind.
Because Calpine has issued so many bonds to finance its expansion, what the
bondholders think makes a difference.
No other company in Silicon Valley -- not even Cisco, not anymore -- has
quite the scope of ambition of Calpine (CPN), the independent power generator
with offices in downtown San Jose.
If you live in the valley, you may know the company best for its gritty --
and now apparently successful -- fight to establish a power plant off Metcalf
Road in San Jose.
If you live in California, you may know about its intricate dance with PG&E
over whether they would be paid for $266 million of unpaid bills.
But these are only a few glimmers in the klieg lights of its ambitions. Not
everyone is singing hosannahs. A recent report by CreditSights analyst Dot
Matthews was a good-news, bad-news review of Calpine.
First, in a development she said was "probably most important," she hailed
the recent agreement with PG&E that would allow Calpine to collect the $266
million owed to it. The market has greeted this news with acclaim, sending up
Calpine's stock by about $7 a share -- or about 20 percent -- since the news
of the agreement broke early this month.
But in CreditSights' view, another piece of news from Calpine was unsettling:
The announcement that the company was paying $800 million to acquire the new
1,200-megawatt Saltend power plant near Hull, England, its first overseas
acquisition.
"This is disappointing for two reasons," Matthews wrote. "First, the plant is
in Englandwhich is a difficult place for American companies to make money in
power production distribution. Second, we are starting to see a pattern
develop where Calpine appears to be buying plants that other savvy players
don't seem to want. We are concerned that Calpine may be expanding at any
price so it can keep up the earnings growth that fuels its stock quote."
The CreditSights report went on to note that both Enron and Entergy (ETR),
which built the Saltend plant, are selling generation facilities -- and that
there is no shortage of power in England.
So what is Calpine's response? I talked with Calpine senior vice-president
Ron Walter, who says the acquisition of Saltend -- a state-of-the-art
gas-fired plant -- is part of a long-term plan to expand outside the
continental United States and Canada. (Calpine has said it's also looking at
possibly expanding in Italy and Spain).
"The growth (in England) is certainly not what the growth is in this
country," Walter said. "But because of the unique nature of this plant, we
feel it's going to do extremely well in this marketplace."
Walter points out that Enron, a heavy trader of energy, has a very different
business plan than Calpine, which has stayed a manufacturer. And he says that
Entergy wanted cash out of its Saltend plant.
And to the charge of expanding too fast? Walter insists -- with justification
-- that Calpine has demonstrated nimbleness today in building 29 power plants
at once.
"We spend all our time looking at each market, at the age of plants, and what
the competition is doing," he said. "We pick the targets that make sense."
It's a good response, and investors who have stayed with Calpine have been
amply rewarded. The stock has gone up 22-fold since its IPO nearly five years
ago.
But it's hard to dismiss all doubt. History teaches that an empire inevitably
gets harder to manage the more far-flung it is. Remember, the Romans
ultimately had trouble doing business in England, too.
Scott Herhold's Stocks.comment appears every Monday and Thursday. Write him
at the San Jose Mercury News, 750 Ridder Park Drive, San Jose, Calif. 95190;
e-mail sherhold@sjmercury.com; phone (408) 920-5877.To read the columns
online, see www.siliconvalley.com/opinion/herhold/b

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

Business
Innogy's pounds 300m power-trading lift
BEN ROSIER

07/15/2001
The Independent - London
FINAL
1
(Copyright 2001 Independent Newspapers (UK) Limited)

Innogy, the domestic electricity business which demerged from International
Power, can expect a boost of up to 500 million euros (about pounds 300m) over
the next three years by exploiting the emerging power-trading business.
The figure is based on calculations by analysts at Schroder Salomon Smith
Barney (SSSB), who say utility businesses such as Enron have used the
practice in the US market. They say European firms such as Innogy and
PowerGen, which is in the process of being bought by E.ON of Germany, could
follow Enron's lead.
Power trading is the sale of electricity as a commodity - a market that has
developed over the past decade and was given greater impetus in the UK when
the New Electricity Trading Arrangements (NETAs) were introduced in March
this year. The NETA system is a wholesale market which allows companies to
balance their books when they trade power.
Electricity can be bought and sold according to a variety of factors, such as
how it is generated and when it is used. Utility companies can use power
trading to better manage their price risks, for example by buying
gas-generated electricity on the market if the costs of generating their own
energy from other sources is too high.
As well as speculating on future prices, companies can generate additional
revenues by selling risk-management services to smaller utilities and other
firms.
SSSB believes traded volumes of electricity in the UK will eventually be five
times the actual consumption of the country. It says Innogy, which owns the
retail business npower, is slightly ahead of PowerGen in the power-trading
market.
"Companies can use [power trading] as a clever way to add value to their
existing assets," said Daniel Martin, a utilities analyst at SSSB. "If they
are successful, I can see 500 million euros, potentially more, added to their
value." But he said the utility firms will have to be more transparent in
telling the City how much they raise from power-trading activities if they
want to see the benefits on their stock prices.
Brian Senior, director of trading and asset management at Innogy, said:
"[Power trading] is helping us extract maximum value from our asset base, and
is also a source of extra revenues.
"We are looking at the possibility of moving into continental Europe."

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

Finalise terms of reference for Enron probe in 8 days:Munde

07/15/2001
Press Trust of India Limited
(c) 2001 PTI Ltd.

Mumbai, Jul 15 (PTI) Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) national vice-president
Gopinath Munde Sunday demanded that the terms of reference for the judicial
inquiry appointed by the government of western state of Maharashtra into the
Enron controversy should be finalised within eight days instead of one month.
Addressing a press conference here, Munde demanded that the government
announce the terms of reference during the monsoon session of the state
legislature.
Demanding that the final report of the judicial probe be submitted within
three months, he urged the ruling Congress and the NCP not to "politicise"
the issue.
The leader of the oppostion in the state assembly, Narayan Rane, alleged that
by merely instituting a judicial probe without declaring the terms of
reference, Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh was "taking his allies for a
ride".
Deshmukh had announced a judicial probe into various aspects of the power
purchase agreement signed between US energy major's Dabhol Power Company and
state electricity board (MSEB) on July 11.
The terms and reference of the probe would be decided by co-ordination
committee of the Democratic Front government within a month, he had
announced.
(THROUGH ASIA PULSE) 15-07 2001

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

A Section
Karl Rove, President's Focus Engineer, Finds Self in Spotlight; Eyes of Bush
Critics Turn to Key Adviser If the Message Blurs
Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer

07/15/2001
The Washington Post
FINAL
A04
Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved

Karl Rove, the political brain who brought President Bush to the White House,
is all about focus. "You really have to focus," he would say during the
presidential campaign. Now, as Bush's senior adviser, he says his biggest
worry for the administration is "losing focus."
So why is it that Rove's name is often the one mentioned these days when the
White House message is blurry? Last week, Rove popped up in the context of an
arrangement between the White House and the Salvation Army over a regulation
the charity sought to exempt it from workplace bias laws based on sexual
orientation.
Before that, Rove attracted attention for his role in the Bush decision to
suspend Navy practice bombing on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques in what
was seen as a bid to appeal to Hispanic voters. Then there was the episode in
which Rove participated in policy discussions that could have affected Enron
Corp. and Intel Corp., two companies in which he has substantial holdings.
Rove has become a lightning rod for critics of the administration, turning up
when there's a controversial matter the White House would rather avoid. When
Sen. James M. Jeffords (Vt.) quit the Republican Party, Rove's pressure
tactics came into question. In discussions over stem cell research, Rove has
been present, voicing worries that federally funded research using human
embryos would cost Bush antiabortion Roman Catholic voters. In everything
from judicial appointments to policy toward Sudan, Rove has made his presence
known.
Why the bull's-eye on Rove's forehead? Partly, it's because Rove, by choice,
is involved in most everything the White House does. It's also because he's a
political adviser rather than a seasoned government official, so his actions,
regardless of motive, seem tainted to some outsiders. Liberals are eager to
demonize him because he is the White House's principal liaison to
conservative interests. And Rove, for his part, enjoys a larger-than-life
reputation and seems to relish combat.
The embarrassments that have come from Rove's actions demonstrate the
pitfalls of having a political strategist in a dominant position in a White
House. But Rove's omnipresence also gives the president assets that, Bush
allies say, have made the Bush presidency successful. Rove ensures that the
president keeps the crucial backing of his conservative base. "He's the one
conservatives feel comfortable in calling and feel that when they air their
concerns they're speaking to a guy who understands their language," said Ken
Connor of the conservative Family Research Council.
Rove's White House colleagues say the senior adviser is merely doing his job
by working with constituencies. "It's a completely bogus rap," Bush's deputy
counselor, Daniel Bartlett, said of the Rove criticisms. "It's part of Karl's
core responsibility to speak with these outside groups."
Some former Clinton administration hands said Rove, 50, is making matters
worse by involving himself so visibly in so many issues. "When you're in the
middle of a new administration and come to town, you have a big blue-dot
target painted on your back," said James Carville, Bill Clinton's top
strategist in 1992. "It seems Karl has tried to paint his orange. He seems to
sort of welcome the fire."
Former Clinton staff chief John D. Podesta said that while Carville did not
take a job in the Clinton White House, Rove is applying the anything-goes
rules of politics to governing. "You've got a White House political director
who seems to have enormous influence on issues of life and death, like stem
cells," Podesta said. "His range of authority is over things normally done by
the chief of staff or the national security adviser."
But Bush's outside strategists said keeping a political animal in his inner
circle is the president's source of strength. GOP operative Ralph Reed said
Clinton would have been better off putting Carville in the White House. "When
the senior political strategist to an incoming administration is pushed to
the periphery, it often has devastating consequences," Reed said. "Had Lee
Atwater lived and had the role in the first Bush White House that Karl Rove
has in this administration, I personally believe that administration would
have had a better shot at reelection."
Last week's Salvation Army flap shows the pitfalls of having a top political
adviser like Rove so heavily involved in policymaking, but it also shows how
Rove has been able to secure for Bush the crucial support of the GOP right
during his first six months.
Congressional staffers said they heard two different messages coming from the
White House over the faith-based initiative. John J. DiIulio Jr. and his
White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, they said, was
seeking to build a consensus among lawmakers, including Democrats. The
legislation retained the 1996 "charitable choice" law's prohibition on
proselytizing, while requiring groups to make any religious activity
"voluntary" and "separate from the program funded."
That change impressed Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). "They did write it in very
strong language that says you cannot use this money to do anything
religious," he said.
But some conservatives balked at the change, arguing that charities would be
even more restricted than under the 1996 law. "What's sad about it is Bush is
laying out the principles very well, but the details belie the principles,"
said Marvin Olasky, an original architect of Bush's proposal who has become
an opponent. "This makes it worse, makes it more difficult for any
evangelical or conservative Catholic or Jewish group to be involved."
While DiIulio irked some conservatives, another group of White House
officials, including Rove, sought to please the right by pushing the measure
through the House even as it stalled in the Senate. This infuriated
Democrats. "It's been very clear that on the one hand John DiIulio and his
staff want to get a bill done and are reaching out to Democrats to reach
consensus," a Democratic aide said. "On the other hand, the White House
legislative strategy does not seem to reflect that kind of cooperative
spirit."
But conservatives were soothed. Michael Horowitz, a scholar with the
conservative Hudson Institute who opposes the faith-based initiative because
he says it would dilute churches' spirituality, said DiIulio's office has
"the worst strategic judgment." But Rove has compensated for that. "What the
White House badly needed was somebody to keep in touch with its conservative
base," Horowitz said. "Karl Rove anchors them to his base and he's superb at
that. His sympathy for the conservative base is extraordinary."
The Salvation Army sought to benefit from that sympathy when a lobbyist it
hired who was friendly with Rove asked the senior adviser for help. Rove
asked the Office of Management and Budget to look into the request. The White
House rejected the proposal last week when the request, and claims from the
Salvation Army of a "firm commitment" to act on it, became public.
As it turns out, House Republicans, working with several White House
officials, had already made changes to the House legislation two weeks ago
that gave the Salvation Army most of what it wanted: protection from cities'
domestic partnership benefit requirements.
This protection comes in a provision allowing all grant programs covered
under the faith bill to be turned into vouchers. "Indirect assistance through
vouchers rather than a city contract would spare the [Salvation] Army and
other religious groups the burden of the domestic partner benefits," said Ira
Lupu, a George Washington University law professor. House Democrats also
argue that the law indirectly allows gay hiring discrimination in a provision
that says a religious organization will be free from state and local
interference in the "definition, development, practice, and expression of its
religious belief."
Democrats have been muted in their complaints about such provisions. But
there was no such restraint when it came to Rove's involvement in the
initiative, particularly over the Salvation Army flap. Terence McAuliffe, the
Democratic National Committee chairman, fired off a statement demanding Rove
"come clean." Wrote McAuliffe: "The White House is arrogantly evading
questions about its backroom deals, and hiding the part played by Bush's top
aides."
Mary Matalin, a senior Bush aide, said McAuliffe cannot argue with the
legislation on the merits so is using Rove as a target. "It's his inability
to engage on issues," she said. "For Terry to succeed, they need to create
villains. They had Newt Gingrich, Ken Starr and Tom DeLay, and now they're
trying Karl -- and it's not going to work."

http://www.washingtonpost.com

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

NEWS
8 firms plan building vast interstate gas pipelines / But energy experts say
other states could tap into supply first
Bernadette Tansey
Chronicle Staff Writer

07/15/2001
The San Francisco Chronicle
FINAL
A.1
(Copyright 2001)

Six months after Californians were stunned to find their winter heating bills
soaring by hundreds of dollars, energy companies are moving ahead with plans
to build pipelines into the state that could lead to a flood of cheaper
natural gas and give consumers a break.
At least eight companies have proposals in the works to build interstate
pipelines, running thousands of miles, from gas fields in Canada, the Rocky
Mountains and the Southwestern United States to California.
"The California economy is very strong, and it's going to continue to grow
and expand," said Jim Macias of Calpine Corp., which is developing plans for
a pipeline that would run from the Southwest to a terminal in Antioch. "We
have adequate pipeline capacity for today, but we have to build capacity for
the future."
The prospect of vastly increased pipeline space for natural gas, coupled with
a building boom in California of gas-powered electricity plants, could head
off crises such as the one that beset the state last winter. As the weather
turned cold, tight space on gas pipelines meant big heating bills for
customers and huge debts for utilities and the state that had to buy
electricity produced by gas-fired plants.
INSURANCE AGAINST BLACKOUTS
Gov. Gray Davis has touted the brace of new plants as California's insurance
against blackout threats and price increases. Just in the past month, Davis
has thrown the ceremonial switches on three new power plants in California,
all of which run on natural gas.
"California is building its way to total energy self- sufficiency," Davis
said Monday at opening ceremonies for Calpine's Los Medanos Energy Center in
Pittsburg.
But there's a risk to putting so many eggs in one basket, say some industry
experts. California's rush to construct the new gas turbines -- at least 16
will come online by 2004 -- is being repeated across the nation by states
equally attracted by the environmental benefits and potential cost savings of
gas.
Those states will want to tap into pipelines being built across their
territory for their own needs, said Joe Benneche, a forecasting expert with
the U.S. Energy Department. Coastal states such as California and Florida
might not get their fill from the leftovers.
"They are at the end of the line," Benneche said. "It does make them more
vulnerable."
And even as they welcome the added megawatts from new power plants, some
California officials are wary of hitching the state's energy future to market
players that have interests in both natural gas and electricity.
"These are horizontally integrated companies that are deciding every day
based on arbitrage spreads whether they are going to sell a megawatt or a
molecule of gas," said Loretta Lynch, president of the state Public Utilities
Commission.
STUDYING GAS PRICE HISTORY
At the state's urging, federal officials are looking into why gas prices at
the California border leaped last winter to levels as much as 10 times the
national average. State regulators have accused El Paso Corp., a Texas energy
firm, of restricting gas shipments through its pipeline into the state to
raise prices -- something El Paso denies.
Generators said the price run-ups for gas justified equally huge increases in
the price of electricity they sold to the utilities and, later, the state.
And even as blackouts loomed, some firms like El Paso upheld their right to
divert fuel from generators and sell the gas instead if the price was right.
Lynch said the state needs to come up with better ways to prevent companies
from manipulating the price of gas, to increase inventories and to promote
competition so prices stay under control.
Even some industry officials are urging caution over the rush to natural gas
as the fuel source for as much as 90 percent of the country's new generation.
"It makes sense to maintain a balanced portfolio," said Neil Brown, a
spokesman for PSEG Power, a Newark, N.J., firm investing in both natural gas-
and coal-powered plants. "One of the reasons California did experience
problems was its reliance on gas and hydroelectric power. Disruptions in both
those sources contributed to supply problems."
Although geological research indicates that North American gas reserves
should be adequate for 50 to 70 years, that doesn't protect individual
regions from temporary shortages that can cause devastating price spikes,
said Benneche, the Energy Department forecaster. The key to preventing those
shortages is to build enough pipelines on time to meet the need, he said.
WAIT-AND-SEE ATTITUDE
Although energy firms, including Enron, El Paso and Sempra Energy, are
talking about a range of projects to supplement the five major interstate
lines into California, only two pipelines so far have received final approval
or have been completed, said Bill Wood, a gas expert for the state Energy
Commission.
Some companies will wait and see what demand looks like before making a final
decision on whether to build, he said.
"They don't want to overbuild," Wood said. "You only get paid for what you
use."
But maintaining extra capacity for use by competing gas marketers is
essential to hold down prices, Wood said. Otherwise, he said, a limited
number of marketers holding pipeline space can jack up rates.
Taking a cautious approach, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp.'s gas transmission
affiliate pipeline has applied to expand its capacity from Canadian gas
fields to the Oregon border by about 10 percent. Most of that will probably
be siphoned off by new gas-fired plants in Washington and Oregon, Wood said.
But the rising demand is attracting new players aside from traditional
pipeline companies operating in California. San Jose's Calpine sees a
robust-enough market to invest in its own pipeline project, if only to fuel
the 12,000 megawatts of gas-fired generating capacity the company plans to
build in California by 2005.
"We're making a big investment in gas-fired plants in California," Macias
said. "So we better be darned sure there's going to be an adequate supply
that can be transported at a reasonable price."

CHART; Caption: Chronicle Graphic

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

Business
Sale withdrawal raises Mitie hopes
Nick Hasell

07/14/2001
The Times of London
News International
Final 2
45
(Copyright Times Newspapers Ltd, 2001)

THE sudden withdrawal of a large sell order stoked hopes that Mitie Group
will emerge with an upbeat trading statement when it reports full-year
figures on July 23.
Shares in the maintenance and building services group have fallen from 190p
last December, despite optimism that the company will benefit from pledges of
increased Government spending on schools and hospitals, some of its biggest
clients. Mitie also has a strong record of earnings growth, and gave a
positive presentation to analysts in its recent year-end briefing.
That meant Mitie followers were relieved yesterday after an unnamed broker
unexpectedly pulled an overhanging sell order. The shares rallied 8 1/2p in
response to close at 142 1/2p. The FTSE 250 faded 5.1 points at 6,163.8.
Tour operators suffered on a first-half profit warning from Switzerland's
Kuoni, which complained of problems in Scandinavia. Airtours, the biggest
player in the region, lost 25 1/2p at 240p. First Choice Holidays fell 6p to
140p.
Incepta, the public relations agency that issued a cautious annual meeting
statement last week, gave up 2 1/2p to 51p as UBS Warburg moved from "buy" to
"hold". Richard Nichols, finance director, has bought 20,000 shares at 53p.
Hopes of a bullish update from SIG lifted shares in the building materials
distributor a further 4p to 224 1/2p. However, some dealers are sceptical,
suggesting that the company may have suffered from a slowdown in UK
commercial property and a weak German construction market. Half-year figures
are due on September 3.
Miller Fisher, the loss adjuster that terminated talks on a possible offer in
April, tumbled 2 1/4p to 7 1/2p. Numis Securities has a sell recommendation
on the shares with an 8p price target, and expresses concern at a recent
client defection.
Mettoni Group, the AIM-listed provider of call centre technology, recovered 5
1/2p at 40 1/2p as the company reassured that first-half pre-tax profits
would be in line with expectations. The shares fell sharply on Thursday on
what dealers described as a badly-executed sell order.
Paladin Resources was the most active small-cap market after HSBC Securities
placed the 20 per cent stake held by Enron, the US energy group. Enron bought
into the independent oil producer at 27p in 1998, and sold its 41 million
shares yesterday at 44p. With the overhang out of the way, Paladin improved 4
1/2p at 49p.

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


Please read the message below.  What do you think about increasing the fee?

D
--------------------- Forwarded by Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT on 09/20/2000 07:32
AM ---------------------------

John Griffith@ENRON
09/19/2000 11:28 AM
To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Cornhusker

Darren,

How are things going?  Just a note to reiterate what we talked about
yesterday.  Rick Hill wanted to know what the admin fee would be if the fee
was for an outside counterparty.  This admin fee would be for the life of the
project (through 2019).   Also, Mike Mazowita should be calling you to talk
about the plant being down this week through the end of the month.  Please
let me know if you have any questions or concerns.  Thanks.

John


Attached is a revised Credit Watch listing as of 4/16/01.
If there are any personnel in your group that were not included in this
distribution, please insure that they receive a copy of this report.
To add additional people to this distribution, or if this report has been
sent to you in error, please contact Veronica Espinoza at x6-6002.
For other questions, please contact Bill Bradford at x3-3831, Russell Diamond
at x5-7095, or Brant Reves at x3-9897.


Mcleod Dixon has a call on our floor 3 years out and all indications are that they would take it now if they could. Manulife has just renovated 34 at a huge cost and it is therefore unlikely that they would be moving anytime soon. As far as squeezing in more people, it is likely that we are already in breach of the fire/building codes (but I'm afraid to ask anyone).

From:	John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/04/2001 02:30 PM CDT
To:	Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:	RE: Enron Canada Office Space

My thoughts are the same.  You should stay in Canterra.  We can squeeze way more desks on that floor and I'm sure you can boot someone out below or above over the next couple of years.  Given the experience with the walls I would stick to your day job.

Lavo

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Milnthorp, Rob
Sent:	Monday, June 04, 2001 12:14 PM
To:	Lavorato, John
Subject:	Enron Canada Office Space

John, I want to re-confirm your approval to enter into a new lease. We need to give notice to Canterra by end of June on whether we are extending for an additional 3 years to June 2005 or terminating our lease June 2002.

I'm currently negotiating on 3 different sites as well as discussing the extension with Oxford:

Canterra		3 year lease - no renewal rights - $26sq/ft at 20,000 sq. ft. No ability to expand contiguously. Currently, at capacity.

TCPL Tower		Conoco has 3 floors (26,27,28 at 25,000 sq.ft/floor). With Gulf takeover, they will consolidate into Gulf Square. Looking for 3 floor 				sub-lease tenant. Likely $25/sq.ft 10 year lease w/renewal rights. Good floor-plate (column-free rectangle). One floor would likely be 			adequate for the next few years. Would overlap canterra lease by likely 9 months.

Bankers Hall		Calpine has 2 floors (39,40 at 19,000 sq.ft/floor). With Encal takeover, they will consolidate into Canada Trust. Looking for 2 floor 				sub-lease tenant. Likely $25/sq.ft. 10 year lease w/renewal rights. One floor would be less than adequate - 2 floors would be more 				than we need for the next few years. Would overlap canterra lease by likely 9 months.

Phillips Warehouse	2 floor warehouse being converted to 3 floor office bldg. 10 year lease w/renewal rights on 35,000 sq.ft at $20sq/ft. Will build to suit and 			Enron would have building naming rights. Timing with expiry of Canterra lease is good (Occupy date would be 1st qtr, 2002).

My preference is to target the Phillip's brothers warehouse.Timing, location, price, sq.footage, parking all look good. They are willing to deal with us exclusively and have aspirations of designing a state-of-the-art office building (this is consistent with their reputation) while Calpine/Conoco want to free-option us while they look for multi-floor tenants (much like what happened when we made an offer on TCPL tower previously and they used it to lever Hunt Oil into a mulit-floor lease).

Let me know your thoughts on this as I need to move fairly quickly.

---------------------- Forwarded by Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT on 06/04/2001 10:27 AM ---------------------------

Rob Milnthorp
02/14/2001 09:06 AM
To:	John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron
cc:
Subject:	Enron Canada Office Space

John, first off, congrats on your promotion!

You may recall that our Canterra lease expires June, 2002. When we consolidated our floor space on 35, we were able to incorporate an option to extend the 35th floor lease (at market rate approx $24 sq.ft) for an additional 3 years to June, 2005. Notice to extend has to be provided June of this year.

The reason I'm bringing this to your attention is that I'm concerned that we will not be able to accomodate any growth for years 2002 - 2005 in our current space. We will be at 115 employees this summer (150 sq. ft./employee) and our max is 130 (135 sq.ft/employee) which should get us through June 2002.

Given this, I have explored a number of leasing opportunities outside of Canterra with the goal of finding a floor plate more conducive to a trading organization. You may recall that TransCanada was in the process of building a new office tower across from Esso Plaza. They are now in the process of sub-leasing a number of the floors.

The tower was designed for their own trading organization and is the largest column-free floor plate in Canada (28,000 sq. ft.). It's state of the art technology includes a raised floor system for wiring (ie no coring). Coral Canada recently leased two floors in the tower for their Canadian trading operation.

We are looking at the 31st floor at $24 sq. ft for a 10 year term with some overlap with our current lease for build-out. At 135 sq. ft/employee we would be able to staff 200 employees. However, given the rectangular/column-free floor plate, we probably could get down to 100 sq. ft/employee (270 employees). This should be sufficient for many years to come.

Please let me know whether we should proceed in negotiating a lease with TCPL.

Regards
Milnthorp

<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>


The report named: West VaR and Peak Position Report By Trader <http://erv.corp.enron.com/linkFromExcel.asp?report_cd=26&report_name=West+VaR+and+Peak+Position+Report+By+Trader&category_cd=6&category_name=WEST&toc_hide=1&sTV1=6&TV1Exp=Y&current_efct_date=10/16/2001>, published as of 10/16/2001 is now available for viewing on the website.

(Revision: 3)


----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/07/2001 07:50 AM -----

	Expense Server@Enron_Development
	02/05/2001 02:44 PM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - January 2001

The following expense report is ready for approval:

Employee Name: Laura Glenn
Status last changed by:  Automated Administrator
Expense Report Name: January 2001
Report Total: $225.29
Amount Due Employee: $225.29

To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur
Expense.
http://nahou-wwxms01p


Here's a copy of what we filed at FERC today.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 02/08/2001 10:52 AM
---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  "Ronald Carroll" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com>
02/08/2001 09:58 AM

To: <nolan.steiner@avistacorp.com>, <dvermillion@avistaenergy.com>,
<rmcmanus@bakerbotts.com>, "J. Clifford Gunter" <cgunter@bracepatt.com>,
"Jeffrey Watkiss" <dwatkiss@bracepatt.com>, "Paul Fox" <pfox@bracepatt.com>,
<gfergus@brobeck.com>, <JChen@brobeck.com>, <dmbutz@butzdunn.com>,
<andrzej_kabarowski@cargill.com>, <phillip_fantle@cargill.com>,
<psteele@coral-energy.com>, <rreilley@coral-energy.com>,
<kjohan@dwp.ci.la.ca.us>, <jmpa@dynegy.com>, <joel.newton@dynegy.com>,
<dfulton@enron.com>, <elizabeth.sager@enron.com>, <jhartso@enron.com>,
<jsteffe@enron.com>, <mary.hain@enron.com>, <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>,
<rsanders@enron.com>, <smara@enron.com>, <snovose@enron.com>,
<sstack@enron.com>, <Fyanney@fulbright.com>, <jheath@fulbright.com>,
<jfrizzell@gibbs-bruns.com>, <sbishop@gibbs-bruns.com>,
<gkeltner@jsslaw.com>, <mghelms@jsslaw.com>, <dpickett@mdbe.com>,
<gerspamer@mofo.com>, <kirvin@mofo.com>, <rloeffler@mofo.com>,
<bcurrey@omm.com>, <jstamper@omm.com>, <john.fryer@pacificorp.com>,
<rbstrong@painehamblen.com>, <thord@perkinscoie.com>,
<jtiffany@pillsburywinthrop.com>, <nancy.loftin@pinnaclewest.com>,
<Timothy.Bolden@pinnaclewest.com>, <dmperlman@powersrc.com>,
<rosteen@powersrc.com>, <awu@qeuo.com>, <hao@quinnemanuel.com>,
<drusso@reliantenergy.com>, <mderstine@rhd-law.com>, <rheyman@rhd-law.com>,
<dgarber@sempra.com>, <wdsmith@sempra.com>, <rbeitler@sempratrading.com>,
<aorchar@smud.org>, <jdalfano@srpnet.com>, <paramfjord@stoel.com>,
<rcjosephson@stoel.com>, <mbrosterman@stroock.com>, <mgoldstein@stroock.com>,
<pjazayeri@stroock.com>, <theftler@stroock.com>, <ayudkowsky@strook.com>,
<katalin_kiss@transalta.com>, <sterling_koch@transalta.com>,
<antoine.cobb@troutmansanders.com>, <cfr@vnf.com>, <gdb@vnf.com>,
<hes@vnf.com>, <gackerman@wptf.org>
cc: "Andrea Settanni" <asettanni@bracepatt.com>, "Tracey Bradley"
<tbradley@bracepatt.com>
Subject: Electronic Copy of Complaint Against PX

I've attached an electronic copy of the complaint, which has been filed
within the past hour.  Hard copies that also include the cover letter, Fed.
Reg. notice, and Appendix for service list are being mailed to all persons on
FERC's service list in EL00-95-000 (the San Diego complaint proceeding).

Thanks to all who contributed to this project; it was truly a group effort.
And special thanks to the nine companies that agree to join as signatories.

For those companies that did not join in, we encourage you to intervene ASAP
in support of the complaint, including the request for an immediate
suspension of the chargeback before the next round of chargeback invoices
come due (which we believe could be as early as Feb. 15).  Since we are
asking FERC to suspend the chargeback no later than Feb. 14, your immediate
intervention would be very helpful.

Thanks again.  Ron

 - CALPXCOM.DOC


December 15, 2000

     Teco Tap       106.250 / HPL Gas Daily

     LS HPL LSK IC       30.000 / Enron

December 16, 2000

     Teco Tap       5.000 / Enron ; 120.000 / HPL Gas Daily

December 17, 2000

     Teco Tap       2.917 / Enron ; 120.000 / HPL Gas Daily


Thanks for the memo.   Mark


We have a discount on Tenn k#2891, Z0 and 500L to Carnes for Oct 1-31st, up to 20,000 per day.

Rate = $.12


Attached you will find the CPUC audit of SCE.

 - Cover.pdf
 - SCE File.pdf


Tana

This is fine with Tax

Thanks.
Justinian


Mike,

The reason my mistake was not caught on the benchmark signoff procedure is
that the postid in question did not have a net position.  The procedure
Rahmann showed you is where we check GERMS positions to the position reports
we run using Excel queries.  If a postid has a net position and is not
officialized, it will be caught using this procedure.  It will not, however,
if the postid does not have a position.  I understand the importance of
officializing postid's, as does the entire West desk.  Thanks.

DG    3-9573
---------------------- Forwarded by Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
11:07 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Jeffrey C Gossett                           10/16/2000 11:02 AM

To: Darron C Giron/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
11:01 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Michael E Moscoso                           10/16/2000 10:14 AM

To: Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

Jeff,

FYI - Darron Giron didn't officialize the West-NW-GDL book on Friday.  Please
re-emphasize the importance of not forgetting.  Also, Rahmann showed me a
control he has to catch books not officialized each night which looked like
an effective tool.  I wonder why he didn't see this book on Friday.

Mike
---------------------- Forwarded by Michael E Moscoso/HOU/ECT on 10/16/2000
10:11 AM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Michael E Moscoso                           10/16/2000 09:59 AM

To: Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT, John
Swinney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric Groves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tracy Beardmore/NA/Enron@Enron,
Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Official Books

We have been tracking books that are not officialized on a daily basis.  This
list goes to Sally Beck and is reviewed at the end of each week by Rick Buy.
Rick has been vocal about taking corrective action if people forget to
officialize.   It is imperative that we take extra care to ensure that all
books are marked official each night before going home.  A control process
should be implemented immediately to absolutely avoid being on the list.

Please contact me if you have any questions (x-35242).

Thanks,
Mike


Well, as you will see the Index has already changed.  Attached is the latest
index. If you have any questions, please let me know.


What gives?
----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 03/26/2001 01:32 PM -----

	"JOANNE BENNETT" <joanne.bennett@blakes.com>
	03/26/2001 11:25 AM

		 To: <richard.b.sanders@enron.com>
		 cc: "DAN FOURNIER" <DPEF@blakes.com>, "RON MAR" <RWM@blakes.com>,
<linda.r.guinn@enron.com>
		 Subject: Outstanding Invoice

Mr. Sanders:
?
I note from our accounting records that our invoice dated  November 9, 2000
in the amount of $124,313.68 on the Project Stanley file  remains
outstanding.
?
Would you mind tracking this invoice down to determine if  there is any
problem with payment of the account as we would like to clear this  matter up
as soon as possible.
?
I appreciate any assistance you can give us on this  matter.? If you require
another copy of the account, please let me know and  I will forward it to you
by fax.
?
Regards,
?
that we could rectify to speed up payment or,
?
Joanne Bennett
Assistant to Dan Fournier
Blake,  Cassels & Graydon LLP
3500, 855 2nd Street S.W.
Calgary,  Alberta
T2P 4J8
Tel: 403-260-9637
Fax: 403-260-9700
Email: joanne.bennett@blakes.com
?
This email communication is confidential and legally  privileged.?
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me at  the telephone
number shown above or by return email and delete this  communication
and any copy immediately.? Thank  you.


----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 12:40 PM -----

	Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>
	02/28/2001 11:00 AM

		 To: Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com>, Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Bev
Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com>, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com>, Susan J Mara
<smara@enron.com>, Joseph Alamo <JAlamo@enron.com>, Paul Kaufman
<paul.kaufman@enron.com>, Michael McDonald <Michael.McDonald@enron.com>,
David Parquet <David.Parquet@enron.com>, Rick Johnson
<rick.johnson@enron.com>, Marcie Milner <mmilner@enron.com>, Sandra McCubbin
<Sandra.McCubbin@enron.com>, Tim Belden <Tim.Belden@enron.com>, Rick Shapiro
<rshapiro@enron.com>, Jim Steffes <james.d.steffes@enron.com>, Alan Comnes
<acomnes@enron.com>, Chris Calger <ccalger@enron.com>, Mary Hain
<mary.hain@enron.com>, Joe Hartsoe <Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com>, Donna Fulton
<Donna.Fulton@enron.com>, Steven Kean <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, Karen Denne
<kdenne@enron.com>, Beverly Aden <beverly.aden@enron.com>, Bill Votaw
<bill.votaw@enron.com>, Carol Moffett <carol.moffett@enron.com>, Debora
Whitehead <debora.whitehead@enron.com>, Dennis Benevides
<dennis.benevides@enron.com>, Don Black <don.black@enron.com>, Dorothy
Youngblood <dorothy.youngblood@enron.com>, "dblack@enron.com"
<dblack@enron.com>, "emelvin@enron.com" <emelvin@enron.com>,
"ehughes2@enron.com" <ehughes2@enron.com>, "gweiss@enron.com"
<gweiss@enron.com>, "gsavage@enron.com" <gsavage@enron.com>,
"Harry.Kingerski@enron.com" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, "kgustafs@enron.com"
<kgustafs@enron.com>, Mike D Smith <msmith1@enron.com>, "sgahn@enron.com"
<sgahn@enron.com>, "vsharp@enron.com" <vsharp@enron.com>, "wcurry@enron.com"
<wcurry@enron.com>, "William.S.Bradford@enron.com"
<William.S.Bradford@enron.com>, Leslie Lawner <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, John
Neslage <john.neslage@enron.com>, Ken Smith <ken@kdscommunications.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: [Fwd: Direct Access Coalition Media Plan]

Attached, please find the latest information from the direct access
coalition.

Received: (qmail 77871 invoked by uid 41); 28 Feb 2001 04:07:03 -0000
Received: from nycxims1.edelman.com (63.96.56.110)  by mx7.quiknet.com with
SMTP; 28 Feb 2001 04:07:03 -0000
Received: by nycxims1.edelman.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id
<FY7A0FGF>; Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:46:37 -0500
Message-ID: <F1011D165600D411AC5400D0B720EE10A621F8@SFOXMB1>
From: "Fairchild, Tracy" <tracy.fairchild@edelman.com>
To: dhunter@smithandkempton.com, brbarkovich@earthlink.net,
wbooth@booth-law.com, drothrock@cmta.net, jackson_gualco@gualcogroup.com,
kmills@cfbf.com, kmccrea@sablaw.com, mday@gmssr.com,  nplotkin@tfglobby.com,
spahnn@hnks.com, wlarson@calstate.edu,  vincent.stewart@ucop.edu,
gharrison@calstate.edu, sgovenar@govadv.com,  hgovenar@govadv.com,
smccubbi@enron.com, lhastings@cagrocers.com,  theo@ppallc.com,
cra@calretailers.com, mmoretti@calhealth.org,  wbrown@lhom.com,
randy_britt@robinsonsmay.com, "DiMare, Dominic"
<Dominic.DiMare@calchamber.com>, vjw@ceert.org, rcavanagh@nrdc.org,
rochmanm@spurr-remac.org, rrichter@calhealth.org, ken_pietrelli@ocli.com,
dennis.flatt@kp.org, richard.seguin@kp.org, arm@phaser.com,
djsmith@smithandkempton.com, "Fairchild, Tracy"
<tracy.fairchild@edelman.com>, "Allen, Stevan"  <stevan.allen@edelman.com>,
"Beiser, Megan" <Megan.Beiser@edelman.com>,  "Manuel, Erica"
<Erica.Manuel@edelman.com>, "Warner, Jami"  <jami.warner@edelman.com>
Subject: Direct Access Coalition Media Plan
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:46:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_000_01C0A139.07D39B10"
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000

Hello to the Direct Access Coalition:

Below you will find a summary of the press strategy that Edelman Public
Relations intends to employ over the coming weeks in collaboration with the
Alliance for Retail Energy Markets and the broader Direct Access Coalition.
I will also outline the information that I need from Direct Access Coalition
members who are willing to be involved in media outreach and interviews.
And finally, I have attached supporting documents that you can use as
background material to prep for your responses to any media inquiries that
you may receive.

This Week

1.   We are drafting a "pitch letter" to send out by the end of this week
via blast e-mail and fax to the following media lists: 1)capitol press corps
reporters; 2) mainstream media reporters working the energy crisis; and 3)
trade media.  We may also outreach to our editorial board list as well.  Our
pitch will be focused on what it will really mean for small business and C&I
customers to lose the option of retail choice at a time when they are
suffering the financial hardships of skyrocketing energy bills. We will
address the effect on California's future business climate if direct access
is not preserved through legislation that corrects the problems that AB1x
caused for retail choice.  And finally, we will address the point that no
matter what direction California ultimately takes, direct access must be a
part of the solution.  Reporters have seen the recent polls which illustrate
California businesses' concerns with the path the state is on so this is a
prime opportunity to build on those recent media stories.

2.    We recommend a conference call with AReM and the Direct Access
Coalition on Friday to address the questions and suggestions on the press
strategy outlined here.

3.     Determine which people in the Direct Access Coalition are willing to
take media calls on behalf of the coalition.

Next Week

1.   Follow up with key reporters who received the pitch letter.

2.   Evaluate the language of SB 27x and determine whether there will be an
opportunity to hold a news conference with Sen. Bowen in the near future.
Monitor movement at the PUC and determine whether a press conference may be
effective in this arena, or whether we may need to use the option of sending
a media alert before the March 7 hearing, followed by a news release after
the hearing.

3.   Place op-eds (opinion pieces) with key newspapers.

4.   Contact radio news shows and TV public affairs shows (i.e. California
Capitol Week and the California Report) to secure
media interviews.

5.    Revise the SB 27x fact sheet (attached) to reflect the realities of
the amended language in SB 27x.

 What We Need From You

1.  If you are willing to speak with the media, or you have
customers/clients with a positive direct access story to tell, please
respond to this email as soon as you can with your name and contact
information.

2.  If you have draft op-eds written that need to be placed with newspapers
on behalf of your association and the broader coalition, we are willing to
do this for the you.

3.  If you have colleagues and/or staff that are already working with the
media it would be helpful to have this information so that we can
collaborate as necessary.

The Documents Below

>  All documents are works in progress, so if you have suggestions on
> potential changes, please feel free to share them with us.
>

Thank you.

>  <<AREM Fact Sheet 2212001 ver 2272001.doc>>
>  <<Q&A @ ESP Reversions 22701.doc>>  <<AReM FAQ FINAL3.doc>>  <<AREM Fact
> FINAL3.doc>>
>
> Tracy Fairchild
> Account Supervisor
> Edelman Public Relations Worldwide
> (916) 442-2331
> tracy.fairchild@edelman.com
>

 - AREM Fact Sheet 2212001 ver 2272001.doc
 - Q&A @ ESP Reversions 22701.doc
 - AReM FAQ FINAL3.doc
 - AREM Fact FINAL3.doc


who met with caminus?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"Masiello, Ralph" <ralph.masiello@caminus.com>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Masiello+2C+20Ralph+22+20+3Cralph+2Emasiello+40caminus+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:25 PM
To:	'pbibi@ect.enron.com'
Cc:	Andrus, John
Subject:	building liquidity

Philippe, John Andrus tells me he has had some general discussions with you
in recent weeks.  John and I will be in Houston next week,
Wednesday-Thursday, and we would very much like to meet with you at your
convenience one those days to discuss some ideas we have to make it more
attractive for Caminus users to trade on Enron OnLine.  (We're not trying to
sell you anything !!)

If you could make some time available I think it would be worthwhile; hope
to hear back from you.

I can be reached most days in Manhattan at 212 515 3691.


She  will come on Thu at 10:15.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 01/18/2000
02:26 PM ---------------------------

Jeanne A Klein@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 01/12/2000 11:55:49 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski@ECT
cc: Mingcheng Lian/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Zimin Lu@ECT
Subject: Modeling in Real Options

Vince,

My name is Jeanne Anne Klein and I am a financial modeler working with
Mingcheng Lian on a high profile pipeline project in China.

Zimin Lu referred us to you regarding questions we have on the Real Option
Valuation Approach.  We are very enthusiastic about what we have read and
heard about this valuation method.

We have been doing some preliminary research on the Real Option Valuation
approach and believe that integrating this approach into our financial model
would bring a significant increase to the value to the project.   We have
identified some deal aspects we believe would be ideal to valuate as real
options.  Our goal is to work with the development team to structure the deal
to incorporate the Real Option Valuation approach into the model enabling us
to arrange the contracts within the deal to optimize the project's value.

We would like to arrange a meeting with you at your ealiest convenience to
brainstorm on additional deal aspects that can be valued using the real
option approach as well as on ways to quantify these aspects using the Real
Option valuation Method.

Please advise if you will be able to meet with us within the next week or
two.

Thank you for your kind attention,

Jeanne Anne

X 6-6547


Mike

The number of trades doesn't seem to match between your presentation and the spreadsheet data.  The spreadsheet shows 17 power trades this year and your presentation shows almost that many every month.  Same comment for the gas side.


Julia:  To close the loop, it appears that none of the swaps were
terminated.  Sara
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 04/12/2000
03:41 PM ---------------------------

Trena McFarland
04/06/2000 10:10 AM
To: Jon Chapman/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Sutton Bridge swaps

John and Sara

In reply to your enquires:

Infinity number 10300 is a hedge that was put on with SBPL.  This is to
remain in place
Infinity number 25556 is a hedge that was put on for SBFL.  This is to remain
in place.

The other deal that you enquired about was a simple passthrough of cash.
This was a spot deal and has matured.

Trena


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

March 16, 2001 5:00pm through March 19, 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 NORTH AMERICAN LANS:  No Scheduled Outages.

FIELD SERVICES:  No Scheduled Outages.

INTERNET: No Scheduled Outages.

MESSAGING:     ALSO SEE ORIGINAL REPORT
Impact:  Corp Exchange/Outlook
Time:  Fri 3/16/2001 at  5:15:00 PM CT thru Fri 3/16/2001 at  10:00:00 PM CT
 Fri 3/16/2001 at  3:15:00 PM PT thru Fri 3/16/2001 at    8:00:00 PM PT
 Fri 3/16/2001 at  11:15:00 PM London thru Sat 3/17/2001 at  4:00:00 AM London
Outage:  Chassis swap of NAHOU-MSMSW03V
Environments Impacted:  Users-Corp Exchange/Outlook
Purpose: Problems with the current Hardware.  After the chassis sawp,  will
be testing fail over from one cluster node to the other and for any other
problems or issues.
Backout: NA
Contact(s):  Dalak Malik    713-345-8219

MARKET DATA:   SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

NT: No Scheduled Outages.

OS/2:  No Scheduled Outages.

OTHER SYSTEMS:   ALSO SEE ORIGINAL REPORT
Impact:  CORP
Time:  Fri 3/16/2001 at  6:00:00 PM CT thru Fri 3/16/2001 at  10:00:00 PM CT
 Fri 3/16/2001 at  4:00:00 PM PT thru Fri 3/16/2001 at    8:00:00 PM PT
 Sat 3/17/2001 at  12:00:00 AM London thru Sat 3/17/2001 at  4:00:00 AM London
Outage:  Unix O/S patch upgrades and FDDI migration on servers
Environments Impacted:  All Development Groups. Servers:  Fava, Navy, Europa,
Electron, Spectra, Genesis, Sdv1tib1
Purpose: Stability
Backout: Reinstall previous patch level.
Contact(s):  Wilford Stevens    713-853-7564
  Lakshminarasimhan Srinivasan    713-345-8490

Impact:  CORP
Time:  Sat 3/17/2001 at  5:00:00 PM CT thru Sun 3/18/2001 at  12:00:00 AM CT
 Sat 3/17/2001 at  3:00:00 PM PT thru Sat  3/17/2001 at  10:00:00 PM PT
 Sat 3/17/2001 at  11:00:00 PM London thru Sun 3/18/2001 at  6:00:00 AM London
Outage:  Install Unix O/S Patches and FDDI migration
Environments Impacted:  All Development Groups. Servers:  Eclipse, Sunray,
Madrdid, Quark, Modena
Purpose: Stability
Backout: Reinstall previous patch version
Contact(s):  Wilford Stevens    713-853-7564
  Lakshminarasimhan Srinivasan    713-345-8490

SITARA:  No Scheduled Outages.

SUN/OSS SYSTEM: No Scheduled Outages.

TELEPHONY: No Scheduled Outages     SEE ORIGINAL REPORT

TERMINAL SERVER:  No Scheduled Outages.

UNIFY:  No Scheduled Outages.

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

(713) 853-1411   Enron Resolution Center
(713) 853-5536   Information Risk Management

Specific 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]
EES Help Desk     (713)853-9797 OR (888)853-9797


Dear Joy and Michael,

Please have a look at DMS 7325 which is associated with deal # 347382.1.

This DMS is a dispute with South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.   Our trader Mark Fischer's name is on this deal, but he does not trade ERCOT / Texas.

When I type in the deal # that is on the DMS, the counterparty pulls up as Valey Electric Association, not South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.  (maybe this DMS was copied and all of the changes were not made?)

I'm wondering which thing the DMS is actually for?  (is the deal # correct, or is the Counterparty S. Texas correct?)

 It looks like Michael Jacobson made some changes, so I'm guessing that the deal # is wrong and the dispute was for south texas.  If that is the case, please put in the correct deal # so that my trader's name is not on it.

Also - Michael, did you make changes to the Valley deal or to a S. Texas deal?  I need to know if my trader's book was affected.

Please let me know.  Mark is anxious for an answer.

Thanks guys,

Virginia


This is a good time to bring this up.  Unless the original CES agreement has
changed, ENA will pay CALP a monthly demand charge of $103,417 from 1/1/2000
- 4/30/2000.  From 6/1/2000 - 7/7/2000, ENA will pay a (volumetric) demand
charge of $.02/mmbtu to CALP for any volumes utilized by ENA.

Which brings up 2 important points;
 1.The month of May has not been addressed which means Robin needs to discuss
this with CALP (and she may have already)
     However, currently we will not be showing any demand estimates for May.

 2.  It's a new ball game starting 7/8/2000.

Comments/questions?

---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Germany/HOU/ECT on 04/10/2000 05:57
PM ---------------------------

Brenda H Fletcher
04/10/2000 04:37 PM
To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Scott Goodell/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: CGAS contract 64231

This contract is on the ECT April spreadsheet under CES Wholesale.  What is
the relationship between ENA and Commonwealth Atlantic?
(Who pays transport invoice?  Any reimbursements?)

Thanks,
Brenda


Below is the text of recommendations taken from the summary of
recommendations in the Cheney Energy Report being released later this morning
that focus on coal and coal-related issues, including environmental.

"The NEPD Group (National Energy Policy Development) recommends that the
President direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to propose multi-pollutant legislation.  The NEPD Group recommends that
the President  direct the EPA Administrator to work with Congress to propose
legislation that would establish a flexible, market-based program to
significantly reduce and cap emissions fo sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides,
and mercury from electric power generators.  Such a program (with appropriate
measures to address local concerns) would provide significant public health
benefits even as we increase electricity supplies.

 Establish mandatory reduction targets to emissions of three main pollutants:
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury.

 Phase in reductions over a reasonable period of time, similar to the
successful acid rain reduction program established by the 1990 amendments to
 the Clean Air Act.

 Provide regulatory certainty to allow utilities to make modifications to
their plants without fear of new litigation.

 Provide market-based incentives, such as emissions trading credits to help
achieve the required reductions."

"The NEPD Group recognizes the importance of looking to technology to help us
meet the goals of increasing electricity generation while protecting our
environment.  To that end, the NEPD Group  recommends that the President
direct the Department of Energy to continue to develop advanced clean coal
technology by:

 Investing $2 billion over 10 years to fund research in clean coal
technologies.

 Supporting a permanent extension of the existing research and development
tax credit.

 Directing federal agencies to explore regulatory approaches that will
encourage advancements in environmental technology.

"The NEPD Group recomemnds that the President direct federal agencies to
provide greater regulatory certainty relating to coal electricity generation
through clear policies that are easily applied to business decisions."

"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy
and other relevant agencies, to review New Source Review regulations,
including administrative interpretations and implementation, and report to
the President within 90 days on the impact of the regulations on investment
in new utility and refinery generation capacity, energy efficiency, and
environmental protection."

"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Attorney General to
review existing enforcement actions regarding New Source Review to ensure
that the enforcement actions are consistent with the Clean Air Act and its
regulations."

"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct federal agencies to
support continued research into global climate change; continue efforts to
identify environmentally and cost-effective ways to use market mechanisms and
incentives; continue development of new technologies; and cooperate with
allies, including through international processes, to develop technologies,
market-based incentives, and other innovative approaches to address the issue
of global climate change.


Enron employees may find the current circumstances stressful.  We want to remind you that Enron's Employee Assistance Program (EAP) is still available and currently offering services to assist you and your family.

Group Discussions
Beginning this week, Enron's EAP provider, Innovative Resources Group, will be facilitating group discussions for employees who are interested in attending. These sessions are designed to address the challenges employees may be facing and to suggest ways to minimize the impact of stress on employees and their families. These sessions will be held on Wednesday, January 30 and Thursday, January 31 at the following times in EB32C2:

	9:00 am -- 10:00 am
	11:00 am -- 12:00 pm
	1:30  pm --  2:30 pm
	3:30 pm --   4:30 pm

No advance registration is necessary -- simply come to EB32C2 at the scheduled day and time that is most convenient for you.

Onsite Confidential Counseling / 24 Hour Hotline
EAP Counselors are available for individual, confidential appointments onsite in the Enron Building or at a variety of neighborhood locations.  Counselors are also available via telephone 24 hours a day, seven days a week for Enron employees in all locations.  The EAP counseling service is provided at no cost to employees and their family members.  To schedule an appointment or speak with a counselor, please call the onsite office at 713-853-6057 or the 24-hour number at 1-800-345-1391.

Informational Brochures
Additional information about EAP programs will be available in the Body Shop, the Health Center on the third floor of Enron Center North and soon in the common kitchen areas on all floors of the Enron Buildings.

Websites
The following links may also provide helpful information:
www.stress.org -- This is the website of the American Institute of Stress. The site provides general information on stress management and links to other related sites.
www.wellnessjunction.com -- This website has been developed by Health Resources Publishing and provides targeted information on trends in wellness and health promotion.


lisa found this to pump us up
---------------------- Forwarded by Matthew Lenhart/HOU/ECT on 02/13/2001
10:39 AM ---------------------------
To: Matthew Lenhart/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Def Leppard

Please forward to mitch and all others attending the Rodeo's concert of the
year.
---------------------- Forwarded by Lisa Gillette/HOU/ECT on 02/12/2001 05:54
PM ---------------------------

From:  Bryan Hull
02/12/2001 05:46 PM

To: Lisa Gillette/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Def Leppard

Gotta love these guys....


Not my deal......


as i previously reported, all of the other defendants settled with the plaintiff. significantly, their settlement included the dismissal of the most onerous (contract) counts (1 thru 4) against the enron defendants as well.   today we received a host of such notices from the court reflecting these developments.

in addition, the court ordered a settlement conference for December 12 at 1:30, and specifically ordered that all clients be present.  we accordingly need at this juncture to discuss your posture as to settlement.  we also need to know whether you think you should attend this conference, and if so, whether the date works for you.  (if not, i can attempt to have it rescheduled).  if you don't think you need to be there, i can try to have you hooked in by phone.  so let us know your thoughts.  even if your position is still not to offer anything, this conference should provide a terrific opportunity to set the stage for the judge about our confidence in the merits of our pending motions.

copies of the notices are on their way to all of you. please get back to me at your earliest convenience with your thoughts on settlement and the conference.

Charna E. Sherman
Hahn Loeser & Parks  LLP
cesherman@hahnlaw.com
216-274-2556 (voice)
216-274-2555 (fax)

**************************************************
This transmission contains confidential
information intended only for the addressee(s).
If you are not the intended recipient,
any use, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this document or its contents
is strictly prohibited.
**********************


Attached is the year-to-date report to 9/26/01.

Lex Carroll
Enron East Power Marketing, Inc.
Midwest Origination
713-853-5426


FYI, KIm.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Abdmoulaie, Mansoor
Sent:	Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:20 PM
To:	McConnell, Mark
Cc:	Watson, Kimberly; Chanley, Earl; Alters, Dennis; Asante, Ben
Subject:	TW/ Questar---new interconnect update

Mark,

After Earl met with Questar on last Wednesday Feb-20 my understanding is that:

1): TW will build all the necessary interconnect facilities and that Questar is responsible for total costs.

2):	In-service date is May-1 and that could be sooner if Questar will support us in purchasing materials

3): You have revised the agreement and it is based on the above term/ conditions

4): Earl has revised the Work.Order for routing and it is based on the above.

Am I correct on 1,2,3 and 4 ?

Thanks, Mansoor