PLEASE TREAT AS CONFIDENTIAL

A source had a meeting today with California state treasurer Phil Angelides.
Here are the main points from their conversation

1. Anglelides Certain that SoCal Will Go Bankrupt

Corroborating our line over the past four months, Anglelides stated with
confidence that SoCal would go bankrupt and that "he was surprised they
hadn't already."  He noted that the only reason they haven't yet is that
"they were too stupid to ring-fence the parent" and that "their two biggest
equity holders were screaming not to do it."

He added that the Davis/SoCal MOU is dead and that all the "Plan B's" are
"speculative" at best.  He also thought that SoCal was being "naive if they
thought they would get a better deal from the legislature than from the
bankruptcy court."

2. Bond Issuance- $12B Not Enough

Angelides conceded that a $12B bond issue would not be enough to buy power
for the summer and that the true costs would probably be $18-24B.   The only
reason they didn't issue more is that Angelides felt that "$12B was all the
market could handle."  The current game plan for bonds assumes an average
peak price for power of $400/MWh, which Angelides said explains the
difference between his estimates and the higher estimates from State
Comptroller's Kathleen Connell's office.

3. New Generator Construction

Anglelides was explicit that the California Public Power Authority
(authorized by the legislature last week) will "build plants and not stop
until we [California] has a 10-15% capacity cushion above expected demand.
Angelides expects the state to be "5-10% short on power all summer."


Please refer to the attached worksheet when charging/coding 3rd party fees &
travel expense to Project Crane.  Please use the WBS element that corresponds
to your group.  If your group is not represented in the structure, please
call me at 3-6354 so that I can add it.

If your group has incurred any 3rd party fees/travel expense this year which
was coded to your cost center, please let me know so that we can move those
charges to this project #.

Thanks,
Rainier


In reconciling with CES I have come across deal numbers 144284, 229286, and
232373 that have CES as the counterparty but in the terms they show the deal
is actually with Allied.  CES has paid everything we invoiced them, including
these three deals, but they have admitted that they are unfamiliar to them.
I have not said anything to CES yet.  Do we need to change the counterparty
or what action should we take?

Thank You,

Molly


Hi Andy

I would be happy to participate in whatever session/role in either or both
Atlanta and/or Newport that you think would be helpful/appropriate - just let
me know.  Thanks - Hope all is well.


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 01/02/2001
10:01 AM ---------------------------

Zimin Lu
12/28/2000 05:27 PM
To: Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  (bcc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT)
Subject: Re: EOL WTI Historical Trade Simulation

Stinson,

Thanks a lot for so much work you have done for the simulation model.
It seems that our work will make an impact on EOL trading, that is very
exciting.

Could you e-mail me the spreadsheet model so that I can catch up with
the changes you have made ?

I read a few books during this vocation. Especially a stochastic processes
book, I finished the entire book.  The queueing theory is very fascinating,
 and hopefully we can apply the theory to a real EBS project.

I will take my family out to see the Nature Bridge Caverns near San Antonio
tomorrow.

See you on Tuesday.

Happy New Year !

Zimin

Stinson Gibner
12/27/2000 08:09 PM
To: Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Zimin Lu/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: EOL WTI Historical Trade Simulation

Greg,

Here are results corrected for spread profit per round-trip transaction.
Prior results incorrectly counted a spread profit per trade.

Stinson


Steve,

I am calling Anjam to give him a deadline regarding move to Houston.
If he decides to stay in Houston, you should meet with him to convey
the concerns regarding his performance.

Vince

Steven Leppard
10/13/2000 03:50 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dale
Surbey/LON/ECT@ECT, Tani Nath/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Paulo Issler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharad Agnihotri/LON/ECT@ECT, Zimin
Lu/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Support for Exotica

All

Sharad's investigations of Exotica's status in London have turned up a very
confused state of affairs. This isn't being helped by the fact that:
1. Anjam is rarely at his desk, and can't be found anywhere in the building.
2. When he is around he isn't willing or able to provide all the information
Sharad might need to support Exotica.
This is worrying since much of our business depends on the validity of
Exotica's valuations.

Sharad will now request information from Anjam via email to leave a trail,
and I want to alert you to the fact that Sharad will be cc'ing you in on
these emails.

If things don't improve soon, I may need to request some assistance in
extracting this information from Anjam.

Many thanks,
Steve


This is the list of CEO's expected at the President's meeting tomorrow on tax
issues.

----- Forwarded by Linda Robertson/NA/Enron on 02/06/2001 03:50 PM -----

	Gian-Carlo_A._Peressutti@who.eop.gov
	02/06/2001 03:42 PM

		 To: Linda.robertson@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: here ya go!

(See attached file: fortune5Bios.doc)

 - fortune5Bios.doc


materials for DC meeting
---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT on 09/20/99 08:47
AM ---------------------------

"Andy Katz" <AKatz@eei.org> on 09/13/99 04:16:05 PM
Please respond to "Wholesale Electric Contract Standardization Group"
<contract@ls.eei.org>
To: "Wholesale Electric Contract Standardization Group" <contract@ls.eei.org>
cc: EComer@eei.org (bcc: Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT)
Subject: Standardized Master Contract and Model Tariff

Please review the attached cover memo that describes the process followed by
the Drafting Committee and a proposed plan of action for the meeting on the
24th.  You will find find attached a clean copy of the Master Power Purchase
and Sale Agreement and a redline version showing changes made by the Drafting
Committee to the last version of the agreement reviewed by the entire Working
Group.   Also attached is a proposed Model Tariff for use with the Master
Agreement.  The Model Tariff is described in the  Cover Memo.  All these
files are in Rich Text (*.RTF) format and should easily import into any
wordprocessing program.

************************************************************
Andrew S. Katz, Senior Attorney
Edison Electric Institute
akatz@eei.org
PH (202) 508-5616
FAX (202) 508-5673

 - clean memo.rtf
 - septcleandraft.rtf
 - 9RJ3RED.rtf
 - #7767 v1 - WHOLESALE MARKET BASED RATE SCHEDULE FORM.rtf


SENT ON BEHALF OF PETER KEOHANE:

FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Sharon Crawford/CAL/ECT on 05/29/2001
11:52 AM ---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources
	Canada Corp.

	From:  Peter Keohane                           05/14/2001 09:33 AM

To: ferickson@cal.stikeman.com
cc: Chris Gaffney/TOR/ECT@ECT
Subject: Derivatives Regulation

Fred, its been a while - how are you?

I would like to talk to you regarding a summary of the applicability (and
more accurately non-applicability) of certain regulatory requirements to our
energy intermediation business.

In particular, I have in mind the Natural Gas Marketing Act (Alberta),
Securities Act (Alberta), Securities Act  (British Columbia), Securities Act
(Ontario), and Commodity Futures Act (Ontario).

As you know, we are involved in Canada, primarily in Alberta, Ontario and BC,
in physically and financially-settled commodities trading and origination,
primarily for gas and electricity, and providing risk management and
commodity portfolio advice to various counterparties.

It would be useful to have an analysis, both for internal purposes and to
share with third parties, confirming the applicability of these regulatory
requirements to our business.

We currently operate in these areas under the following understandings:

Natural Gas Marketing Act (Alberta) - the Act applies to "netback"
arrangements applicable to gas aggregation where there is no specified price
agreed to between the producer and the shipper, and is therefore largely not
applicable to our business

Securities Act (Alberta) - we are a Qualified Party by virtue of the
"commercial user" exemption and our counterparties are similarly or otherwise
exempt, and in any event we obtain a rep to that effect from  our
counterparties

Securities Act (BC) - similarly, we and our counterparties are Qualified
Parties and we obtain a rep to that effect (note:  the Qualified Party
exemption in BC extends only to the registration and prospectus requirements,
but we otherwise take the "risk" as there is not much we can do to comply
with the other operative provisions of the Act, which I am not sure even make
sense in the context of our business)

Securities Act (Ontario) - the proposed amendments have not been enacted and,
hopefully, if and when they are, we will be able to rely on similar
exemptions or exclusions

Commodity Futures Act (Ontario) - the Act only applies to exchange traded
forward contracts or options (whether or not exchange traded) on exchange
traded forward contracts (or "commodity futures contracts" and "commodity
futures options"), and not to trading on a spot basis or over-the-counter
(note:  although we believe there is a technical argument that electricity is
not a "commodity" under the Act, unless the IMO will be classed as a
"commodity futures exchange", which we assume it will not (both by its
purpose and creation and the fact that it is a spot market), and as there is
no other exchange of which we are aware, either proposed or operative, in
Ontario for forward gas or power contracts, we understand the Act as not
being applicable to our business)

What is not so clear to us, particularly with respect to the Securities Acts,
is how these statutes apply not when we are trading as principal for our own
account (where we understand the exemptions to apply), but where we are
providing portfolio positioning or risk management advice to counterparties.
Do the exemptions apply in this case, or are there some "advisor" or "dealer"
registration or compliance requirements in these circumstances?  I also
believe there are registration requirements for advising under the Commodity
Futures Act (Ontario), but again these would apply to "commodity futures
contracts" and "commodity futures options" in which we don't deal.

Fred, I guess, in summary, what we would like is an executive summary-type
memo (not a formal "legal memorandum") which can be shown to commercial
employees and counterparts which addresses these issues and hopefully
confirms our approach to date.  I would also like to know if there are
regulatory requirements that we have missed.  I am not concerned with
"operational regulations" (such as under the Electric Utilities Act
(Alberta), Gas Utilities Act (Alberta), Electric Utilities Act (Alberta),
Fair Trade Practices Act (Alberta), Electricity Act (Ontario), Electricity
Competition Act (Ontario) and Ontario Energy Board Act (Ontario)) but
regulation of our commodity trading, origination and risk management advisory
business.

After you have had a chance to digest this, can you please have your
assistant call Sharon @ 974.6726 so we can schedule a time that Chris Gaffney
(my colleague in Toronto) and I can discuss this with you.

Peter.


Geynille:

Here is the list of the women who attended the presentation at Wellesley
along with their e-mail addresses.

Laura