---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 09/01/2000
04:13 PM ---------------------------

GemanIX@aol.com on 09/01/2000 04:05:21 PM
To: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Many

Dear Vince,
1.I apologize for not having got back to Karla
earlier but Dauphine is not properly equipped yet.
2.The conference with Samuelson,Merton,Heath,
Ross,McKean etc was spectacular.512 academics
and practitioners came to College de France and
 were very grateful.
3.I was so worn out afterwards that I did not make
it to Houston.I just went to visit Alex after a week
conference on Quantitative Risk Management
where I was speaking at Carnegie Mellon
4.Another former PhD student of mine has been
testing and improving the software.He is great
and modest ;giving the papers I referee and the
conferences I go to,I do believe that we are still
ahead(or way ahead)today.We also beautifully
simplified the valuation of the hourly swings.
Obviously,in case of a problem,my reputation
and your esteem would be more valuable
than 30% of 90,000 USD (to be shared ...)
5.I declined RISK in Houston and NewYork
and am not sure I will have the pleasure
to see you in London.In all cases, we
should coordinate for Paris soon
Helyette


To:								Department:  	ENA Legal

From:		Mark Taylor					Date:	May 11, 2001
		Vice President and General Counsel

Subject:	Enron North America Corp. NYMEX Hedge Exemption Applications

We are in the process of preparing applications for position limit exemptions for ENA's NYMEX energy commodities futures trading.  These applications require that ENA represent whether its officers, employees, owners, or agents have a power of attorney, control or have a financial interest in any related commodity future(s) account either individually or acting with another person pursuant to express or implied agreement.

Please direct any responses to my paralegal, Tana Jones, via intercompany email or call her at (713) 853-3399 by the end of business on June 15, 2001 if you have any power of attorney, control or have a financial interest in any commodity futures account (other than an ENA or other trading affiliate account).

IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A COMMODITY FUTURES ACCOUNT, YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESPOND TO THIS REQUEST.


Attached is a memo from Michelle Blaine regarding the U.S. Anti-Boycott Report for the third quarter of 2001.  Please call me if you have any questions at extension 52414.  Thank you.


Hi Vince,

I'm wondering if you got this last week? If you could have a quick look and
get back to me with any comments that would be great - Robin is chasing me
on this one!

Best regards.

Chris.

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Strickland <chris@lacima.co.uk>
To: <VKaminski@aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 4:16 AM
Subject: EPRM Article

> Hi Vince,
>
> Hope things are fine with you. I'm sorry that I only ever write to you
when
> I'm after something, but could you look at this simulation article - the
> next installment in the EPRM articles.
>
> Many thanks and best regards.
>
> Chris.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <VKaminski@aol.com>
> To: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>; <Les@lacima.co.uk>;
<chris@lacima.co.uk>;
> <robin@risk.co.uk>
> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 4:23 AM
> Subject: Re: VaR Article
>
>
> > Les,
> >
> > The revised version  of the VaR article looks fine.
> >
> > Vince
> >
>

 - EPRM_04_sim_mr.zip


I'm available.  As I  mentioned, I'm still working away on the revised
equipment contract.

Kay

Heather Kroll@ECT
10/23/2000 08:36 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Scott Healy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffery
Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen Plauche/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: CRRA LOI meeting

How does 10:00 work for everyone?  Jeff's got a meeting at 9, so he can't
make the 9:30.

Kay,  can we use your office?  All the conference rooms are full down here.

If 10:00 works for you, I'll see you up in Kay's office.

Heather


Dick -- I totally agree with you that allowing the TPs to work in some
"credit" for adjustments that can only be made to their generation (and that
by definition will not be transparent to anyone) is bad.  Can you send me a
paper, email, etc. where they have said this and we can pursue it (whether by
alerting FERC, etc.)  Thanks.

From: Richard Ingersoll on 04/30/2001 07:45 PM MST
To: Bill Rust/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Update on PFTF   IMPORTANT

Bill, Charles,  Keep in mind that the system physically operates
automatically with the actual flow effected by the net schedules thus we
should come up with a way to net schedules for the IDC and TLR process.  I
have one major concern in the netting dialog and in the current TLR
discussions.  The providers are proposing that they be given credit for not
only netting of unit generation which is probably OK but also they want
credit in the TLR process for units whose generation has been adjusted prior
to the TLR being called.  They say they sometimes adjust generation before
calling a TLR to try and prevent the need for a TLR.  Sounds good and it is
good that some of them try to do this but to give them credit for adjusting
generation that was adjusted prior to a TLR being called after the TLR is
then implemented will be a source of abuse that will be dificult to police.
It is the Native Load issue again, though they never bring Native Load into
the discussions.  I am looking for a solution that will encourage them to
adjust generation prior to calling a TLR and would not then be abused in the
TLR process.  Anyone have any IDEAS let me know.

	Bill Rust/ENRON@enronXgate
	04/30/2001 08:50 AM

		 To: Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Ingersoll/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Update on PFTF

Dick/Charles,

Here's a very brief update of the PFTF conference call held on Friday 27 APR.

Tom Mallinger opened the call by briefly going over our seven alternatives
for the inclusion of netted effects in the TLR 5 relief assignment. We talked
about the presentation Tom gave before the SCS. Tom said that the SCS shot
down any alternative that did not give credit to the PSE. That left our most
complicated alternative as the only solution. I asked if the complexity was
worth the benefit.

At this point Tom said (emphatically) that both Dick and Lydia Volmer
insisted that the PFTF come up with a solution other than the existing
solution and that the new solution be one which gives PSEs incentive to
create counter flows.

Our call settled on the PFTF selecting our seventh alternative, which is also
the most complex. This alternative will give the PSE credit for counter flows
(by PSE) and will also give control areas credit for counter flows (by CA).
Details are to be worked out.

COMMENTS:

The existing method looked at positive contributions to the flow gate and
ignores negative contributions (netting effects).

Dick - what is your position on sticking with the existing procedure vs.
creating a new procedure which allows netting? Did Tom characterize your and
Lydia's opinion correctly above? My concern is that the CAs will always have
netted affects available and thus will always benefit from the new procedure
(at the expense of point-to-point). We will have to predict when and where
the TLR 5 will occur and then create a transaction, before the fact, to
benefit from the new netting procedure. This procedure will not be useful
after the fact.

My real question - Is the SCS insisting on a netting procedure, or does Tom
just not want to go back empty handed? In each PFTF meeting he is adamant
that we reach consensus on a new solution that includes netting. If this is
really what the SCS wants, the we'll push for the complex solution. I just
think this is another NERC band-aid approach that is unnecessarily complex
and may not benefit Enron.

Let me know your thoughts.

Bill Rust


These dates and times are confirmed.  Please let me know if you have any
additional questions.  Thanks!
Ben Rogers


Start Date: 4/8/01; HourAhead hour: 5;  No ancillary schedules awarded.
Variances detected.
Variances detected in Energy Import/Export schedule.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001040805.txt

---- Energy Import/Export Schedule ----
$$$ Variance found in table tblINTCHG_IMPEXP.
     Details: (Hour: 5 / Preferred:  12.00 / Final:  11.98)
  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  SC_ID: ECTRT
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 4/8/01
  TIE_POINT: PVERDE_5_DEVERS
  INTERCHG_ID: EPMI_CISO_SKEETER
  ENGY_TYPE: WHEEL


----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 10/23/2000 08:26 AM -----

	Richard B Sanders
	10/23/2000 08:26 AM

		 To: melanie.gray@weil.com@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: PCA: Scheduling conference call

All of Thursday morning is good.  How long do you think this should take?
Lets meet Wed. at 3:00.   I'll hold both of these open until I hear from you.

	melanie.gray@weil.com
	10/21/2000 03:42 PM

		 To: richard.b.sanders@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: PCA: Scheduling conference call

I left Twanda several messages last week about trying to schedule a conference
call to start the settlement discussions in the PCA case.  I know that last
message was to her direct voice mail, but the earlier ones may have been to a
wrong number (number dialed:  713-853-9042).  Sorry if they didn't get through
to her.

Nonetheless, the Trustee and counsel are available for a conference call on
Thursday, Oct. 26th in the morning after 10:30 CST and up until 2:00 pm.  Do
you
have any time on Thursday.  I know it is late notice, but if you do, then I'd
say let's get the ball rolling.

I am available on Wednesday to sit down and review the issues, numbers, etc.
in
preparation of such a call.  If we go forward on Thursday, let me know what
works for you on Wednesday.  Thanks.

I'm in the office Monday morning, but will be traveling on Monday afternoon
and
am out on Tuesday in a deposition.  Thanks.

**********NOTE**********
The information contained in this email message is intended only
for use of the individual or entity named above.  If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or
agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you
have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify us by telephone (713-546-5000), and destroy the original
message. Thank you.


Dear NYTimes.com member,

Your registration to NYTimes.com included permission
to send you occasional e-mail with special offers
from our advertisers. To unsubscribe from future
mailings, visit http://www.nytimes.com/unsubscribe

This is a special offer from NextCard Visa.
-------------------------------------------------------

Congratulations! You've been pre-selected for this
NextCard(R) Visa(R) offer with rates as low as 2.99% Intro
or 9.99% Ongoing APR!

NextCard Visa is the best credit card you'll find, period.
We're the only credit card company that can tailor an
offer specifically for you with an APR as low as 2.99%
Intro or 9.99% Ongoing.  Then, you can transfer balances
with one click and start saving money right NOW.

Get a NextCard Visa in 30 seconds! Getting a credit card
has never been so easy.

1.  Fill in the brief application
2.  Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
3.  Pay no annual fees with rates as low as 2.99% Intro or
9.99% Ongoing APR

Click here to apply!
http://www.nytimes.com/ads/email/nextcard/beforenonaola.html

Why waste time with those other credit companies? NextCard
offers 100% safe online shopping, 1-click bill payment,
and 24-hour online account management.  Don't wait, apply
now and get approval decisions in 30 seconds or less.  The
choice is clear.

===============================================

Current cardholders and individuals that have applied within
the past 60 days are not eligible to take advantage of this
offer.  NextCard takes your privacy very seriously.  In
order to protect your personal privacy, we do not share
your personal information with outside parties.  This may
result in your receiving this offer even if you are a
current NextCard holder or a recent applicant.  Although
this may be an inconvenience, it is a result of our belief
that your privacy is of utmost importance.

You may view additional details about our privacy policy
at the following URL:
http://www.nextcard.com/privacy.shtml

===============================================
ABOUT THIS E-MAIL

Your registration to NYTimes.com included
permission to send you occasional e-mail with
special offers from our advertisers. As a member
of the BBBOnline Privacy Program and the TRUSTe
privacy program, we are committed to protecting
your privacy; to unsubscribe from future mailings,
visit http://www.nytimes.com/unsubscribe

Suggestions and feedback are welcome at
comments@nytimes.com.  Please do not reply directly to
this e-mail.


Have a great weekend!   Happy Fathers Day!

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


Al,

I have spoken with Mark Lay and he is interested.
Even if we cannot help you here in Enron, he may be able
to put you in touch with other CV groups in town.

Please, call him directly and give my name as a reference.
(713) 853-7408

Good luck.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 01/24/2001
02:20 PM ---------------------------

Vince J Kaminski
01/24/2001 11:21 AM
To: Al Arfsten <arfsten@bflassociates.com> @ ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: Next Step

Al,

I have called Mark Lay and left a message on his voice mail.

Vince

Al Arfsten <arfsten@bflassociates.com> on 01/24/2001 11:16:25 AM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Next Step

Vince:  Your suggestion to introduce the concept discussed with one of
the Lays is welcomed.  I hope that this would mean that you would remain
involved at some level.  The design of the model and its potential
economics could be key to how worthy the effort might be.   Enron could
be an ideal environment from which to the concept enhancement through to
commercialization could be successfully accomplished.  Please
confidentially share matters as you think best and advise me of the
interest generated.  I am ready to meet there at your building or
elsewhere that is appropriate.  Best regards,  Al Arfsten 713 965 2158


Vince & Shirley:

 Here are the details about my remaining 2000 vacation and their use:

 Vacation currently available now: 136
 Next week 3 days (Dec 27-29)    24
     ---------------------------
 Vacation Remaining on 31-Dec:  112
 Officially rolled over to 2001:    40
     ---------------------------
 Unused 2000 vacation:    72

Thanks,
Krishna.
---------------------- Forwarded by Pinnamaneni Krishnarao/HOU/ECT on
12/18/2000 02:41 PM ---------------------------

Pinnamaneni Krishnarao
12/11/2000 06:28 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Rollover of my vacation days to 2001

Vince:
 I would like to rollover my vacation days for 2000 remaining at the end of
this year to 2001. I could not use us all of my available vacation this year
because of the following reasons:

1. As you know, I have been supporting three business units (EES, EPG & Enron
India) this year. All these units had difficult and relatively long projects
that required experience in energy markets, derivatives pricing and business
knowledge that I had gained over the last few years at Enron.

2. There has been a significant change in the team members reporting to me. I
now have six people under me compared to only three at the begin of the year.
Of the current six members, five joined us only this year and most of them
didn't have any prior work experience, thus requiring a lot of my time in
recruiting, training and mentoring.

3. Given that I had to visit our Bombay office in January, 2000 for a
business trip (10 days) and will need to go there again in January, 2001, I
could not take leave from my work for the other two units (EES & EPG) for an
extended period of time.

So, in summary, this year has been a long and challenging one, and as a
result, I could not take vacation for more than a few days. I request you to
grant the rollover of my remaining vacation to next year.

Currently I have 136 hours of vacation available and , of these, I expect to
have 112 hours unused at the end of this year.

Thank you,
Krishna.


calendar and meeting file
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/07/2001 07:49 AM -----

	Ricardo Charvel
	02/05/2001 04:16 PM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Mexican Energy Secretary Marten's meeting with Dr. Lay

----- Forwarded by Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron on 02/05/2001 04:16 PM -----

	Ricardo Charvel
	02/05/2001 04:15 PM

		 To: richard shapiro
		 cc: Steve Kean
		 Subject: Mexican Energy Secretary Marten's meeting with Dr. Lay

Rick,

As you know, last week I had a meeting with Fernando Alonso who is the head
of Investment Promotion at the Mexican Department of Energy.  We discussed
the gas price policy, electric deregulation and the role that Enron has been
playing and can play in all these matters.

I pointed to him that Presidents Bush and Fox were geting together on
February 16th and that President Fox has been declaring to the media that he
will talk about a common energy policy with President Bush.

We agreed that it would be useful for Secretary Martens to Meet with Dr. Lay
before the Presidents meet.  Fernando Alonso admitted to me today that
Secretary Martens wanted to hear Mr. Lays opinion on this subject and perhaps
recieve some advice with respect to talking points for President Fox with
President Bush regarding energy policy.

Secretary  Marten's  team(and now the Secretary himself) view Mr. Lay as an
ideal communication link between the Mexican and the U.S. Governments for
energy policy.  This is the reason why the Secretary wants to meet with Mr.
Lay before the 16th.  Originally they had agreed on meeting on Feb. 12th at
9:00 a.m. Nevertheless, President Fox has asked that Secretary Martens to
meet him in Mexico City on Monday the 12th which is why I got a call from
Fernando Alonso asking if Mr. Lay could see Secretary Martens on Sunday the
11th between 3:00 p.m. and 6:30 p.m.

Secretary Martens has to be at a CERA dinner on Sunday at 7:00 p.m.

Fernando Alonso, Dionisio Perez-Jacome, Undersecretary Niceforo Guerrero and
myself will be meeting tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. to talk about electric
deregulation.  They are expecting an answer from me by then.

Dionisio Perez-Jacome president of the CRE (FERC equivalent) is going to be
in Houston on Monday the 12th.  I would like you and Steve Kean to meet with
him if you are going to be in town.  I would also like to organize a tour for
him that day.  We'll talk about this tomorrow night when I see you.

Thanks for your support.

Ricardo


FYI


Please note that a conference call has been scheduled for tomorrow at 8:00 am
cst. re the Duke/Citrus contract.  The dial-in information is as follows:

1-800-998-2462 passcode 5313982

Andy and Jeff you will dial in on 703-736-7230.  Operator will ask you for
the above referenced passcode.

Twanda Sweet
Enron North America Corp.
EB3822
(713) 853-9402
twanda.sweet@enron.com


<TITLE>Power Indices - IntercontentalExchange</TITLE>

IntercontinentalExchange

Firm Power Price Bulletin

For Power Delivered on Wednesday, November  28, 2001

(Trade Date of Tuesday, November  27, 2001)

Click here to access index history.

* volume represents sell-side only *

Hub
High
Low
Wtd Avg Index
Change ($)
Vol (Mwh)

Cinergy	         $20.50	         $18.00	         $18.45	-    .12	          55,200

Comed	         $17.25	         $16.75	         $16.96	+    .96	           4,800

Entergy	         $18.00	         $17.00	         $17.33	-    .35	          12,800

Nepool	         $27.75	         $27.00	         $27.47	+    .25	          12,000

Palo Verde	         $29.50	         $27.75	         $28.80	+   6.35	           5,600

PJM-West	         $23.25	         $22.80	         $22.96	+   1.24	          50,400

SP-15	         $32.50	         $29.50	         $31.13	+   6.94	           6,400

TVA	         $20.00	         $17.00	         $18.04	+    .29	           7,200

Includes all trades done from 6 AM to 11 AM Central Prevailing Time on the trade date specified for financially firm power delivered during the on-peak hours (6 AM - 10 PM CPT for Eastern hubs / 6 AM - 10 PM Pacific Prevailing Time for Western hubs) on the delivery date(s) specified.

IntercontinentalExchange is the world's most liquid trading platform for over-the-counter energy and metals.  Active markets include North American power and natural gas, global crude and refined oil products, and precious metals.  Traded instruments include forwards, swaps, and options.

In order to receive the proprietary information contained in this email, you acknowledge and agree that you shall not further disseminate the IntercontinentalExchange Market Data contained herein to any person or entity without the express written consent of IntercontinentalExchange.    Furthermore, you acknowledge that (1) IntercontinentalExchange has exclusive and valuable property rights in this data; (2) IntercontinentalExchange's data is being made available to you only for your own business or personal activities; and (3) you cannot communicate the data, in any form, to any other person or entity without the express written consent of IntercontinentalExchange.

This data is provided to you free of charge.  IntercontinentalExchange reserves the right to cancel this service at any time for any reason or no reason at all.

You agree that IntercontinentalExchange does not make any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to the data.

To become an Exchange Participant or inquire about the indices, please contact sales@intcx.com.

To unsubscribe from this service, click here unsubscribe.

©Copyright IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. 2001, All Rights Reserved.


Attached please find the Natural Gas market  analysis for today.

Thanks,

Bob McKinney
 - 12-27-01 Nat Gas.doc


Susan has reviewed the Confidentiality Agreement and is OK with my changes.
If you guys are OK with the changes we can forward this to Tri-State for
their review.

----- Forwarded by Gerald Nemec/HOU/ECT on 08/31/2000 11:10 AM -----

	Gerald Nemec
	08/22/2000 10:49 AM

		 To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Mark Courtney
		 Subject: Gallup Compressor Station

Susan,

Under the terms of the Gallup Compression Services Agreement, ECS is working
with the electric utility (Tri-State) to provide TW access to Tri-State's web
site for the purposes of load controlling the Gallup Station to avoid
Tri-State's system peaks.  Attached is a confidentiality agreement which
Tri-State drafted under which Tri-State will allow both TW and ECC to see
such data.  Tri-State is obviously concerned with migration of the data to
Enron's power trading groups.  The attached draft includes my comments.  I
have attached a clean and a redlined of my comments.  I thought we could get
both of our comments prior to sending back to Tri-State.  Please review and
return all your comments to me.  Thanks.


Elvi,
   Give me a holler, 972 231-1559.  Maybe I can go with you Sunday,
depending on the time you're going.

Drow

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/47cccB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/Vk9qlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

At Homecoming 2000, the BETA TENT had the biggest crowd by far.  Stay connected and consider a future homecoming BETA reunion.  It's incredible...forget the 20 years in between...everyone just seems to pick it up right where they left off years ago.

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


Here's the answer to your question about paragraphs 42 and 44 of Duke's
complaint.  Although CDWR is technically the SC for the UDCs in the short
term bilateral market and the ISO, as a practical matter, if CDWR does not
like the prices offered in the bilateral market, it waits to buy the power
from the ISO.  Then  CDWR reviews the price of the ISO's purchases and
(according to an article in Megawatt daily) it "does not authorize the
payment at prices it deems unreasonable."


Please be advised that a conference call has been scheduled for TODAY
(Tuesday, October 24, 2000) at 5:00 p.m. central time regarding the
above-referenced matter.  The dial in number is 1-800-998-2462; pincode:
4718933

Thanks.

Richard


Sent by: Enron Announcements@ENRON
To: All Enron Worldwide
cc:

Subject: Talk to Joe Sutton on eSpeak Today!

Log on to ethink.enron.com on Friday, November 19 at 9:30 a.m. (Houston time)
and talk to Joe Sutton on Enron's first eSpeak event!

What is eSpeak?

eSpeak is an interactive Q&A forum on the eThink intranet site where we will
be holding scheduled events with a variety of people on a variety of
subjects.  Joe Sutton is our first guest speaker.

For one hour, you have an opportunity to ask Joe how Enron can break down
communication barriers.  Share your ideas with him for innovative ways to
communicate and tell him how you want to receive information.  Also, what can
Joe personally do to encourage better communication across business units,
within teams and with your co-workers?

How to sign up for eSpeak

If you haven't already signed up on the eThink site, you will be required to
register before you can participate in an eSpeak event.  This may take a few
minutes, so register as early as you can.
? You will be asked to enter your email address and operating company.
? A "userid" and password will be automatically sent to your email address.
? Use the "userid" and password to log onto the site.  (An easy way to enter
the password into the required field is to copy and paste it from your email.)
? You will be immediately prompted to change your password once you are in
eThink.
? Each time you participate in eThink forums you will be asked to log on, so
keep your password simple!

We want to know what you eThink!

Your interaction and feedback will have an impact on the development of
eSpeak, so please send your comments, suggestions or ideas to
ethink@enron.com.

Join the eThink momentum and begin sharing today.
Log on to ethink.enron.com


Hi Sherrie and Sally -

To let you know that Ken has agreed to join another board.  It is i2
Technologies, Inc.  The company is based in Dallas.

Please let me know if you need further information.

Rosie


Dear Mr. Lay,

I went home yesterday along with the other 3,999 employees who lost
their jobs at Enron.  Even though we had weeks to prepare for the worst,
when the layoffs occurred, it really hit me hard.

I cried a great deal, not only about the uncertainty of my future, but
for the loss of relationships and friendships that I had established
over the last five years I spent at Enron.  The hardest aspect of
yesterday was saying "goodbye" to my friends and co-workers.

We've all made a resolution to stay in touch and hopefully we will all
pick up the pieces and carry on with our lives.

I appreciate the efforts that were made to get us some severance, but as
you are well aware, gave so much of ourselves to the company and lost so
much in return..

I'm sure I'm not alone in encouraging you and Enron management to
continue to push for additional severance for those of us who lost our
jobs.  This is a hard time to hit the street looking for a job, while
Continential, Compaq and now Enron have downsized and the holidays are
upon us.

I know you have probably received this kind of message  many times in
the last few weeks, but I hope you will continue to do the right thing
for the employees.  We need the additional severance to be able to
ensure food on the table and roofs over our heads until we can land on
our feet after this free fall.

I will never regret my 5 years at Enron.  They are an important part of
my past.

I appreciate your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Pope-Sance
ex-Manager
Enron Energy Services
ksance@swbell.net


The dinner was incredibly delicious.  Thank you very much.  I apologize for
being so late--increasingly I have less and less control over my schedule.
Would have much preferred to have spent it with you guys.  And sorry that I
pooped out so early---I'm running on zero sleep and had a 7:30 conference
call this morning.

That said, the dinner was really extraordinary.  You guys outdid yourself.
Made an others tough day very nice.  Thanks.

Best,
Jeff


Start Date: 1/10/02; HourAhead hour: 2;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2002011002.txt


e-mail sent on 10/22/01 by Sharron


great thanks

Chris.Germany@enron.com on 04/04/2000 04:43:04 PM
Please respond to Chris.Germany@enron.com

To: Jeffrey Porter/CES/ColumbiaGas@COLUMBIAGAS
cc:
Subject: Re: TCO Capacity to COH

Secondary non-recallable, you can use $.14 year round

OR

$.05 for Apr-Oct which is probably a little high and $.15 for the winter.

The non-recallable factor is the hard thing to figure in.

jporte1@columbiaenergygroup.com on 04/04/2000 02:41:03 PM

To:   " - *Chris.Germany@enron.com" <Chris.Germany@enron.com>
cc:   " - *Perrone, Brian" <bperron@columbiaenergygroup.com>
Subject:  TCO Capacity to COH

Can you help me with capacity prices on TCO to put in our pricing models?
I
need Apr-Oct '00 and Nov-Mar for deliveries to COH. assume 10,000/d of
secondary for summer and 20,000/d for winter. Please call if you have
questions.


darren,
 This was done as a signed GTC transaction.  I do not know if they have
signed or not.  The paperwork provides a zero collateral threshold.  The
counterparty is a limited partnership.  J. E. Robert Companies is the general
partner.  The enron counterparty is Houston Pipe Line Company.  I see no
reason to redo the paperwork if the original GTC has been signed.  Do you
agree?

	Darren Vanek/ENRON@enronXgate
	04/16/2001 04:43 PM

		 To: Debra Perlingiere/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: JER-BRE Austin Tech.xls

Please prepare a Master Physical according to the terms of the worksheets.
Please call if you have any questions.

-Darren


The $.10 rate should be correct.

D

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Megan Parker @ ENRON                           03/08/2001 12:33 PM

To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Tenaska IV Transport 10/00

That's great.  What about deal 452475?  We have $0.10 and we are being billed
$0.11 for meter 25000200 on contract 1856.  Also, I faxed the Oct 2000 TXU
invoices to Trisha Hughes so she can look into the Dec 2000 and forward
problem.

Megan


Steve,

Please see attached a background note and update relating to the LME fine
issued to Enron Metals.  Please let me know if you have any questions, or
would like any further information on this.

Regards

Julie Green


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Glover, Sheila
Sent:	Monday, September 24, 2001 6:25 PM
To:	Bruce, Robert; Musch, Susan
Cc:	Greene, John
Subject:	Hong Kong

Robert and Susan,
It was decided last week that Financial Trading is not going to pursue Hong Kong Equity Trading in 2002.  We are tabling for next year.
Thanks. Sheila


Over the last several years, we've received numerous questions and candid
comments from many of you on a wide range of topics during our eSpeak
sessions and through the Office of the Chairman online mailbox and
voicemail.  While eSpeak is an open, informal chat between employees and
management, the Office of the Chairman online mailbox and voicemail box are
designed as confidential upward feedback tools for employees who choose
anonymity.  We are pleased that many of you have openly expressed your
thoughts and your identity, which made it possible for us to quickly respond
to your questions and concerns.  This is the kind of work environment we all
must strive for at Enron, and we encourage you to continue sending us
comments about the things that are important to you.

Many times, however, we wanted to respond to those of you who contacted us
anonymously with your good ideas, observations and questions.  We now have a
way to do this while maintaining your confidentiality.  In the future, when
we receive an anonymous question or comment from an employee, both the
question and our response will be posted on eMeet.  This will allow us to
answer all the questions that we receive, and it will give other employees an
opportunity to provide their insight, if they choose to do so, since eMeet is
an open discussion board.

Remember:  You can send your questions and comments to us in two ways:
 - email to Office of the Chairman, or
 - Office of the Chairman voicemail box at 713-853-7294, which is a
confidential call

Promoting open and honest communication is consistent with our Vision and
Values and absolutely vital to our continued success as a company.  So don't
be hesitant or afraid to speak your mind.  We want to hear from you.


- GC010627.xls


[[ ENRON42.XLS : 2599 in ENRON42.XLS ]]

Darren, Thanks for your patience.  Call me when you have the time to go over
this.

Patricia Anderson
512-370-8280
 - ENRON42.XLS


(See attached file: hpl0614.xls)

 - hpl0614.xls


First of all, congrats on the big win this weekend.  They keep proving me
wrong.  Second, sorry this is late.  Friday was 1st day, our longest of the
month.

   DRAFT

This is a summary of where we stand from a Risk Management perspective on the
PGT/Socal permanent assignment to Calpine  Currently there are 5 deals in
Tagg and 1 in the transport  model.

 EC3952.O - Annuity where the West desk pays PGT (from $.08987 to $.17308) on
67,500/Day thru Oct-23
 This deal will be unwound and this income (approx $30M) will fall out in the
West desk

 EC3952.F - Buy from Canada of 30,000/Day thru Oct-08 at Malin for Index +
$.00
 EC3952.K - Sell to AEC of 30,000/Day thru Oct-08 at Malin for Index + $.00
 As of now, these deals will remain unchanged in the system because AEC will
not let us out of the firm contract

 EC2208.B - Buy from Canada of 22,500/Day thru Oct-08 at Malin for Index -
$.005
 EC3952.B - Buy from Canada of 15,000/Day thru Oct-01 at Malin for Index -
$.01
 These deals will be unwound, but discussions between Philip Allen and ???
will reveal details not known at this point in time   (Bid/Offer)

 Transport Model - Kingsgate to Malin capacity of 67,500/Day beginning Nov-08
thru Oct-23
 This deal will have to be unwound or killed - Currently the deal is valued
at approx $12M in the West Desk

After unwinding these deals, the West desk will be kept whole, the remainder
will be granted out in orig.

This is my first go at it.  Let me know of any revisions you want.

DG    3-9573


Dave

It sounds like the urgency on the Wind Power decision wasn't a reality.
Kevin says that they are working on it.  If you need me to do anything let me
know.

Lavo


Gordon,

It was a  pleasure talking to you.
I shall ask my assistant to send you the reprint.

Vince Kaminski

Shirley, Can you, please, send a copy of the paper on credit risk management
(reprint from the  RISK book).

Gordon Rausser <rausser@nature.berkeley.edu> on 04/26/2000 12:02:02 PM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject:

Vince:

Thank you very much for the useful information you provided me today.

As you suggested, I wish to request a copy of the reprint that was
published last year in Risk.

Gordon Rausser
Robert Gordon Sproul Distinguished Professor
Dean, College of Natural Resources
University of California
101 Giannini Hall, MC 3100
Berkeley, CA 94720
Phone: 510-642-7171
Fax: 510-642-4612

>http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/index.php3?db=dean_rausser


Jim:

The same prohibition applies to EES, although I did not notify anyone specifically about the prohibition.  Harry, is there someone we need to talk to?  Is EES selling power to IP?

-----Original Message-----
From: Steffes, James D.
Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 7:50 AM
To: Migden, Janine; Boston, Roy; Landwehr, Susan M.
Cc: Shapiro, Richard; Novosel, Sarah
Subject: FW: Enron/Dynegy Transaction and Affiliate Rules

FYI.

Also, does the same obligation present itself in Illinois?  Are there any restricitions or obligations on EES as a marketer in IP territory?

Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Novosel, Sarah
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 9:08 PM
To: Presto, Kevin M.
Cc: Nicolay, Christi L.; Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Steffes, James D.
Subject: Enron/Dynegy Transaction and Affiliate Rules

I received a call this evening from our V&E regulatory counsel (Adam Wenner) who received a call from Dynegy's regulatory attorney, Dan King, about the need for both companies to making filings at FERC to notify FERC of the proposed acquisition and to state that, during the pendency of the acquisition, both companies will treat each other as if the two were already merged (i.e., the standards of conduct and affilate rules will apply).

Under FERC's regulations, as of the date of the agreement, Enron and Dynegy must conduct themselves as if they are already merged.  Therefore, Enron can no longer enter into transactions with Illinois Power to buy or sell power absent FERC approval under section 205 of the Federal Power Act, and Dynegy cannot enter into transactions with Portland General absent prior FERC approval.  With regard to the sale and purchase of non-power goods and services, all non-power goods and services provided by Illinois Power to Enron must be priced at the higher of cost or market. Any non-power goods or services provided by Enron to IP must be priced at a level that does not exceed market price.

We will work with the attorneys to make these filings, but we wanted you to know as soon as possible that we need to stop power sales and purchases with Illinois Power (if we were doing any) and can only enter into transactions with them with prior FERC approval.

We will send a draft of the FERC filing to you for review.  Please let us know if this restriction causes problems for you (e.g., you have existing or forward contracts with IP that are in effect or are scheduled to go into effect during the pendency of the acquisition).

Let us know if you have any questions.

Sarah


(See attached file: HPLN0327.xls)

 - HPLN0327.xls


What person(s) in London prepares credit for the English and Singapore
financial transactions?  At some point in the not so distant future, the
Houson and London credit departments need to speak in order that each
understands the "philosophy" behind credit analysis for the omnibus and
master transactions.  I look forward to hearing from you.   Regards.  Sara

ps  Congrats on your promotion!  I didn't have a chance to speak with you
after the offsite to shake your hand.  Hope you enjoyed your weekend in
Houston.


I plan to take the 18th out for vacation as no one else is out that day.  Mary

Cordially,
Mary Cook
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith, 38th Floor, Legal
Houston, Texas   77002-7361
(713) 345-7732 (phone)
(713) 646-3490 (fax)
mary.cook@enron.com


This is a Return Receipt for the mail that you sent to
dune.thorne@oracle.com.

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

 - C.DTF
Return-Path: <Tana.Jones@enron.com>
Received: from inet-smtp2.oracle.com (inet-smtp2.us.oracle.com
[205.227.43.29])
 by gmgw03.us.oracle.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA17219
 for <dune.thorne@oracle.com>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:12:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Tana.Jones@enron.com
Received: from postmaster.enron.com ([192.152.140.9])
 by inet-smtp2.oracle.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17756
 for <dune.thorne@oracle.com>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 15:12:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com ([172.28.10.38])
 by postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id
SAA22309
 for <dune.thorne@oracle.com>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 18:11:25 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (unverified) by
nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP id
<Tac1c0a264fc6cf3abc@nahou-msmsw02px.corp.enron.com> for
<dune.thorne@oracle.com>;
 Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:11:26 -0600
Subject: NDA - Oracle
To: dune.thorne@oracle.com
Cc: Dovie.Keprta@enron.com
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.3  March 21, 2000
Message-ID: <OF15D33D43.0E4343EF-ON86256992.007EFC26@enron.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 17:11:22 -0600
Return-Receipt-To: Tana.Jones@enron.com
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.3
(Intl)|21 March 2000) at
 11/09/2000 05:07:08 PM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed;
 Boundary="0__=86256992007EFC268f9e8a93df938690918c86256992007EFC26"
Content-Disposition: inline


no not necessarily... just sick of her at the moment,

From: Margaret Allen@ENRON on 04/02/2001 01:32 PM
To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re:

what a pisser -- i'm still in austin so i can't go.  what about your
girlfriend?  is she on her way out?

	John Arnold@ECT
	04/02/2001 12:25 PM

		 To: Margaret Allen/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc:
		 Subject:

i may have some u2 tix for tonight,   wanna go?


Puget Sound -- open to trade Western power products.  However, this CP is NOT
authorized to trade Eastern power products.  Thus, disregard the previous
recommendation to set them up for Enron sales only for the East.

City of Roseville:  Open to trade all US power products pursuant to on-line
GTCs.

Leslie

	Tana Jones
	09/13/2000 11:01 AM

		 To: Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 09/06/00

Need to know the scoop on City of Roseville and Puget Sound...
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 09/13/2000 11:01 AM -----

	Shari Stack
	09/11/2000 11:32 AM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 09/06/00

Leslie said that she will call you re: City of Roseville (and Puget Sound as
well).

----- Forwarded by Shari Stack/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 11:31 AM -----

	Shari Stack
	09/11/2000 09:27 AM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Rhonda L Denton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 09/06/00

Tana:

The following CP's are not authorized to trade US Power Products:

Willowbridge Associates: Declined by Credit
City of Roseville: Need to speak with Elizabeth/Leslie  - will get back to
you on them today.
Coastal Field Services Restricted by Credit
Mississippi Chemical Corporation - Restricted by Credit

Thanks,

Shari


Drew, Steve Harris said this morning that Susan was out today.  I will be out
Monday and Tuesday next week.  Let me know, if want to meet anyway.

Keith

	From:  Drew Fossum                           12/01/2000 08:30 AM

To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc: Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Gallup

Lets talk today, susan.  I need to satisfy myself that this is really one of
those "shit happens" situations like everyone seems to believe, rather than a
situation where we may have a cause of action and some $$$ owed to us by
someone.  DF
---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 12/01/2000
08:25 AM ---------------------------

Keith Petersen
12/01/2000 08:08 AM
To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Gallup

The note below was a portion of Terry Galassini's Weekly Report.  I wasn't
sure if either of you have been a part of the test information.

**Gallup Compressor Station & Mainline Expansion
A field test was completed and initial results indicate a compressor
efficiency around 80 - 82% which is within Cooper's guarantee.  A not to
exceed cost of $3 Million was provided to Marketing for station modifications
to facilitate an incremental mainline (West of Thoreau) firm capacity of 10
MMcf/d.    Additional work by E&C to fine tune the not to exceed estimate is
targeted for completion by December 8th.  The mainline expansion potential is
directly related to Gallup since the discharge pressure must be increased to
970 psig to achieve an additional 10 MMcf/d on the mainline.  The San Juan
Lateral firm capacity would remain at 850 MMcf/d.


---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Drexelius/CES/ColumbiaGas on 12/27/99
08:07 AM ---------------------------

Marianne Stiles
12/22/99 04:00 PM

To: Phil Villagomez/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas
cc: Paul Drexelius/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas, Noel
Bartlo/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas, Joanne
Swogger/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas,
Frank Kronz/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas, Brian
Perrone/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas, Melissa
Flewellyn/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas, Morgan
Sharifi/CES/ColumbiaGas@ColumbiaGas
Subject: January 2000 AGT volumes

Here are the approximate January daily volumes for each of the gates.   Please
do not forget that January 1 and January 2 will be lower because of the
weekend/holiday.    I know you wanted an exact volume for 1/1 but I will not
have that for all of the Algonquin markets until Monday, 12/27.      We will
need a range from 3200 dth to 4200 dth per day.   This large swing is normal
for these types of markets due to weekends, weather, and customer situations.

 - agt012000.xls


***************************************************
*                 NEW MEDIA MARKETS               *
***************************************************
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=180
***************************************************

Dear MR MC CONNELL

-----------------------------------------------------------------
"New Media Markets provides in-depth analysis of everything
that's happening in the pay-TV business...it's an indispensable
read!" Stuart Prebble, Chief Executive, ITV
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Please CLICK BELOW to download your second FREE issue of NEW
MEDIA MARKETS - the premier weekly newsletter covering business
strategies and technology in the European cable, satellite and
digital television industry.

Subscribe to NEW MEDIA MARKETS and benefit from:

* WEEKLY DELIVERY- keeping you fully informed of all the latest
news
* EXCLUSIVES -  giving you vital news and information on key
companies ahead of other sources
* QUALITY ANALYSIS - offering you insight into how new
developments will affect the industry.

CLICK BELOW TO DOWNLOAD YOUR SECOND FREE ISSUE
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=164

NEW MEDIA MARKETS also brings you monthly SPECIAL GUIDES -
giving you detailed statistics and essential information on
key players and their strategies, providing insight into the
hot topics in the industry. COMING IN NOVEMBER: The set-top
box market in Europe; IN DECEMBER: European football rights.

NEW MEDIA MARKETS, now in its twentieth year of publication,
is relied on by senior executives and decision-makers throughout
your industry - can you afford to be left behind in this
fast-paced market?

CLICK BELOW TO ORDER
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=174

New Media Markets:		895 GBP / 1343 USD / 1432 EUR
New Media Markets Online:	1045 GBP / 1568 USD / 1672 EUR

Other benefits of subscribing to NEW MEDIA MARKETS:

1. You'll become a member of the Subscriber Club
(http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=165) - giving you up
to GBP 2000 worth of discounts and special offers across Informa
Media & Telecoms products.
2. Order using your credit card and you'll receive a free copy of
GLOBAL DIGITAL TV - worth GBP 800 / USD 1360! Gain exclusive
forecasts of satellite, DTT and cable TV households to 2010, plus
in-depth country and company profiles from 23 key markets

Other relevant publications from the Informa Media Group:

* TV International -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=173
* Broadband Media -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=171
* Digital Broadcasting Revolution (4th edition) -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=166
* Personal TV -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=169
* Global Digital TV -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=160
* On-Demand Television -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=172
* Convergence in TV & The Internet -
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=178

Please feel free to forward this to interested colleagues

In order to view your free issue you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader
Click below to download it for free
http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/click.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020&l=170
___________________________________________________________________

CLICK BELOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE

If you do not wish to receive information and news on this subject
in future please reply to this email with the message UNSUBSCRIBE
in the subject line and you will be instantly removed from this list.
Please note that as this is an automated operation replying with
unsubscribe in the text of a message will have no effect.

The personal information shown in this e-mail, or provided by you,
will be held on a database and may be shared with companies in the
Informa Group in the UK and internationally. Sometimes your details
may be obtained from external companies for marketing purposes. If
you do not wish your details to be used for this purpose, please write
to the Database Marketing Manager, IBC UK Conferences Limited,
Enterprise House, 45 Station Approach, West Byfleet, Surrey,
KT14 6NN.
E-mail database@ibcuk.co.uk

Informa Media Group, Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London,
W1T 3JH, UK

Remove from list: http://f0am.net/cgi-bin/foam/unsub.cgi?i=2109&c=81&a=30020


Craig Gannet reports:

 I talked to Rich Glick this morning about the rumored
Administration rulemaking on reliability.  Rich said that it will be a
notice of inquiry, not a proposed rulemaking.  The NOI will essentially ask
three questions: (1) should DOE issue a proposed rule? (2) Does DOE have the
legal authority to do so?  (3)  if DOE should issue a rule and has the
authority to do so, what should be included in the rule?  The NOI will not
contain any proposed language.  The comment period will be 45 days, and Rich
does not expect this Adminstration to act on this issue.  In effect, he
said, they are simply teeing the issue up for the next Administration.
(This assumes that the pending reliability legislation is not passed during
the upcoming lame duck session, which I think is a pretty safe assumption.)
Rich said that the NOI is on Secretary Richardson's desk, and is likely to
be signed tomorrow.


Mark, see below the percentage allocations for Michelle Cash and Richard
Sanders (all ENA) received from Kris Armstrong.  Deb

Deb Korkmas
Enron North America Corp.
ENA Legal Dept.
1400 Smith Street, Room 3819
Houston, TX  77002
Phone:  713-853-5448
Fax:  713-646-3393
----- Forwarded by Deb Korkmas/HOU/ECT on 10/23/2000 10:22 AM -----

	Kristin Armstrong
	10/23/2000 09:03 AM

		 To: Deb Korkmas/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Cash-Sanders Allocations

Deb - see attached.

Kris


Test


Mary --

Did anyone file for rehearing to "include" LT contracts into the review
process?

Jim

	Mary Hain@ECT
	03/12/2001 01:31 PM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com@ENRON, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Christian
Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tracy Ngo/PDX/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: FERC Order and DWR

In the Staff Recommendation on Prospective Market Monitoring and Mitigation,
March 2001, the FERC Staff stated that its proposed mitigation proposal is
designed to apply only to approximately 5% of the market that remains in
real-time and not to the bilateral and forward markets.  In addition, the
December 15 order only established a reporting requirement for sales into the
ISO and PX spot markets exceeding $150/MWh.  Under the order, the refund
potential closes after 60 days of a utility filing its cost justification
unless the FERC issues written notification to the seller that its
transaction is still under review.  Note well that this does not entirely
insulate EPMI concerning long term deals because the FERC's December 15 order
is still pending rehearing and parties can appeal that order once the
Commission rules.

From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 03/12/2001 12:00 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Christian
Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FERC Order and DWR

Quick question to Joe and/or Christian, John and Mary:

I'm assuming that any deal we sign with DWR that falls below the $150/MWH
soft cap is free and clear of the order FERC issued on Friday as well as any
other refund risk associated with FERC's December order.  Is that correct?
Thanks.

Best,
Jeff


I am out of the office.  I will be periodically checking e-mail.  For urgent matters, you may reach me by cell phone at 713.398.5963.


See last question.
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/02/2001 09:46 AM -----

	Stelzer@aol.com
	04/02/2001 08:47 AM

		 To: klay@enron.com
		 cc: skean@enron.com
		 Subject: Advisory council meeting

    Let me review where we stand for the April 10-11 meeting.
1.  I have spoken with Gavyn and asked him to add to his usual review
comments on the significance of recent developments for Enron.
2.  I have asked Bill Kristol to do the same.
3.  I have asked Paul Portney to review "the lay of the land" in the
environmental policy area.
4.  Since we couldn't locate a speaker to address the question of how Enron,
now larger and more corporate than in the past, can continue to attract the
best, the brightest (and the oddest?), I have asked Pankaj to give a brief
talk about what the literature generated by his colleagues has to tell us on
this subject.
5.  I couldn't get anyone on the "monopoly-too-big-and-powerful" question,
although I am still trying.
I assume you folks will brief us on California and the national energy supply
picture. Have we heard from the author of "When Genius Fails"?


I sent the approval to JoAnn

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Shapiro, Richard
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09, 2001 9:13 AM
To:	Kean, Steven J.
Cc:	Hill, Jo Ann
Subject:	Retention awards
Importance:	High
Sensitivity:	Confidential

Steve: Please  approve the following requests via Jo Ann for the following individuals( all options priced on or about 11/1/01).: Harry Kingerski-$50,000; Christi Nicolay-$50,000; Sarah Novosel-$50,000;& Bob Frank-$40,000. Thanks.


Start Date: 10/27/01; HourAhead hour: 16;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2001102716.txt

Error retrieving HourAhead price data - process continuing...


Eliz -- I need your group to put together a search which captures the
comments of PG&E and Edison officials in trade press, anlyst reports, and
speeches which would be inconsistent with the idea that they can now recover
their shortfall.  In other words, when they were trying to get AB 1890
passed, when they were fighting Proposition 9, when they floated their "rate
reduction bonds" and when they talked to analysts and rating agencies I'm
sure they assumed that they would live under the rate freeze and take the
risk of stranded cost recovery whithin the statutory deadline.

----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 11:45 AM -----

	"Dick S George" <dsgeorge@firstworld.net>
	09/27/2000 08:04 AM

		 To: "Dick George" <dsgeorge@firstworld.net>
		 cc:
		 Subject: WSJ: PG&E's Huge losses...

CC list suppressed...
September 27, 2000
California Utilities' LossesOn Electricity Pose Risk

By REBECCA SMITH

Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

California's two biggest utilities are losing so much
money buying electricity in the state's deregulated
market that they have run up deficits equivalent to half
their net worth in just four months.

If the cost of wholesale power continues to exceed the
price these utilities are allowed to bill their
customers, as currently seems likely, they could become
technically insolvent sometime next year. That would put
pressure on regulators to orchestrate a
multibillion-dollar public bailout, similar to the "too
big to fail'' response that in the past pushed
governments to rescue banks.

Such a scenario is quietly being discussed by bond-rating
concerns that recently reduced their credit outlooks for
Pacific Gas & Electric Co., a unit of San Francisco-based
PG&E Corp., and Southern California Edison, a unit of
Edison International of Rosemead, Calif. Bond- rating
concerns say they aren't sure how much additional debt
can be borne by the two affected utilities before they
will have difficulty paying their bills.

Probe of California Power Prices Begins, but New Plants
Aren't Seen as Solution (Sept. 11)

Los Angeles Utility Is Benefitting, Surprisingly, From
Deregulation (Sept. 6)

California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Electricity Costs
(Sept. 1)
"If this is just a seasonal aberration, the utilities can
get through it," says Lori Woodland, analyst for Fitch
IBCA. "If it goes on for six or nine months, it's a very
serious situation." Adds A.J. Sabatelle, senior credit
officer at Moody's Investors Service Inc.: "At some
point, you have a financial crisis."

The utilities say they are having no difficulty meeting
expenses and don't envision problems in servicing their
debts. But they are vigorously lobbying state and federal
regulators to change the rules of the game, hoping
somehow to raise rates to make up for the shortfall. The
California utilities' experience may be a harbinger of
what could happen in other states where wholesale power
prices have surpassed the amount that utilities are
allowed to charge their ratepayers.

For now, utilities are making ends meet by going to the
financial markets to borrow money. PG&E, a giant utility
that serves one out of every 20 Americans, is seeking
approval to increase its debt capacity by $1.4 billion.
It is borrowing $200 million, while Edison is tapping
$250 million from the commercial paper market. "This is
going to be a long, tough road," says Jim Scilacci, chief
financial officer for Southern California Edison.

Today's situation represents a complete turnabout from
what was expected when California deregulated its energy
market on March 31, 1998, which opened electricity
pricing to competition. California tried to give its
utilities a competitive edge nationally by deregulating
faster than other states and by creating a mechanism to
allow investor-owned utilities, such as PG&E and Edison,
to quickly pay down debts incurred to serve customers
under the old regulatory system.

To do this, the state legislature set retail rates at
high levels, which, at first, generated fat surpluses for
the utilities. As the money piled up, utilities used it
to pay down debts for generation facilities that were
otherwise unprofitable in the new deregulated world. By
the end of this June, PG&E and Edison together had
collected more than $12 billion and were on track to
finish paying down debts well ahead of the March 31,
2002, deadline set by the legislature. At that point,
rate freezes were to end and retail prices were to
fluctuate with the market.

But all that went out the window in June, when wholesale
power prices surged, topping the rates the utilities were
allowed to charge retail customers. Average prices at
state-sanctioned energy markets were four to five times
the prices of a year earlier, and three to four times the
level utilities could charge customers.

The accumulated shortfall has been so enormous at PG&E,
that analysts expect its deficit to exceed $3 billion by
Oct. 31, more than half its shareholder equity of $5.7
billion, which is defined as assets minus liabilities.
Southern California Edison finished August with a deficit
of $2 billion, equivalent to almost two-thirds its net
worth of $3.2 billion. The utilities, though they have
been accumulating deficits, aren't required to report
these as losses on their earnings statements.

That leaves utilities in a bind. They want to end the
rate freeze to be able to pass on the real cost of
electricity to consumers. But should the freeze end
before the statutory deadline of 2002, they get
clobbered. That is because they will immediately have to
book a loss on their power-purchase deficits. What's
more, they can't use the proceeds from planned
power-plant sales to cover those losses; instead, should
the freeze end, they will be obliged to refund some of
the proceeds to ratepayers. In PG&E's case, the refunds
could total $500 million, while in Edison's case, the
amount is $254 million.

Publicly at least, utility executives insist a mechanism
will be found to let them recoup the money spent on
electricity.

Consumer advocates are gearing up for the fight. Nettie
Hoge, executive director for San Francisco consumer group
Utility Reform Network, says ratepayers shouldn't end up
footing the bill for a deal cut by utilities that
benefited them before prices shot up.

Utility executives are now distancing themselves from the
legislation that got them into such a mess, which was
drafted with their assistance. PG&E Chairman Robert Glynn
says it is best not to "overanalyze" the "old deal."
Instead, he says, regulators and legislators should sit
down with utilities and construct a new agreement, since
"it's in the broad interests of the state not to have
critical energy infrastructure look like a leper."

Mr. Glynn says the current deal offers "mutually assured
destruction" to both utilities and ratepayers. Something
must be done, he says, or consumers throughout most of
the state will experience "a San Diego-style rate shock."
The utility serving that city, San Diego Gas & Electric
Co., ended its freeze a year ago and began passing
wholesale power costs directly through to ratepayers.
Legislators intervened this summer, however, and
temporarily capped retail rates when monthly power bills
nearly tripled. The utility, a unit of Sempra Energy, is
also accumulating a deficit as a result.

So long as banks and bond markets believe the utilities
will be repaid, they will be able to borrow, analysts
say. "Until we hear politicians of consequence state
otherwise, our position is that we believe the utilities
will be made whole," says Richard Cortright, a director
at Standard & Poor's corporate ratings group.

But that opinion could change if it looks like the
utilities will have to swallow a big loss. The result:
lower credit ratings that would raise borrowing costs and
could trigger a downward spiral. "You're talking about
top-rated companies, though," said Ms. Woodland of Fitch
IBCA. "To get to insolvency, a lot would have to happen."

In the meantime, utilities are doing all they can to
control the hemorrhaging. They have gotten authority from
regulators to buy more power under long-term contracts at
fixed prices, reducing their vulnerability to spot-market
volatility. And they have petitioned federal regulators
to declare California's market so badly flawed that
generators should be denied market pricing and, even,
ordered to pay refunds.

Nevertheless, several forces are working against them.
Although they can sign bilateral contracts, prices remain
high for those as well. What's more, they can't buy less
power than their customers need. If they don't buy
enough, the California Independent System Operator, the
organization responsible for reliability, will step in
and make purchases for them and send them the bill.

Perhaps the biggest problem facing PG&E and Edison,
though, is one of timing. The California legislature is
out of session until December, and regulators haven't
even really started to address the issue formally. In the
meantime, the utilities' deficit is growing by tens of
millions of dollars daily.

Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith@wsj.com


As you know, we've been working for about an eternity to unbundle SoCalGas'
system.  90+% of the industry agreed to an unbundling solution and filed it
as a settlement at the Commission.  In opposition, muni generators and TURN
supported SoCalGas' original proposal to essentially maintain the status quo
(SoCalGas eventually came over to our side, as did Southern California
Edison).

A judge's proposed decision came out the day before Thanksgiving adopting the
settlement advocated by the muni generators and TURN.

If it weren't for the continual barrage of retrograde policy pronouncements
coming from the "new" California PUC, folks would be genuinely shocked by the
judge's proposed decision, but as things are, it was somewhat expected.

There's one silver lining:  We managed to get in both settlements an
identical provision that eliminates a substantial amount of financial risk TW
would have faced but for the provision.  So from that perspective, the choice
to go with the TURN/muni settlement and embrace the status quo does no harm.
It does considerable harm, however, when compared to the significant value
that would have been created if the judge adopted the the unbundling
settlement.

We have a chance to go on the record in a trade publication "California
Energy Markets."  Recent events might persuade us to keep a low profile
generally at this point.  On the other hand, perhaps the time is right to
start coming out of our corner just a bit and pointing out the very poor job
this Commission is doing in managing California's energy policy.  I'm
squarely on the fence at this point and am seeking feedback.  A proposed
comment is attached.

Two questions:

1) Do folks think that there's value in providing a comment?

2) If so, does this statement work, or do folks have suggestions?

Thanks,
Jeff

"The California Public Utilities Commission has a choice. It can adopt the
same, common sense natural gas policy for Southern California that,s been in
place and working well for consumers in PG&E,s service territory.  Or it
stick with the status quo, which the industry agrees is at least partially
responsible for bottlenecks and high prices in California.  The proposed
decision opts for the status quo.  That's not going to California,s natural
gas problems and it,s likely to make matters worse in California's electric
industry."


Just confirming that we (ENA) aren't planning to use all of our "chits" on this issue..

Please call if you have any questions.

Regards,

Stephanie

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Wong, Michael
Sent:	Friday, November 16, 2001 2:47 PM
To:	Mcdonald, Michael; Calvert, Gray; Miller, Stephanie
Subject:	PG&E and Lodi Gas
Importance:	High

I spoke with Jeff Dasovich and got an update of discussions with PG&E.  He received an email yesterday from Dan Richards (Steve Kean equivalent at PG&E) and he is getting a contact for us to interface with at PG&E on this issue.  Dan indicated that he would try and have a name and number to Jeff by early next week, so Jeff will keep us posted.  If you have any questions, comments, etc. give me a call and I'll track it down.

Michael Wong
Enron North America
(w) 415-782-7808
(c) 415-297-9664


Ben,

Just keep with you. Don't circulate it.

---------------------- Forwarded by Jinsung Myung/Corp/Enron on 03/27/2000
03:51 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Jinsung Myung                           03/27/2000 02:11 PM

To: Tom Swank/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Scenario analysis on Synthetic CC

Tom,

Structuring got back to us with scenario analysis on different deal terms.
Here is the summary.

Levelized capacity payment (starting 6/1/02)
10 yr deal (Best term)
 - @mid curve: $6.21/kw-mo
 - @offer curve: $9.84/kw-mo
12 yr deal
 - @mid curve:  $6.23/kw-mo (due to curve shift since last time, compared to
$6.10)
 - @offer curve: $9.90/kw-mo (due to curve shift since last time, compared to
$9.65)

Levelized capacity payment (starting 6/1/03)
8 yr deal (Best term)
 - @mid curve:  $5.98/kw-mo
 - @offer curve: $9.69/kw-mo
11 yr deal
 - @mid curve:  $6.04/kw-mo
 - @offer curve: $9.81/kw-mo

This result comes mainly from upward shaping gas curve. Although I don't know
exactly what pricing the trade will give to us for 8yr deal starting 6/1/03
(best term), I can get the quote, if you want. Please see attached
spreadsheet for complete analysis. Can we think of any other optionality
other than term play? Let's sit down when you have time.