NOTE:  YOU WILL RECEIVE THIS MESSAGE EACH TIME YOU ARE SELECTED AS A REVIEWER.

You have been selected to participate in the Year End 2000 Performance
Management process by providing meaningful feedback on specific employee(s).
Your feedback plays an important role in the process, and your participation
is critical to the success of Enron's Performance Management goals.

To complete requests for feedback, access PEP at http://pep.corp.enron.com
and select Perform Review under Performance Review Services.  You may begin
providing feedback immediately and are requested to have all feedback forms
completed by Friday, November 17, 2000.

If you have any questions regarding PEP or your responsibility in the
process, please contact the PEP Help Desk at:

Houston: 1.713.853.4777, Option 4
London:  44.207.783.4040, Option 4
Email: perfmgmt@enron.com

Thank you for your participation in this important process.

The following is a CUMULATIVE list of employee feedback requests with a
status of "OPEN."   Once you have submitted or declined an employee's request
for feedback, their name will no longer appear on this list.

Review Group: ENRON
Feedback Due Date: Nov 17, 2000

Employee Name                   Supervisor Name                 Date Selected
-------------                   ---------------                 -------------
BROWN, WILLIAM W                LOUISE KITCHEN                  Nov 02, 2000
BRUCE, DANIEL                   PHILIPPE A BIBI                 Nov 10, 2000
DETMERING, TIMOTHY J            JEFFREY M DONAHUE JR            Oct 31, 2000
DONAHUE JR, JEFFREY M           DAVID W DELAINEY                Nov 15, 2000
DOSHIER, RAYMOND W              KEVIN P HANNON                  Nov 13, 2000
FITZGERALD, JAY L               LOUISE KITCHEN                  Nov 13, 2000
GARNER, BRUCE                   LOUISE KITCHEN                  Oct 27, 2000
GROS, THOMAS D                  LOUISE KITCHEN                  Nov 13, 2000
HICKERSON, GARY J               JEFFREY A SHANKMAN              Nov 15, 2000
MCCLELLAN, GEORGE               JEFFREY A SHANKMAN              Nov 15, 2000
MCMAHON, JEFFREY                MARK A FREVERT                  Oct 31, 2000
NOWLAN JR, JOHN L               JEFFREY A SHANKMAN              Nov 16, 2000
PIPER, GREGORY F                LOUISE KITCHEN                  Nov 14, 2000
SHANKMAN, JEFFREY A             MICHAEL S MCCONNELL             Nov 16, 2000
ZIPPER, ANDREW A                LOUISE KITCHEN                  Nov 13, 2000


Here is your confirm,  please read the sections we have changed and let me
know if you have any questions.

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


Daren:

I'll come down to talk to you about these.

Lee

PS congrats!!

---------------------- Forwarded by Lee L Papayoti/HOU/ECT on 03/20/2000
09:56 AM ---------------------------

Kristen J Hanson
03/20/2000 09:31 AM
To: Lee L Papayoti/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Lisa Csikos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sherlyn Schumack/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Mobil Discrepancies

Lee,
Here are some specific situations I am trying to resolve regarding volume on
Centana:

Purchase from Mobil:
2/99 - The purchase by HPLR for 155,000mms in deal 60978 was never billed by
Mobil.
 (A purchase of gas in storage with no physical movement per comments in
sitara).
  Per our conversation Friday, it sounds like HPLC does owe Mobil for his
gas, right?

Sale to Mobil:
1/2000 - Per the pipe statement provided by Greg Bonin for Centana volumes,
299,893
 flowed in January.  I billed 299,893 and Mobil paid it.
 Logistics said 19,893 of the gas that flowed was not our sale to Mobil
because
 the gas wasn't scheduled.  In addition, if the 19,893 were a sale to Mobil,
the
 point would not be in balance in the system.  The source of 280,000 of the
gas
 says they only sold 280,000mms and not any more. No other sources are in the
system.

 I assume if the 19,893 wasn't consumed by Mobil, they wouldn't have
 paid for it.   Is there storage involved here?  If so, whose storage and how
did it work?

There are sales in other months with discrepancies on Centana with smaller
volumes
than in 1/2000.  Once I understand what happened in January, maybe that will
help me
with the other months.

Please let me know if there is any other information you need from me
relating to
the questions above and when would be a good time for you to discuss this.  I
can bring
the pipe statements to you if that would help.

Thanks,
Kris


A meeting has been scheduled as follows:

Project Torque - Excluded Facility Review
Monday, February 14th
2:00 - 3:00 in EB4249

If you have any questions please feel free to call!

Thanks,
Kathy
x3-4364


---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/10/2001 11:57
AM ---------------------------

Kay Mann
04/06/2001 11:25 AM
To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

I would really appreciate your advice.  I have to learn it somehow, and I
know that you have an excellent idea of what works.

Thanks,

Kay

From: Sheila Tweed@ECT on 04/06/2001 11:22 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

Mark is the signer of opinions and I know what he will sign and what he
won't, so I'll be glad to help you through it but it's

	Kay Mann@ENRON
	04/06/2001 10:47 AM

		 To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

They have a financing out in the letter agreement.  We have to use
commercially reasonable efforts to deliver GE consents, but I don't recall
anything about in other financing docs.

Is someone in the dept designated as the opinion reviewer?

Kay

From: Sheila Tweed@ECT on 04/06/2001 10:19 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

I guess I'm not sure I know what's in the letter agreement.  If it's a done
deal, I'd say no or at least maybe.  We only give due authority opinions and
we try to narrow our obligations to lenders under Consent Agreements

	Kay Mann@ENRON
	04/06/2001 09:15 AM

		 To: Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

Nice touch, sending this the day after the letter agreement was signed.  Can
you enlighten me on the ENA procedures and sensitivities to these types of
docs?

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/06/2001 09:14
AM ---------------------------

"PARKER, Isabel" <isabel.parker@freshfields.com> on 04/06/2001 09:07:25 AM
To: "Carolyn Campbell (E-mail)" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com>, "John Keffer (E-mail)"
<JKeffer@KSLAW.com>, "Kay Mann (E-mail)" <kay.mann@enron.com>, "Rick Vicens
(E-mail)" <rvicens@deltapower.com>, "Gregory F. Lang (E-mail)"
<gregorylang@paulhastings.com>
cc: "John Tisdale (E-mail)" <jtisdale@jhancock.com>, "Dan Revers (E-mail)"
<drevers@arclightcapital.com>, "Amy Weed (E-mail)" <aweed@jhancock.com>,
"BURKE, Ted (TDB)" <ted.burke@freshfields.com>

Subject: Pegasus: ENA Consent and Legal Opinion

This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you
have received it in error, you are on notice of its status.  Please notify us
immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system.
Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to
any other person:  to do so could be a breach of confidence.  Thank you for
your co-operation.  Please contact our
IT Helpdesk on +44 (0) 20 7936 4000 Ext.2000 or email ITHelp@freshfields.com
if you need assistance.

We understand that the Letter Agreement is to be signed today, and attach
for your comments a form of ENA consent to collateral assignment of the
Letter Agreement and a form of legal opinion to be issued by in-house
counsel to ENA.  Both documents are conditions precedent to funding.

Kind regards
Isabel

 - NY003700425.DOC
 - NY003699617.DOC


I had just called down to the back office and said, hey aren't we due some
$$$ back soon since margins should be going down?????  Fat chance......

From: Sara Shackleton@ECT on 12/12/2000 02:31 PM
To: Joseph Deffner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Wesner/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mary
Cook/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: (00-423) Natural Gas Margin Increase

FYI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 12/12/2000 02:30 PM -----

	exchangeinfo@nymex.com
	12/12/2000 02:07 PM

		 To: sara.shackleton@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: (00-423) Natural Gas Margin Increase

Notice No. 00-423
December 12, 2000

TO:
ALL NYMEX MEMBERS AND MEMBER FIRMS
ALL NYMEX CLEARING FIRMS
ALL NYMEX OPERATIONS MANAGERS

FROM: Neal Wolkoff, Executive Vice President

SUBJECT: MARGIN RATE CHANGE

Effective Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2000 (close of business)

Futures Contract: Henry Hub Natural Gas Futures

Contract Months: All Months

Rate Change:
NYMEX Division Margins on Henry Hub Natural Gas Futures Contracts

Effective Date:  Wednesday, December 13, 2000 (close of business)

Clearing Member (Maintenance Margin): Old:  $12,000  New:  $14,000

Member Customer (Initial Margin):            Old:  $13,200  New:  $15,400

Non-Member Customer (Initial Margin):   Old:  $16,200  New:  $18,900

Should you have any questions regarding these changes, please contact Arthur
McCoy at (212) 299-2928 or Joe Sanguedolce at (212) 299-2855.  This notice
supersedes all previous notices regarding outright margins for the NYMEX
Henry Hub Natural Gas Futures Contract.

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

"
http://208.206.41.61/email/email_log.cfm?useremail=sara.shackleton@enron.com&r
efdoc=(00-423)"

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


I have been trying to hook up with Kevin and will see him tomorrow.  I still
prefer to use the "old exec committee plus" for this PRC with a reformed MD
PRC starting at mid year.  We have too many people in transition to just
switch over to the policy committee at this stage.

	Cindy Olson
	12/04/2000 09:10 AM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re:

Steve, my preference is the first option however I can live with either
really.......we just need to make a decision ......what do you think??????
---------------------- Forwarded by Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron on 12/04/2000
09:00 AM ---------------------------

David Oxley@ECT
12/04/2000 08:29 AM
To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Gina Corteselli/Corp/Enron@Enron, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON

Subject: Re:

How can we resolve today if possible?
---------------------- Forwarded by David Oxley/HOU/ECT on 12/04/2000 08:28
AM ---------------------------

Kevin Hannon@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 12/02/2000 10:12:58 AM
To: Gina Corteselli/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re:

You know my opinion, I vote for option #2.

Kevin

	Gina Corteselli@ENRON
	11/30/00 07:19 PM

		 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject:

Following discussions with Steve and Kevin yesterday, we're providing some
options for the conduct of final PRC reviews  for the Enron VP's and MD's.
Please let us know which of these options (or a derivative therein) you'd
prefer.

For continuity through the year-end process, we might consider having the
existing MD VP PRC Committee review the VP slate; and  the former EC and two
newly appointed EC members  who are also VP PRC Committee, (John  Lavorato
and Jeff Shankman were suggested), ratify the VP slate and review the
MD's.    The newly appointed EC members who are MD level will remain in the
"Not Rated" category, so that Jeff and John may participate in the overall
discussion and depart before discussions relative to them and their EC
colleagues.

Alternatively, we might disband the existing MD VP PRC Committee in favor of
having the newly appointed EC  (13  of whom are MD VP PRC) review the VP
slate.  Thereafter, the Enron Corporate Policy Committee would be responsible
for ratifying these results and for reviewing the MD's slate.  Insofar as the
Policy Committee might require further  information on individual MD's,
selected EC members could be invited for an appropriate period of time to
provide the necessary details.

If we opt to disband the existing MD VP PRC we'd need to notify those members
who aren't part of the new EC that their services are no longer required.  In
so much as some of these people are currently assigned to, and attending, BU
and functional pre-rankings clearly the sooner we are able to do this, the
better.

Your immediate attention to this issue would be greatly appreciated, since we
are eager to begin the year-end VP/MD PRC planning process.  Thanks in
advance,

Gina Corteselli


Attached is a copy of the new floor plan for 47, as well as a list of the
seating assignments as approved by senior management.  The construction is
scheduled to be completed on February 9, and we'll be able to effect our
moves the following Monday, February 12.

The move paperwork will be handled as one complete request.  You may be
contacted for your social security number, current location, etc. if we don't
already have that information.

On another note, a couple of people have voiced complaints about the air
quality on the 47th floor.  The air filters have been replaced with high
density, thicker filters which should make a significant improvement.  The
Facilities group will also perform some additional testing to check our air
quality.

If you'll be out of the office on Monday and need help getting your desk
packed, please let Elizabeth know by Thursday, 2/8.

Please call her at x33896 if you have any questions.

Angela M. Wilson
Enron Corp.
Government Affairs-The Americas
713-853-1593
awilson3@enron.com


Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Morning Market View(TM) for Wednesday, June 6, 2001
as of 11:00AM EDT
Information provided by Standard & Poor's

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

U.S. INDICES
(11:00a.m. EDT)

----------------------------------
Market            Value     Change

DJIA          11,145.30    - 30.50
Nasdaq Comp.   2,232.65     - 1.01
S&P 500        1,276.17     - 7.40
----------------------------------
NYSE Advancing Issues        1,043
NYSE Declining Issues        1,620
NYSE Trading Volume        287 mln
NASDAQ Advancing Issues      1,364
NASDAQ Declining Issues      1,805
NASDAQ Trading Volume      574 mln

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

U.S. TREASURIES
----------------------------------
Value            Yield      Change

1-year bill       3.57%        n/a
5-year note       4.84%     - 4/32
10-year note      5.30%     - 7/32
30-year bond      5.66%     - 3/32

The tables above look best when viewed in a fixed-width font,
such as "Courier."

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

U.S. TRADING SUMMARY

The headline indices have chopped around both sides of unchanged
levels this morning as concerns over upcoming earnings reports
and continued uncertainty over the outlook for the domestic
economy pull traders in many directions. Throw in a bias toward
profit-taking in the wake of the recent gains in the headline
indices and it is not surprising that stocks have been volatile
this morning. Oil, financial and banking stocks are among the
worst-performing sectors. Meanwhile, computer systems, computer
software and household products have managed to make some headway
in today's volatile market.

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

JAPAN / EUROPE SUMMARY

European stock market indices have moved lower with the U.S.
indexes. The German Dax has fallen 0.5%, while the French CAC-40
dipped 0.3% as both indexes reversed earlier gains. The London
FTSE has managed to hold around unchanged levels. Note that the
Bank of England matched market expectations by announcing that it
left short-term interest rates unchanged at its most recent
policy meeting. Elsewhere, gains in the downtrodden banking
sector were more than offset by weakness in technology issues as
the Nikkei-225 erased its early gains and moved into the red by
the close. For the day, the Nikkei-225 dropped about 0.1% while
the broader Topix remained unchanged.

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

CURRENCY SUMMARY

Concerns over the Japanese economy, alongside comments from a
Japanese official, have kept the yen under pressure. Of course,
this is to the dollar's advantage, as the greenback is holding
above the 120 yen level. The euro has been slapped lower to below
0.850 dollars per euro, as traders take profits on an early run
higher to 0.855 dollars.

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

MAJOR COMPANY / INDUSTRY NEWS
(All prices as of 11:05 a.m. EDT)

** The $8 billion merger between DuPont's (DD: 47.15, + 0.45)
pharmaceutical division and Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY: 57.42, -
0.49) has moved one step closer to reality, according to The Wall
Street Journal. Citing unnamed sources, the Journal reported that
DuPont agreed to exclusive negotiations with Bristol-Myers in
order to quickly move the deal forward. DuPont has authorized the
transaction if both companies can agree to terms, but many
hurdles still remain that could thwart the takeover. DuPont's
pharmaceutical division's main drugs include medicines targeting
blood clots, HIV and Parkinson's disease.

** Advanced Micro Devices (AMD: 29.18, + 0.28) expects to
increase revenues despite the current slowdown in the
semiconductor sector, according to a news conference given by
AMD's Chief Operating Officer Hector Ruiz. Despite sector growth
contraction of 15%, AMD expects to increase its business as it
expands its market share. The COO also stated that signs have
emerged that may signal a pickup in global personal computer
demand in the fourth quarter of this year. However, Ruiz was less
optimistic about semiconductor demand for the beleaguered
communications sector.

** President Bush called for an investigation into the alleged
dumping of foreign-produced steel in the U.S. The move by the
president has the potential to bring about restrictions on
foreign steel producers. Under Section 201 of the 1974 Trade Act,
the president may ask the International Trade Commission to
investigate whether or not imported steel is hurting U.S.
domestic production. The commission has six months to issue
recommendations that the president could accept, reject or
modify. Penalties could include increased tariffs on imports,
quotas limiting the affected imports or a combination of both.
The move, which comes on the heels of the Democratic takeover of
the U.S. Senate, could help the president curry favor with some
in the Democratic Party.

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

ECONOMIC NEWS

** No data today.

** THURSDAY - Weekly initial jobless claims, wholesale trade for
April, consumer credit for April.

** FRIDAY - No data.

################################################################

Log in using the links below to:

Access your account:
https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=CCBodyi&NeedCASelValue=Y

View your Email Alert customization options:
https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=EAMyAlerts

Perform research or request a market quote:
https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=Quotes

Place a trade order:
https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=TradeStock

To visit Schwab's home page, use this link:
http://www.schwab.com/

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

To unsubscribe or modify your Email Alert customization options,
log in using the link below or copy and paste it into your
browser's address window:

https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=EAMyAlerts

Now you can receive graphics Email Alerts in HTML format,
using helpful, full-color graphics and active Web links that
connect you directly to information you want. Use the link
below to log in and change your email format preference:

https://investing.schwab.com/trading/start?SANC=EAEditEmailAddr

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

Notice: All email sent to or from the Charles Schwab corporate
email system may be retained, monitored and/or reviewed
by Schwab personnel. (1000-8752)

Copyright 2001 Standard & Poor's MMS Inc.  All rights reserved.
Standard & Poor's MMS services are for personal use only.
Commercial use or redistribution in any form, print or
electronic, is prohibited.
Distribution by Quris, Inc.


Hey,
do you happen to know the name of the scooter place in Beaverton and also about how much I can expect to pay for a pretty good 125 cc scooter ? thanks. Are you leaving work early to go to Seattle?


Before we send anything other than the "thank you" e-mail I sent to Jeff, and
before we have any conversations with GE on this point, we need to seek Kay's
guidance based on her read of the contract and the issues Jeff raised in his
letter.

Kay - will you have some time to talk about this Friday?

Regards,

Ben

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Rebecca Walker @ ENRON                           05/09/2001 01:39 PM

To: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Chris Booth/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: payment of invoices, Blue Dog Max

Ben

The way we actually paid the invoices changed slightly after Chris had sent
the letter to GE.  We deducted the LD's and the retention amount from the
April 25th invoice (since the May invoice was not due until May 25th).

On May 8th, a wire totalling $1,671,039 was sent to GE -- this represented
$469,000 for the c/o #2 invoice and $1,202,039 for the April 25th invoice
less the LD's and retention.

To respond to Jeff Darst's letter, we can say that we are planning on paying
the May 25th invoice in full (assuming we're not planning on deducting
additional LD's for May 8-May 25).

We just need to clarify with Jeff that both the LD and the retention were
deducted from the April invoice, and then we can deal with resolving the
issues he discusses in his letter.

Regards,
Rebecca
---------------------- Forwarded by Rebecca Walker/NA/Enron on 05/09/2001
01:22 PM ---------------------------

jeffrey.darst@ps.ge.com on 05/09/2001 01:18:59 PM
To: chris.booth@enron.com
cc: Ben.Jacoby@enron.com, chasecl@pssch.ps.ge.com, john.schroeder@ps.ge.com,
stephen.swift@ps.ge.com, Rebecca.Walker@enron.com

Subject: payment of invoices, Blue Dog Max

Chris,

Please see attached letter, original to follow via FedEx.

 <<Microsoft Word - BDM002.pdf>>
 <<Microsoft Word - BDM002.pdf>>

 - Microsoft Word - BDM002.pdf
 - Microsoft Word - BDM002.pdf


I have approved this already.

From:  Melba Lozano
  10/02/2000 05:29 PM

To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Blumenthal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H
Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stacy E Dickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bjorn Hagelmann/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey C
Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Anne Bike/Corp/Enron@Enron, Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: US Gas Phy Index approval required 2nd request

2nd request.
---------------------- Forwarded by Melba Lozano/HOU/ECT on 10/02/2000 05:22
PM ---------------------------

From:  Melba Lozano
  09/25/2000 11:26 AM

To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Blumenthal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen H
Douglas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stacy E Dickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rudi Zipter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bjorn
Hagelmann/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anne Bike/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Robert B Cass/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: US Gas Phy Index approval required

Your review and approval of the following product type in the EOL Datamanager
is needed (for directions on approval , please see steps for approval at the
bottom of this e-mail).

Trader:  Tori Kuykendall
EXAMPLE:

US Gas Phy Index

US Gas Phy Index Fwd Firm non-TX < or = 1Mo (RESTRICTED)

US Gas Phy Index       IF EPSJ Blanco Avg           Oct00         USD/MM

A US Gas Transaction with Enron North America Corp., under which Seller shall
sell and Buyer shall purchase a quantity of natural gas equal to the Daily
Contract Quantity at the Contract Price on a firm basis. The volumes
scheduled to be delivered are subject to reductions due to normal operational
constraints on the El Paso Natural Gas Pipeline. The reductions caused by
these constraints are excused nonperformance and are not considered a failure
to receive or deliver firm gas. The Contract Price shall be derived from the
Index, as adjusted by the price submitted by Counterparty via the website.
The Period of Delivery shall be from the Effective Date through the
Termination Date.
The term of the Transaction shall be from the Effective Date of 01 Oct 2000
to the Termination Date of 31 Oct 2000.
The transaction is for delivery at El Paso San Juan Blanco non-Bondad.
The Index for a month shall be the El Paso Natural Gas Co. - San Juan Basin
price as listed in the section entitled "Prices of Spot Gas Delivered to
Pipelines", published in the first issue in such month of Inside Ferc's Gas
Market Report.
The price is quoted in US Dollars per unit of volume, which will be the
Contractual Currency.
The unit of measure against which the price is quoted shall be millions of
British thermal units and the quantity shown shall be in millions of BTUs per
day.

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

STEPS FOR APPROVAL:

click the  START button
select  PROGRAMS
select  TEST APPLICATIONS
select ENRONONLINE CLUSTER(PROD)
 PROCEED WITH USUAL LOGIN/PASSWORD
click the Enron Online Production Cluster "START" button
select EnronOnLine (this is the EOL Datamanager)
 PROCEED WITH EOL LOGIN/PASSWORD
click on the "+" for EnronOnLine
click on the "+" for Product Types
click on the "+" for "Awaiting Approval" (OR  "Partially Approved")
select the product requiring review as stated in e-mail above
Right "mouse" click on "properties" to view product set-up
TO APPROVE:  Right mouse click on "Approved"

Thanks - Rob Cass  -  Melba Lozano
x35491   x58986


Have a happy Easter! Lets talk next week.
713-853-9636

-----Original Message-----
From: Tammi Depaolis [mailto:tdepaolis@sequentenergy.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 1:12 PM
To: Parks, Joe
Subject: Re: Hello

Joe, what is your phone number.

The job that you & I in the past have talked about is the same one you and Jeremy discussed.     We have been talking about hiring a gulf coast/midcontiinet physical trader--  with both physical and financial experience.    Call me next week or give me your number and we can talk.

thank yo*--  have a great easter.

>>> "Parks, Joe" <Joe.Parks@enron.com> 03/27/02 11:10AM >>>
Hey, thought I would send you an email to say hello. I know how bid week can be. I spoke with Jeremy the other day and forwarded my resume  to him. I am not sure what he is look for, but I would definitely like the opportunity to speak with him. Hopefully I will hear something  after the holiday weekend. Have a happy Easter and I will catch up later.

Thanks
Joe

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


We did talk about the creation of these new positions within gas support.  I
have also discussed this at length with Brent, and agree that the shift of
manager positions to front to back looks across each region (eliminating the
OA and Deal Validation manager roles) makes sense.  Upon the recommendation
of Susan and Brent, I am comfortable with appointing Jeff Gossett as the
manager of the West region.

Kim Melodick
04/17/2000 10:46 AM
To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Reorganization/Promotion

Susan indicated that she had a conversation with you about these promotions.
Are you comfortable going forward with them?
---------------------- Forwarded by Kim Melodick/HOU/ECT on 04/17/2000 11:38
AM ---------------------------

Susan Harrison
04/14/2000 03:49 PM
To: Kim Melodick/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve
Jackson/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Reorganization/Promotion

We are in the process of reorganizing several functional groups within Gas
Operations.  With this change, we want to promote Jeff Gossett to Manager
effective May 1.  The following describes the reorganization and
justification for the promotion.

The Risk Management, Operational Analysis, Transport Rates and Deal
Validation groups will be realigned into four regional teams and managed by
Business Controllers.  There will also be a centralized Controls group with
2-3 individuals that will be managed by a different Business Controller.
With this realignment, we are creating five new manager positions (four
regional and one Controls) and eliminating the two manager positions for the
Deal Validation and the Operational Analysis/Transport Rates groups.  The
regional Business Controllers will be responsible for managing the day-to-day
activities of their regional teams, including interacting with the Trading
Desk Directors, and the Controls manager will work across the regional teams
to ensure consistency and efficiency in our processes.

The new Controller positions will be filled as follows:

West - Jeff Gossett
Central - Carrie Hollomon
East - Will Kelly (Senior Specialist)
Controls - Kathryn Cordes
Texas - TBD (Brenda Herod to hire)

We are promoting Jeff Gossett at this time due to the responsibilities he
will be carrying in the Controller role in addition to his current
responsibilities for the NGP&L and Benchmark functions.

Will Kelly's performance will be evaluated during the next few months to
determine if he will be the permanent Controller for the East region.  If he
performs well in this role, mid-year promotion will be pursued.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  I will follow-up next week to
discuss a salary adjustment for Jeff Gossett.

Thanks,

Susan


Today's IssueAlert Sponsors:

[IMAGE]

The IBM e-Energy Executive Forum ) "Personalization, Partnership, and
Profitability"

Designed for executives in the utility industry looking to leverage Customer
Relationship Management in the competitive marketplace. Topics will focus on
how process and technology can be leveraged to gain competitive advantage.
Featured speakers will include IT analysts, solution partners, IBM
executives, and customers including: John Goodman, President of e-Satisfy;
Richard Grimes, Director of CRM Energy Services; David Bonnett, Global
e-Energy Sales Executive, Siebel Systems.

www.ibm.com

Stay on top of the torrent of e-commerce information news and analysis with
SCIENTECH'S E-Commerce InfoGrid.  Get over 100 pages of daily tracked and
verified information regarding what gas, water, electric and utility service
businesses are doing to keep ahead in the e-commerce industry.  Download a
sample at www.ConsultRCI.com or contact Chris Vigil, toll-free at (888)
972-8676 for more information.
[IMAGE]
The most comprehensive, up-to-date map of the North American Power System by
RDI/FT Energy is now available from SCIENTECH.

[IMAGE]

IssueAlert for  March 29, 2001

California Regulators Approve Massive Rate Increase:
Who Benefits and Who Doesn't?

by Will McNamara
Director, Electric Industry Analysis

California regulators earlier this week approved electricity rate increases
topping 40 percent, the largest in the state's history. The California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) voted unanimously to raise rates by 3 cents /
KWh. The rate hikes, which take effect immediately but won't appear on
customer bills until May, apply to millions of customers of Southern
California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric, the state's two largest
utilities. Low-income residents are exempt from the increases.

Analysis: For context, keep in mind that it was only two months ago that the
CPUC approved its first rate increase in response to the staggering debt of
SCE and PGOand other factors related to the California energy crisis.  In
early January, the CPUC approved temporary rate hikes of 9 percent for
residential customers (about $5 a month for the average customer) and 7 to 15
percent for businesses. The temporary increases were only to remain in effect
for 90 days and will be expiring shortly. At that time, both PGOand SCE
denounced the temporary increase, which was not surprising considering that
the 9 to 15 percent increase was much lower than the utilities had requested
(PGOasked for a 26-percent increase and SCE had asked for 30 percent). The
January rate increase was followed by an additional 10-percent increase that
is set to take effect next year.

The CPUC's current ruling increases rates by about 42 percent at SCE and 46
percent at PG&E. However, the CPUC's measure will most likely serve to
benefit the state more than SCE or PG&E. The CPUC clearly established that
none of the additional revenue earned from the rate increases can be used by
the utilities to pay for past power purchase costs, which have amounted to
about $13 billion. In addition, the CPUC adopted a proposal by consumer group
Toward Utility Rate Normalization (TURN) that a rate cap preventing the
utilities from charging market rates should be extended. In other words, the
portion of the electric rates that PGOand SCE actually receive from
ratepayers will remain frozen for the foreseeable future. The CPUC has
established that the utilities must still recover billions of dollars in
stranded costs before the rate freeze can be lifted.

Thus, it appears that most of the revenue accumulated from the rate increases
will be used to reimburse the state of California for the power purchases it
continues to make on behalf of the utilities and will not be used to pay off
any existing debt held by the utilities. PGOalready has responded that the
CPUC ruling attempts to "completely change the ratemaking rules that are used
to determine the end of the rate freeze under AB1890." PGOhas said that it
will challenge this and other aspects of the CPUC ruling.

However, even though most of the money from the rate increases will go to the
state, it is also not presently clear if the increases will be sufficient to
reimburse California for the $4 billion it has already spent to procure
power, or compensate for the anticipated $14 billion that it will have to pay
for power this year. Some of the funds generated by the rate increases must
be used by PGOand SCE to pay for power that they still obtain from suppliers
or to cover costs for their own power generation. Consequently, the CPUC has
left open the possibility that additional rate increases may be necessary.

Although it is still being evaluated how individual customer classes will be
impacted by the rate increases, it is fairly clear that large commercial and
industrial customers will end up paying the most.  Loretta Lynch, president
of the CPUC, maintained that an underlying goal of the increase is to force
what she referred to as "electricity hogs," or those people who excessively
use power without concern for the state's supply shortage, to conserve. Lynch
has said that conservation is the key to staving off additional rate hikes,
and that the higher rates should put financial pressure on Californians to
conserve energy, which theoretically should help to reduce the risk of
blackouts in the state this summer. The average residential cost for a
kilowatt hour is about 12.5 cents for SCE customers and 10.5 cents for
PGOcustomers. The new rate increase will add about 3 cents / KWh for the
customers of both utilities, which as noted averages out to about a
42-percent increase at SCE and a 46-percent increase at PGO(for electricity
alone).

However, Lynch also established that a "tiered" pricing structure, which has
yet to be fully determined, will be put into place. The tiered pricing system
will reward customers who conserve energy and penalize those who do not.
Essentially this means that those customers who use the most power will
ultimately pay the most, and could face additional rate increases this year,
which the CPUC did not rule out as a possibility. Under a tiered pricing
structure, those customers who conserve on their power usage may not see
their bills increase beyond the rate increase approved this week.

The CPUC also ruled that PGOand SCE must pay small independent generators in
the state (known as qualifying facilities) for energy within 15 days of
delivery. Over the last week, California has again issued Stage 3
emergencies, signaling that power reserves have fallen to dangerously low
levels. Contributing to the problem is the fact that QFs have stopped
producing in recent weeks as a result of the financial problems of PGOand SCE
and the fact that they have been paid only a small percentage of what they
are owed for power previously produced. Under normal circumstances, the QFs
can generate as much as 30 percent of the state's electricity needs. The CPUC
ruled that PGOand SCE must pay the QFs within 15 days of the end of a billing
period, or suffer from penalties equal to the amount of their outstanding
payment.

Gray Davis, who throughout his tenure as California's governor assured
Californians that rates would not be increased, attempted to distance himself
from the CPUC's ruling, and in fact issued a statement that he has no control
over the commission's decision. Further, Davis said that the rate increase
was "premature" because the state is still evaluating the financial numbers
that are needed to make a sound decision. In turn, the CPUC's Lynch
criticized both the governor and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) for "failing to act" on energy rates up to this point.

In addition to its comments regarding the rate freeze, PGOresponded with a
mixed reaction to the CPUC's ruling on the rate increase. On one hand, the
utility said the ruling offered a "welcome dose of realism." However, the
utility also said that the rate increase "does not offer a comprehensive
solution, fails to resolve the uncertainty of the crisis and may even create
more instability." Based on previous statements that PGOhas made, the utility
believes that the state's fundamental problem has its origins in the
wholesale market, where prices have often exceeded $300/MWh.

Some power generators, many of whom have been lambasted by California and
federal regulators for alleged price gouging, went on record with a favorable
response to the rate increases. Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's CEO, said, "There's
been a need to balance supply and demand [in California] and to date I don't
think anyone has been willing to let the prices rise to help balance supply
and demand. So [the increases] are a huge step forward in reducing the odds
of shortfalls."  Keith Bailey, chairman and CEO of Williams, told Reuters
that he thought the CPUC's rate increase was a rational decision and
something that the industry has been suggesting for some time.

Naturally, many consumer activists reacted vehemently against the rate
increases and protested during the CPUC's proceedings. The main argument of
the consumer groups is that the CPUC, the governor and FERC have not
fulfilled their regulatory responsibilities in bringing down electricity
prices in the state and have not acted with enough force to restrict what
they perceive as excessive prices for power owned by out-of-state generators.
This position gained momentum last week when the California ISO reported that
electricity wholesalers overcharged state utilities by $5.5 billion over the
past 10 months. Consumer groups also continue to oppose any sort of a
bail-out for PGOand SCE and believe that the utilities have hidden money
under the protection of other subsidiaries within their parent companies.
Both utilities maintain that any financial restructuring activities they have
implemented have been legal.

Moreover, while the rate increases may help the state to continue securing
power on behalf of the utilities, other fundamental problems related to the
state's energy crisis remain unresolved. The CPUC has asserted that part of
the benefit of the rate increases is to keep the utilities financially
solvent. However, at the same time, the commission clearly states that none
of the extra revenue generated by the rate hikes can be used to pay down the
utilities' outstanding debt. Consequently, although the higher rates should
significantly increase revenues for both utilities ($2.3 billion a year for
SCE and $2.5 billion a year for PG&E), all of this money apparently will be
turned over to the state and do little to alleviate the utilities' own
financial problems. This issue still remains unresolved and under the domain
of the state legislature. However, the likelihood that PGOand SCE would need
to declare bankruptcy remains strong (unless additional rate increases or
securitization takes place). In addition, other fundamental problems such as
the supply / demand imbalance in California and the related volatility of the
state's wholesale market continue to wreak havoc on the market's
stakeholders. While the CPUC's rate increases may be a positive step toward
stabilizing the state's financial, the future remains quite uncertain for
PGOand SCE.

An archive list of previous IssueAlerts is available at
www.ConsultRCI.com

Reach thousands of utility analysts and decision makers every day. Your
company can schedule a sponsorship of IssueAlert by contacting Nancy Spring
via e-mail or calling (505)244-7613. Advertising opportunities are also
available on our website.
SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free,  daily IssueAlert. Let us
know if we can help you with  in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH
information  products. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive our
free,  daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include  their full
name and email address or register directly on our site.

If you no longer wish to receive this daily email, send a message to
IssueAlert, and include the word "delete" in the subject line.
SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts(SM) are compiled based on the  independent analysis
of SCIENTECH consultants. The opinions expressed in  SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts
are not intended to predict financial performance  of companies discussed, or
to be the basis for investment decisions of any  kind. SCIENTECH's sole
purpose in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer  an independent perspective
regarding the key events occurring in the  energy industry, based on its
long-standing reputation as an expert on  energy issues.

Copyright 2001. SCIENTECH, Inc. All rights  reserved.


I'm attaching an article that I just received about the CPUC's and Indicated
Shippers' protests of the recent ENA deal on El Paso.   I have a call in to
Drew Fossum to talk about formulating a formal response, and I will keep you
in that loop in case you get any inquiries.  (My initial, unofficial reaction
is that with the marketing affiliate rules and other safeguards in place, the
fact that ENA and Transwestern have the same parent company should make no
difference to the FERC.)  Until further notice, I would avoid any
communication with ENA on these issues.  If you have any questions, please
e-mail or call me (x30596).

---------------------- Forwarded by Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron on 12/30/99 12:41
PM ---------------------------

Kevin Hyatt
12/30/99 12:39 PM
To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: The El Paso Controversy Continues

---------------------- Forwarded by Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron on 12/30/99 12:38
PM ---------------------------
ET & S Business Intelligence
From: Lorna Brennan on 12/30/99 09:18 AM
To: Bill Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Julie McCoy/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lou
Geiler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tim Aron/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve
Klimesh/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sarabeth Smith/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Gary
Sova/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rob Wilson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lon
Stanton/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rita
Hartfield/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rockey Storie/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie
Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kent Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John
Dushinske/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dave Neubauer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael
Bodnar/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joni Bollinger/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David
Badura/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Janet Bowers/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Craig
Buehler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bob Burleson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Allen
Cohrs/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Fiscus/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bret
Fritch/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Steve Gilbert/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Morgan
Gottsponer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Brenda Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James
Harvey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Herber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dana
Jones/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jane Joyce/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie
Korbelik/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Therese Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bill
Mangels/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Penny McCarran/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Vernon
Mercaldo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Larry Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eileen
Peebles/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Perales/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tony
Perry/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Loren Penkava/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ken
Powers/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joan Schwieger/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Chris
Sebesta/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Frank Semin/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Neal
Shaw/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Larry Swett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kay
Threet/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mike Ullom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lisa
Valley/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Chuck Wilkinson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jim
Wiltfong/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jo Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Karen
Lagerstrom/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ray Stelly/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bob
Stevens/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Sue M Neville/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mike
Barry/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Miriam Martinez/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Martha
Janousek/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Don
Powell/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Melinda Tosoni/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve
Weller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael G Stage/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tim
Johanson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven
Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lindy Donoho/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery
Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew
Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lee Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria
Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Glen
Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: The El Paso Controversy Continues

Enron-El Paso Deal Could Mute Competition to CA

     Fearing an end to pipeline competition in California, the state's
regulators and Indicated
     Shippers have called on FERC to summarily reject the three
transportation agreements by
     which Enron North America Corp. has contracted for 1.25 Bcf/d of
unsubscribed firm
     capacity on El Paso Natural Gas.

     Approval of these agreements would give Enron Corp., parent of
Transwestern Pipeline
     and Enron North America, control over all the available transportation
capacity to the
     southern California border, warned Harvey Morris, principal attorney for
the California
     Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which plans to submit its protest
today. Between
     the two pipelines, he estimated Enron will control 2.34 Bcf/d of firm
capacity from the
     San Juan and Permian basins to California.

     For Morris, Enron North America's contracting of the El Paso capacity
represents a
     worse threat to the pipeline's other shippers than Dynegy Marketing and
Trade, who has
     held the capacity for past two years and whose contract expires Dec. 31.
"At least then
     there was some Transwestern competition to the Dynegy situation. Now
it's Enron, the
     owner of Transwestern, who's stepping into Dynegy's shoes."

     But "what's even worse," he told NGI, is the revenue-sharing provision
in the contracts. It
     stipulates that "after Enron makes $35 million off of these contracts,
it has to share the
     proceeds with El Paso for 25% of anything beyond $35 million. So
effectively, Enron and
     El Paso have become partners in how high they can jack up the
transportation rate
     differential between the California border and the Southwest producing
basins."

     The two pipeline companies "that have for decades competed with each
other in carrying
     Southwest supplies to California are now partners. We think that's
anticompetitive, and
     there's no way FERC should approve it," Morris said. He recalled the
basis differential
     between the San Juan Basin spot price and the California border shot up
by 17% during
     1998, the first year during which Dynegy controlled the El Paso capacity
into California.
     This situation could worsen under Enron, he believes.

     "At first blush the El Paso-Enron contracts [do] not appear to contain
the same
     anticompetitive features of the El Paso-Dynegy contracts," Indicated
Shippers noted, but
     a "closer review and analysis" reveals the anticompetitive effects of
the revenue-sharing
     provision (RSP) in El Paso-Enron contracts "are not only similar" to
those of the hotly
     contested reservation-reduction mechanism (RRM) in the El Paso-Dynegy
case, "but are
     increased......due to the fact that the contracts are with a marketing
affiliate of El Paso's
     primary interstate pipeline competitor," Transwestern.

     Both the RRM and RSP "operate to provide a disincentive for El Paso and
its competitors
     to compete against each other, or to take any other action that will act
to drive down the
     basis differential that defines the market value of the capacity,"
Indicated Shippers told
     FERC in a protest filed on Wednesday [RP97-287-041]. The group includes
producers
     Amoco Production, Burlington Resources Oil and Gas, Marathon Oil, and
Phillips
     Petroleum, and two marketers - Amoco Energy Trading and Phillips Gas
Marketing.

     FERC "should reject the tariff filing immediately. The Commission erred
in allowing the
     El Paso-Dynegy contracts to remain intact for their two-year term after
finding that the
     contracts were anticompetitive. This issue is pending in the [D.C. Court
of Appeals].
     That same error should not be repeated here," the producers and
marketers said.

     The CPUC's attempt to block the Enron-El Paso contracts at the outset is
a little bit
     unusual for the agency, Morris said, but it learned its lesson following
Dynegy. "When the
     Dynegy situation first hit, we asked for FERC to investigate the matter.
We thought
     FERC did a very inadequate job then.....This time around we're asking
for FERC to
     summarily reject it. It's hard for an agency like ours to take such a
strong stand right at
     the beginning, but we've learned too much from two years of suffering
under the Dynegy
     situation. And this is even worse."

     In the event the Commission should reject California's request, the CPUC
has asked that
     an "anti-hoarding condition" be included in the contracts, which would
require Enron to
     release unused capacity into the short-term market at a price higher
than what it's paying
     El Paso for the capacity. "They must make a little profit," Morris
noted. "We're confident
     Enron can't use the entire 1.2 Bcf/d of capacity.....so there's going to
be unused
     capacity."

     The agency also wants FERC to clarify that the primary delivery point
for the Block II
     portion of the capacity (579MMcf/d) is PG&E-Topock in keeping with the
terms of the
     1996 settlement between El Paso and its customers. Morris said he agreed
fully with
     Amoco, Burlington Resources and Southern California Gas (SoCalGas),
which accused
     El Paso of violating the 1996 agreement by allowing Dynegy to use
SoCalGas-Topock as
     a primary delivery point for the Block II capacity last summer. They
contend the alleged
     violation is included in the Enron contracts.

     He also noted the CPUC will challenge the ability of Enron to call back
Block II capacity
     after it already had been recalled by El Paso shippers to serve Pacific
Gas and Electric
     (PG&E) customers in northern California. Last July, FERC granted Dynegy
the right to
     do this under its contracts with El Paso. But Morris contends the
decision violates the
     1996 settlement under which PG&E paid $54 million to preserve the right
of the pipeline's
     shippers to recall the Block II capacity to serve end-users in its
service territory.

     The CPUC also intends to challenge the Commission's decision that would
enable Enron
     to "just sit on the capacity," thereby withholding idle Block II
capacity from the market.
     Indicated Shippers also contend the Enron contracts violate the Block II
capacity
     provisions of the 1996 rate case, as well as "exacerbate" the primary
firm delivery point
     capacity-allocation issues that are pending before FERC now.

     The CPUC accused El Paso of "deliberately" filing the Enron contracts at
FERC just
     before the holidays to avoid controversy. The pipeline "is trying to
sneak one of the most
     controversial things ever past FERC right before Christmas so that
protests would be
     minimized," said Morris. "They did this with the Dynegy contracts two
years ago. They
     have a pattern of filing right at the last minute, making it harder for
people to protest and
     harder for FERC to stop it from going into effect."

,Copyright 1999 Intelligence Press Inc. All rights reserved. The preceding
news report may not
be republished or redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without
prior written consent
of Intelligence Press, Inc.


Hey David,

Please give me a call.

713-345-8960

Thanks,
Robin


Dear KENNETH L,

My name is Kishore Rajaram, Marketing Manager with InventX, Inc.
(http://www.inventx.com). I am contacting you today to find out how you are
currently managing your existing and/or future projects at  ENRON CORP.  At
InventX, our Enterprise Project Management (ePM) solution uses best
practices to enhance your ability to manage multiple projects and at the
same time improve your internal processes equating to significant reduction
in rework and enormous potential for profit enhancement.

Our Unique Value Proposition: We will map our ePM solution to  ENRON CORP's
both internal and external business needs! We provide highly customizable
web-based, industry specific solutions, which results in significant Return
on Investments.  We have been instrumental in helping companies such as
Texas Instruments, Luminator, Park Nicollet, AMCC  and more, strategically
align multitude of projects with their specific business goals. I look
forward to having an opportunity to explore these advantages with you in
more detail.

Please let me know if I can contact you or the appropriate individual at
(713) 970-2274 who is in charge of similar initiatives, to discuss and
demonstrate our comprehensive ePM application.

I am very interested in working with you KENNETH L.

Happy Holidays!

Thanks & Best Regards,

Kishore Rajaram,
Marketing Manager,
InventX, Inc.
972.808.0355 (Office)
972.808.0354 (Fax)
214.392.8962 (Cell)
http://www.inventx.com
******************************************
InventX  "The Definition of Future"


TO:		EMF 20 WORKING GROUP INVITEES
FROM:	Hill Huntington, Energy Modeling Forum
RE:		Hotel Reservation Reminder

This is to remind you that MONDAY JANUARY 7, is the cut off date to reserve a room at the Hilton Houston Plaza Hotel to attend our EMF 20 meeting on fuel diversity, natural gas and North American energy markets.  If you plan on attending our first EMF 20 Working Group Meeting please call the Hilton Houston Plaza Hotel (713-313-4606) or send an e-mail to jennifer_mikail@hilton.com.  Please be sure to identify yourself as a participant of the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum and mention the city/group codes: HOUMC-EMF. After Monday, January 7, 2002 all rooms will be on a space available basis.

Also, if you haven't already done so, please return the attached EMF's response form at your earliest convenience.

We appreciate your help.
Thank you.

 - responseformmtg1.doc


CES Contact
Charlie Dalphon  703-561-6469   Fax 703-561-7317


---------------------- Forwarded by Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT on 01/09/2001 03:13
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Samuel Schott                           01/09/2001 03:05 PM

To: Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Trader Access

Hi Kayne,

This is a rather large request. I expect it to be completed by tomorrow
evening.

Rgds.

Samuel x3-9890
(GCP_ENA)

	From:  Kayne Coulter                           01/09/2001 02:47 PM

To: Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Trader Access

I was wanting to know  what the status is on this or if I need to contact
Doung Luu.  The names are still not showing up with the respective books.

Thanks alot
Kayne Coulter
X34340
---------------------- Forwarded by Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT on 01/09/2001 02:48
PM ---------------------------

	From:  Stacey W White                           01/04/2001 09:18 AM

To: Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Jenny Latham/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kayne Coulter/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Trader Access

Please assign everyone in the list below to the following trading desks:

EPMI-HRLY-SE
EPMI-HRLY-NE
EPMI-HRLY-MW
EPMI-HRLY-ERCOT

Thanks,
Stacey
---------------------- Forwarded by Stacey W White/HOU/ECT on 01/04/2001
09:20 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Kayne Coulter                           01/04/2001 09:20 AM

To: Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: 24 Hour Books

These are all the names that need to be associated with Hourly Ercot, Hourly
Midwest, Hourly Southeast, and Hourly Northeast.

Thanks
Kayne


FYI, cpy below is governmental.
---------------------- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 04/19/2000 10:17 AM
---------------------------

David Minns@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
04/18/2000 04:26 PM
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Paul Smith/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Allan
Ford/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Shari
Wicks/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Paul
Quilkey/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Re: EOL Credit Responses 4/17

Confirming CS Energy Limited are cleared to trade Australian power. Just to
confirm they are a Government owned entity and should not trade any other
products without further review.

To: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy E
Dickson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT,
David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, David
Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:

Subject: EOL Credit Responses 4/17

---------------------- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 04/18/2000 09:04 AM
---------------------------

From:  Tom Moran
04/17/2000 05:13 PM

To: Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice
Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debbie
R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian Hunter-Lindsay/LON/ECT@ECT, Coenraad
Basson/LON/ECT@ECT, Bhautik Patel/LON/ECT@ECT, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli
Campbell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Gillette/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Connie Sutton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sylvia A
Campos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Matthew Allan/LON/ECT@ECT, Molly Harris/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: EOL Credit Responses 4/17

Please find attached Credit's EOL responses for 4/17/00

Regards
tm


Hi,

Has Reggie made any progress on the short file cabinets?

Thanks,

Kay


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 03/19/2001
07:48 AM ---------------------------

"Btu" <subs@btu.net> on 03/16/2001 04:18:51 PM
To: "Btu Weekly" <>
cc:
Subject: Btu Weekly

Attached is the latest issue of Btu Weekly.

e-mail: info@Btu.net
phone: 732-758-8222
fax: 732-758-8286

 - wg031901.pdf


Attached please find the Comments of Chevron U.S. A. Inc. on the Proposed
Decision of Comr. Bilas that were filed with the CPUC today.  If you have
any questions please feel free to contact me.  Thank you.

Very truly yours

Amie C. King
Alcantar & Elsesser

 - chj040.pld(121100).doc


MARK YOUR LUNCH CALENDARS NOW !

You are invited to attend the EWS Brown Bag Lunch Series

Featuring:  MICHAEL L. MILLER

Topic:  Principal Investments

Thursday, May 17, 2001
11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
EB 5 C2

You bring your lunch,          Limited Seating
We provide drinks and dessert.        RSVP  e-mail Kathie Grabstald
                   or call x 3-9610


Attached is a draft of a letter that we would like to send to Barclays laying
out the items/requests associated with Conversion.

Gerald:  could you take a look at the descriptions associated with the
Amendments to the Gas Gathering Agreements and the Admin Services Agmt. and
make corrections if necessary.

Audrey:  Could you please provide a short summary of the construction status
(one to two paragraphs)

Dean:  if I have missed out on anything please include them

Katie:  Could you create Attachment A as described in the letter.

Thanks

Ranabir


Thanks.

	Britt Davis/ENRON@enronXgate
	05/25/2001 03:01 PM

		 To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: In re M/V PACIFIC VIRGO

 Per your request for an update:

 1.  ECT sent its insurance claim letter out to Underwriters' adjusters in
this matter last week.  No reply has yet been received.  We will monitor.

 2.  Mitsubishi has not pushed its demurrage claim of about $260,000.  Our
solicitor, David Best, has had confirmed by our barrister that our time-bar
defense against the demurrage claim is strong.

 3.  We are paying joint testing invoices 100% and submitting them for 50 %
reimbursement to Mitsubishi.  So far, despite its agreement to do so,
Mitsubishi has not reimbursed us at all.  We suspect that if we push this,
Mitsubishi will start threatening to start up with the demurrage claim
again.  At least until we find out what Underwriters' position will be, we do
not suggest pushing Mitsubishi on this.

 I will keep you advised.

 Britt


Hi there,

I thought I'd check back to see where we are on the Delta (Salmon) break out
contract, now that we know that the stabilizers should be included.  How's it
looking?

Thanks,

Kay


Barbara:

I have Williams (called Leslie and gave them to her).  Jay Williams in Credit is working on J.P. Morgan and Bill Bradford is working on Duke.  Leslie said she has already pulled Goldman and J. Aron.

It looks like we should have them soon.

Marie

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Gray, Barbara N.
Sent:	Monday, November 05, 2001 3:24 PM
To:	Heard, Marie
Subject:	Annex I

Marie, do you think we will have  all the names of the legal entities comprising the "houses of Williams, Goldman, Jp Morgan and Duke by tomorrow...I need to know if you think it cannot be done,,,,,,,,thanks bng


This meeting has changed to 10:30 a.m.  It will be held in the same conference room.

Thanks,
Amanda

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Rybarski, Amanda
Sent:	Thursday, January 31, 2002 3:57 PM
To:	Neal, Scott; Ring, Andrea; Ames, Chuck; Townsend, Judy; Mckay, Jonathan; Brawner, Sandra F.
Subject:	RE: trading plan and products, etc meeting

The meeting will take place in ECS06100.

Thanks,
Amanda

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Neal, Scott
Sent:	Thursday, January 31, 2002 2:22 PM
To:	Ring, Andrea; Ames, Chuck; Townsend, Judy; Mckay, Jonathan; Brawner, Sandra F.
Cc:	Rybarski, Amanda
Subject:	trading plan and products, etc meeting

I would like to get together Monday, February 4 at 9:30am to discuss the startup of our business
including products, points, responsibilities etc.

Amanda will notify you with the location.

Thanks,

Scott


hey Mark,
yes, cita had another episode of congestive heart failure.    I'm pretty
sure that they just need to increase the dosage of her CHF medicine since
it was a fairly mild attack.    The good thing was that she noticed her
condition quickly and actually called 911 herself.   They also took her off
an IV within an hour.   We hope that she'll be out of the hospital by
Tuesday but won't know until we talk to the doctor this morning.

I'm leaving to Houston on Tuesday and return on Friday late afternoon.
So, I will not be able to go skiing on Friday.    For Saturday, I
tentatively have a golf date scheduled with Cicero and the Richardson's.
Bob was trying to schedule a few foursomes but will not know until today.
We call it the Superbowl of Golf but actually turns out to be the
Superduffers.    If you are interested in playing, I'll see if he has an
opening for another golfer and you can play in my foursome.

If golf falls through, a day in Big Bear sounds good if the ski conditions
are good.    I'll need to drive up and back the same day.   Karen cannot go
because she is recuperating from her lasik eye surgery and cannot do any
strenuous exercise for a couple weeks.     We can check the weather and
conditions later in the week.

If golf and skiing fall through, then I might take Karen to a museum on
Saturday.    She's been wanting to see a special Egyptian tour that is
actually in Santa Ana through February.   You are welcome to join us if
interested in Egyptology.

No real plans for the superbowl, other that maybe a gathering at my place
and possibly doing the HB 10k run in the morning along the pier.     I'm
not too interested in the game itself but we'd be remiss not to have at
least a small gathering.   So, plan on that if nothing else comes up.

I will not have email access during my trip to Houston.....  so leave
voicemails instead during the next week.
see ya,
Dave

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient
of this message you are hereby notified that any use, review,
retransmission, dissemination, distribution, reproduction or any
action taken in reliance upon this message is prohibited. If you
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
material from any computer.  Any views expressed in this message
are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect
the views of the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------


-----Original Message-----
From: JAN SKOOG [mailto:jskoog_vitoltvl@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 5:04 PM
To: DuBose, Heidi
Subject: STAAB - CLARION HOTEL GILLETTE

                                          AGENT JS/JS BOOKING REF
ZLH69O

                                          STAAB/THERESA R

  ENRON
  1200 17TH STREET
  SUITE 2750
  DENVER CO 80202
  ATTN-HEIDI DUBOSE

  DATE:  OCT 03 2001

HOTEL                 11OCT CLARION HOTEL GILLETTE
                      12OCT 2009 S DOUGLAS HWY
                            GILLETTE, WY 82718
                            UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                            TELEPHONE: (307) 686-3000
                            FAX: (307) 686-4018
                            CONFIRMATION: 24438599
599
                            REFERENCE: Z309THRTHR
                            SINGLE ROOM KING SIZE BED
                            RATE: THR USD 69.00 PER NIGHT
                            GUARANTEE GIVEN
                            RQST NS KING

NON-REFUNDABLE TKT MINIMUM $100.00 CHANGE FEE
***********************************************
THIS IS A TICKETLESS RESERVATION. PLEASE HAVE A
PICTURE ID AVAILABLE AT THE AIRPORT. THANK YOU
*24* HOUR ADVANCE XCL POLICY BY 4PM AT THE CLARION HTL GILLETTE
                  THANK YOU FOR CALLING VITOL TRAVEL

=====
VITOL TRAVEL
1100 LOUISIANA STE-3230
HOUSTON TX 77002
713-759-1444 - PHONE
713-759-9006 - FAX

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1


Here is the last draft confirms we had worked up which need to be completly
redone.
---------------------- Forwarded by Phil DeMoes/Corp/Enron on 11/30/2000
01:27 PM ---------------------------

Dan J Hyvl@ECT
07/20/2000 04:55 PM
To: Phil DeMoes/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Fairley/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Southern Confirmation Letters

Attached please find a red-line redraft of the Confirmation Letters.  I
understand that Enron will not sign the confirmation letters with Southern
until Enron North America Corp. has finalized its arrangements with the Elba
Island Terminal entity having the gas available at the tailgate of the Elba
Island facility.  Is this correct.  If so, I do not need to make ENA's
contract with such entity a condition precedent to the Southern Confirmation
Letters.  Please advise.


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Bushman, Teresa G.
Sent:	Monday, November  5, 2001 6:47 PM
To:	Corbet, Nancy; Fowler, Ellen; Larson, Bradford; Butcher, Sharon
Subject:	FW: Sale of JEDI II assets

FYI--

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ephross, Joel
Sent:	Monday, November 05, 2001 5:31 PM
To:	Hudler, Shirley A.; Thompson, C. John
Cc:	Bushman, Teresa G.; Mintz, Jordan
Subject:	RE: Sale of JEDI II assets

John, the prior conversations concerning these assets indicated that the non-JEDI 2 ownership of some of these assets resided in the WhiteWing structure. WhiteWing also involves outside equity, and in addition to other concerns, has limitations on sales below contributed value [the book value on the transfer to WhiteWing]. Given the current situation concerning related party transactions, I recommend approval from the Enron Corp. Board prior to any related party transaction, as well as the approval of JEDI 2 and in the case of WhiteWing, at least a majority of the outside equity.

Teresa, if these activities are under active consideration, I suggest we schedule meetings with Mark Haedicke and Jeff McMahon.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Hudler, Shirley A.
Sent:	Monday, November 05, 2001 4:56 PM
To:	Thompson, C. John
Cc:	Ephross, Joel
Subject:	Sale of JEDI II assets

John,  It has come to my attention that we are looking at selling several of the E&P investments to a related party.  Because of the current issues Enron is having with related party transactions, such a sale will require Enron as GP of JEDI II, to obtain the LPs consent - obviously this mean CalPERS as I am assuming we would consent to our own deal.  I have spoken with CalPERS briefly regarding the proposed sale and they do not seem immediately inclined to permit such a sale.  Please give me a call so we can discuss.  Thanks.  Shirley x34859


COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION
                        NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
                                  JUNE 04, 2001

Notice ID: 2774
5 - NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

SUBJECT: CAPACITY ALLOCATION-TIMELY NOMINATION CYCLE FOR JUNE 5, 2001
         PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL ALLOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON THE
         RECEIPT OF ANY NEW NOMINATIONS OR INTRADAY NOMINATIONS.

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

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

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

Columbia Gas Transmission has completed allocating all of its receipt and
delivery points for the gas day of June 5, 2001.  You may now view the
quantities you are authorized to flow on June 5, 2001.  On the Internet
NAVIGATOR, view Nominations, Scheduled Quantity, Scheduled Quantity for Service
Requestor-Summary, Nominations to be Viewed, and select Reduced Nominations.
The quantities confirmed to flow for your account are available on the Internet
NAVIGATOR after 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 4, 2001.

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


print
----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:17 AM -----

	Jeffrey Keeler
	10/13/2000 12:28 PM

		 To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, John
Shafer/OTS/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David L
Johnson/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Colleen
Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe
Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris
Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Pipeline safety legislation - update

Since the defeat of the Senate pipeline safety legislation earlier this week
in the House, we have been working on strategies related to action that could
occur before the end of the congressional session.  The following
developments indicate that the legislation is still very much in play, but
our primary concerns are making sure efforts going forward remain under
control and preventing the passage of legislation that goes too far.

Developments:

House Republican leadership is not interested in pursuing the legislation any
further, either through regular procedures or as an attachment to
appropriations, "omnibus" or other must-pass measures.   They are somewhat
angry at the industry for not being able to fight off advances made by Reps.
Dingell and Oberstar, who were able to persuade enough Democrats to vote
against the Senate bill so that it fell short of the 2/3 needed for passage
under suspension of the rules.

Senate bill sponsors/supporters are extremely angry at House Democrats for
killing the Senate legislation, and at the White House/DOT for not strongly
promoting the Senate bill (which they previously had supported) and reigning
in House Democrats.   Senator Patty Murray called the White House and
expressed her concern, which prompted a series of meetings between staff for
Senate and House Democrats and the White House to discuss a solution.

In these meetings, House Democrats have proposed adding several provisions
from the Dingell/Oberstar legislation to the Senate bill and moving that
package on an omnibus or appropriations bill.   Sources close to Rep. Dingell
indicate that they really do not want any bill at all, and are merely keeping
up the pressure in an effort to see if they can get the Senate or industry to
accept tougher provisions.

Senate Democrats (including Murray, Bingaman, and Breaux) are not accepting
any possible amendments to the original Senate bill, and are opposed to
changing the Senate bill at all.   However, Senator Murray and Republican
Senator Slade Gorton (who has a tough election) both want to continue to
pursue the Senate bill (unamended) as a rider to an omnibus/appropriations
bill.

The White House is looking to cover itself from a poor performance in the
House, and is considering drafting an executive order that could be issued if
no legislation passes at all.  It is unclear what could or would be contained
in such an order, but the White House is indicating to Senate staff that it
would be more like the Senate bill than the House bill.  We are working with
sources close to the White House to confirm their strategy.

Strategy going forward:

Upon hearing that some industry associations were on Capitol Hill discussing
"what industry could live with" in terms of provisions added to the Senate
bill, I insisted (along with El Paso and others) that we not take such an
approach, but rather remain consistent in our approach -- we support the
Senate bill and only the Senate bill.   It was approved unanimously in the
Senate and by 60% of the House, and if anything moves forward on an
omnibus/appropriations bill, it should be the Senate bill.  Consistent with
what our Senate friends are doing, we should not even recognize the
Dingell/Oberstar legislation as a serious proposal, nor start accepting
pieces of it as a compromise.

We will be shoring up support for our position of "if anything moves forward,
it should be the Senate bill only" with Senate supporters and leadership in
the House and Senate.  We will also be working to thank the 51 Democrats who
supported us in the House, and make sure they have any cover they need in
case their vote becomes an issue.   In support of Senator Gorton's election
troubles, we will be working to try to get media placement of op-eds that
support the efforts he has waged and make sure the House Democrats shoulder
the blame for the bill's defeat.  In particular, we are hopeful that Senator
McCain (who has been passionate about this issue) will write op-eds that can
be placed to support Gorton and others in tough races who supported the
Senate bill.

Congress' state of confusion over omnibus/appropriations bills and last
minute politics causes the legislative activity to be extremely fluid and
subject to change rapidly, so we will have no real certainty until the
session is over (which now could be as late as October 20).

I will keep you posted as changes and developments occur.

Jeff


Please respond to Vince,

Thank you very much. I applied for the position yesterday (via e-mail
address) and mentioned your name in the cover letter. I'll keep my fingers
crossed.

Sincerely,
Helen

-----Original Message-----
From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com [mailto:Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:42 AM
To: demianen@ruf.rice.edu
Subject: RE: Job posting

Helen,

FYI.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001
09:40 AM ---------------------------

From: Lee Ferrell/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/24/2001 06:20 PM

To:   Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:  RE: Job posting

Hi Vince,

This posting is for my group.  Thanks for the referral.

    -----Original Message-----
   From:   Kaminski, Vince
   Sent:   Tuesday, April 24, 2001 5:31 PM
   To:     Goodpasture, John; Watson, Kimberly; Ferrell, Lee; Kaminski,
             Vince
   Cc:     Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni
   Subject:  Job posting

   I am teaching a class at Rice and one of my very bright students sent
   her resume
   in response to this posting. Do you know who posted this job?

   Vince Kaminski

   ---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on
   04/24/2001 05:27 PM ---------------------------

   (Embedded image moved to file: pic05601.pcx)
   "Helen Demianenko" <demianen@hydrant.ruf.rice.edu> on 04/24/2001
   02:11:05 PM

   Please respond to <demianen@rice.edu>

   To:  <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
   cc:
   Subject:     Job posting

   Dear Vince,

   Thanks for talking to me this morning about the Sr. Risk Analyst
   position.
   Here is where you can find the job description for that position:

   http://www2.enron.com/jobs/cgi-bin/get_details.pl?id=0000108729&b=4x

   Also, I have cut and pasted it down below, just in case.

   I appreciate your assistance in this matter and will start working on my
   cover letter right away.
   I would also like to talk to somebody to get a better feel for the
   position
   (Is this really an MBA level position and how much of the in-depth
   learning
   opportunities for the derivatives market does it entail?)

   Sincerely,

   Helen Demianenko

   P.S. I have attached my resume (one more time).

   SR RISK ANALYST
   ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: Primary accountability for managing the ETS Risk
   Book
   structure and processes from a pipeline (front office) perspective. Work
   within current NNG and TW Marketing organizations to effectively
   integrate
   risk books into daily marketing and structured product activities.
   Provide
   feedback to management regarding overall and specific risk positions.
   Provide support for consistent and accurate deals entry/reporting for
   stand
   alone risk management system. Create ad-hoc reports to assist management
   in
   risk analysis. Responsible for managing and providing enhancements to
   the
   Capacity Books :? Maintain functionality and provide leadership for new
   functionality from a users perspective. Provide support and direction
   for
   integration of Capacity Books and Revenue Management Project.Support
   Revenue
   Management Team
   ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS: BA/BS in Finance or Accounting (MBA preferred).
   Minimum of two years financial instruments experience. Excellent
   quantitative/analytic and systems skills. Knowledge of commodity risk
   book
   concepts. Understanding of physical natural gas market, interstate
   transportation and financial derivatives. Ability to interface with
   structuring/marketing groups in order to define business requirements.
   Ability to provide leadership for business and system processes.
   Excellent
   communication skills with an ability to communicate across organization
   with
   varied skill sets and ideas. Must be self-motivated with a high level of
   energy

   PREFERRED SKILLS: NA.

   SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS: This job functions in a team-oriented,
   fast-paced
   environment with multiple concurrent assignments and constantly changing
   priorities.

   CONTACT: Responses will be accepted through May 3, 2001. Respond to
   Enron
   Corp., Human Resources 235, P O Box 3330, Omaha, NE 68103-0330 or
   e-mail:
   dea.crum@enron.com as a .doc or .txt attachment. Please include this
   requisition number.

   Job ID  0000108729
   Department  RISK MANAGEMENT & REPORTI
   Company  ENRON TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
   ENRON TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
   Location  HOUSTON, TX
   Type
   Posting date 19-APR-01

    - Helen_D_resume.doc << File: Helen_D_resume.doc >>


Recieve an Extra $150 Now, Plus Receive additional 20% on your
First Deposit, up to a $200 Bonus!

DOWNLOAD FOR FREE NOW! CLICK THIS LINK !
http://64.177.245.43/

<<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>>
* To remove yourself from this mailing list, point your browser to:
http://i.pm0.net/remove?funnymoney:10
* Enter your email address (Andrew.H.Lewis@enron.com) in the field
provided and click "Unsubscribe". The mailing list ID is "funnymoney:10".

OR...

* Reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject line.

This message was sent to address Andrew.H.Lewis@enron.com
X-PMG-Recipient: Andrew.H.Lewis@enron.com
<<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>> <<<>>>

pmguid:1c.1k83.803w8


Meeting on 9th from 10 -12 has been scheduled.
Thanks


PLEASE NOTE:

The ClickAtHome ordering will be taking place in MT. RAINIER from 1pm to 5pm.
Please let me know if you have any questions.

- Grace
x8321
---------------------- Forwarded by Grace Rodriguez/PDX/ECT on 02/25/2001
04:24 PM ---------------------------

GRACE RODRIGUEZ
02/23/2001 03:16 PM
To: Portland West Desk
cc:  (bcc: Grace Rodriguez/PDX/ECT)
Subject: ClickAtHome Portland Road Show

Please note the following changes:
We would like to know the approximate number of attendees for the morning
sessions, so please be sure to let me know which of the two sessions you are
interested in attending.
The afternoon session will begin at 1:00pm, rather than 12:00pm
In order to keep the "flow" of traffic moving through Mt. Hood, please plan
on stopping by at the top of the hour (1pm, 2pm, 3pm, 4pm, 5pm).

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Regards,
Grace
x8321


If I am reading this correctly, it appears that rather than provide an
adjustment for decremental units relieving local congestion, they will be
required to either pay the market clearing price of energy for the zone or
redispatch another unit in the same zone to counter act the decremental
instruction.

I believe we can support this change as long as few questions are properly
handled:

If there are multiple units that can clear the local congestion problem, who
gets selected?  (best shift factor, submitted dec bids, ERCOT flips a coin?)

If a generator fails to follow this instruction will it properly show up as
an uninstructed deviation, or will ERCOT follow performance to these direct
instructions some other way?

Can this similar methodology be used on the incremental side to curb abuse
by those who manipulate their resource plans to create congestion they will
be the only resource to correct?

Have a great day!

> ----------
> From:
> manuel-munoz@reliantenergy.com[SMTP:manuel-munoz@reliantenergy.com]
> Sent:  Sunday, November 26, 2000 7:45 PM
> To:  isonp@ercot.com; piwg@ercot.com; operations@ercot.com
> Cc:  kevin-gresham@reliantenergy.com; Brenda_B_Harris@reliantenergy.com
> Subject:  Suggested Solution to the PUC's Concerns Regarding Local
> Congestion
>
> <<File: Adib103100>><<File: stoft-game.pdf>><<File:
> stoft-intra-zonal.pdf>>
> In a memo from Parvis Adib dated Oct. 31 (copy attached), the PUC
> describes
> a serious concern on the part of the Commission regarding market abuse
> through relieving Local Congestion under the current Protocols. John Meyer
> has asked me to draft a suggested solution to this concern. I am
> recommending the following solution and believe it should be very easy to
> implement.
>
> THE PROBLEM: Gaming whereby an entity deliberately and chronically places
> itself in a situation to create local congestion in order to profit from
> instructions to decrement its energy deliveries.
>
> The current language states that when a resource  is instructed to
> decrement its energy deliveries and a Market Solution does not exist the
> resource's QSE will pay the minimum of the MCPE for that zone or 0. The
> trouble with this approach is that if the MCPE is negative the QSE is
> rewarded for having a resource causing local congestion. If the situation
> persisted over time this could encourage inefficient generation to be
> built
> on the same area so that it can profit by having its output reduced or
> even
> turned off.
>
> Note that this would only happen in a situation where the local congestion
> is located within a zone that is also susceptible to CSC congestion as
> well
> and the QSEs in such a zone are decremented most of the time which leads
> to
> high incidence of negative MCPE for the zone. This does not appear likely
> but could occur if a zone is relatively small; i.e., dominated by QSEs
> that
> are few in number and that consistently overschedule across a CSC zone
> with
> the anticipation that they will always be instructed to decrement energy
> in
> real time.
>
> RECOMMENDED SOLUTION :
>
> Do not compensate or charge a resource that is instructed to decrement its
> energy deliveries by ERCOT when a Market Solution does not exist in
> relieving local congestion.  However, the resource must obey the
> instruction in order to maintain system reliability.
>
> Please give me your comments on this solution concept  before Dec. 1. I
> am
> recommending that we add this as an item to vote on at the RUG meeting
> scheduled for Dec. 6. I will also draft the recommended language changes
> (very minor) to sections 6 and 7 and distribute it prior to the meeting.
>
> Manny
>
>
> (See attached file: Adib103100)
>
> (See attached file: stoft-game.pdf)
>
> (See attached file: stoft-intra-zonal.pdf)
>
>


I don't think we need the language, especially since the guarantees won't
apply to retrofitting the plant later.

"Thompson, Peter J." <peterthompson@akllp.com> on 02/07/2001 09:08:48 AM
To: <Kay.Mann@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: RE: Words to go with the other 2 emails regarding Austin

I would recommend that we not insert Eric's comments regarding the
exhaust temperature and energy guarantees for combined cycle facilities.
As Eric indicates, this is a simple cycle plant, which is similar to
Fountain Valley.  When commenting on the Fountain Valley agreement, Lee
recommended that all references to exhaust temperature and energy
guarantees be stricken and we did so.  In addition, Lee has already seen
a version of the City of Austin agreement that had Sections 10.4.1 and
10.4.3 (the sections Eric would like to reinstated) stricken. Let me
know what you think, but I recommend we leave them out, particularly if
such sections are not necessary and would only be useful to have in the
future if the plant ever went combined cycle.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kay.Mann@enron.com [mailto:Kay.Mann@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 2:28 PM
To: Thompson, Peter J.
Subject: Words to go with the other 2 emails regarding Austin

Here's what Eric wrote:

I revised the contract you sent me to make it site specific.  Those
changes
are redlined.  Please note that I have reinserted sections 10.4.1 and
10.4.3 as well as the defined terms that go with them.  These were
related
to exhaust temperature and energy.  I know this is a simple cycle plant
and
they typically aren't required, but I wanted to see if GE would
guarantee
it anyway.  It maybe helpful in the future if Austin Energy goes
combined
cycle.  If for some reason GE's lawyers specifically want to leave that
out, then they will probably also want to delete sections 10.4.2 and
10.4.4
(and their defined terms) since those also talk about specific exhaust
guarantees.  Let me know what they decide.

Exhibit A (site basis conditions) which I also revised was not attached
to
your file.  (It's right behind the sign-off pages in my hard copy.)  I
therefor hand marked up a copy and scanned it.  It is now attached as a
separate word file.

Exhibit F is "boiler plate" and shouldn't change.  Exhibit "U" is not in
my
hard copy.  My copy only goes up to Exhibit "T."   If you get something
from GE on Exhibit "U", send it to me and I will be glad to review it.


Sara,

I called the publication and they told me they publish every Friday.  They
don't take any months off.  She said they publish all 52 weeks.

If you have any questions please give me a call.

Thanks,

ML


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Jamie_K_Schnorf@fpl.com@ENRON   On Behalf Of Jamie_K_Schnorf@fpl.com
Sent:	Tuesday, January 22, 2002 10:07 AM
To:	Art_R_Morris@fpl.com; Spraggins, Gary; Adams, Jean; Linhart, Joe; Michael_Jessop@fpl.com; Janzen, Randy; Ronald_Scheirer@fpl.com; TransOKnoms@enogex.com
Cc:	Forbish, Sherry; Greaney, Chris
Subject:	Lamar Nomination

Attached is the NNG Lamar burn schedule for January 23, 2002.  At this time
we plan on  45,000.

Thanks

Jamie Schnorf - FPL
561-625-7032

(See attached file: NNG LAMAR NOMNATION.xls)
 - NNG LAMAR NOMNATION.xls


Kim:

As requested, I called on the phone for trip.  Unfortunately both phones are being utilized during that time.  I learned that you can purchase a chip to interchange in your current phone at Cingular.  Please call Corporate Care to complete at 713-623-6722.  Thanks.


Guys:
Here are questions from LG&E regarding the peaker assets.  Some of these
questions are tax related.  Please assist us in answering these questions.
Thanks for your help.
Ben
3-7998


Just to let you all know - the following deals have been changed per Mike
Swerzbin -

516611 - from H01 to Q3-01
516618 - from 10 mw to 16 mw
516651 - from Mid-C to Palo

Let me know if you have any questions about these changes. (Most were due to
my inability to read his handwriting!)

Thanks,
Kate


ELCON commercial practices group[


----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/06/2001 11:04 AM -----

	"Julee Malinowski-Ball" <jmball@ns.net>
	03/06/2001 10:43 AM
	Please respond to "Julee Malinowski-Ball"

		 To: "William Hall" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com>, "Tony Wetzel"
<twetzel@thermoecotek.com>, "Sue Mara" <smara@enron.com>, "Steven Kelley"
<steven@iepa.com>, "Steve Ponder" <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, "Steve Iliff"
<siliff@riobravo-gm.com>, "Stephanie Newell"
<stephanie-newell@reliantenergy.com>, "Ross Ain" <rain@caithnessenergy.com>,
"Roger Pelote" <roger.pelote@williams.com>, "Robert Lamkin"
<rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, "Richard Hyde" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, "Randy
Hickok" <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, "Paula Soos"
<paula_soos@ogden-energy.com>, "Nam Nguyen" <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, "Marty
McFadden" <marty_mcfadden@ogden-energy.com>, "Lynn Lednicky"
<lale@dynegy.com>, "Larrea, John" <John.g.Larrea@williams.com>, "kent
Palmerton" <kent.palmerton@williams.com>, "Ken Hoffman"
<khoffman@caithnessenergy.com>, "Kate Castillo" <ccastillo@riobravo-gm.com>,
"Kassandra Gough" <kgough@calpine.com>, "Jonathan Weisgall"
<jweisgall@aol.com>, "John Stout" <john_h_stout@reliantenergy.com>, "Joe
Ronan" <joer@calpine.com>, "Joe Greco" <jgreco@caithnessenergy.com>, "Jim
Willey" <elliottsa@earthlink.net>, "Jeff Dasovich" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>,
"Jack Pigott" <jackp@calpine.com>, "Jack Hawks" <jack.hawks@gen.pge.com>,
"Hap Boyd" <rboyd@enron.com>, "Greg Blue" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, "Frank DeRosa"
<fderosa@sanfrancisco.usgen.com>, "Eric Eisenman"
<eric.eisenman@gen.pge.com>, "Eileen Koch" <eileenk@calpine.com>, "Ed Tomeo"
<ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>, "Duane Nelson" <dnelsen@msn.com>, "Doug Fernley"
<fernley.doug@epenergy.com>, "Dean Gosselin" <dean_gosselin@fpl.com>, "David
Parquet" <dparque@ect.enron.com>, "Curtis Kebler"
<curtis_l_kebler@reliantenergy.com>, "Curt Hatton" <Curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>,
"Craig Chancellor" <craigc@calpine.com>, "Cody Carter"
<cody.carter@williams.com>, "Carolyn Baker" <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, "Bob
Gates" <bob.gates@enron.com>, "Bob Escalante" <rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>,
"Bob Ellery" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, "Bill Woods" <billw@calpine.com>, "Bill
Carlson" <william_carlson@wastemanagement.com>, "Quan-Hill, Danielle"
<danielle.quan-hill@mirant.com>, "Theo Pathos" <theo@ppallc.com>, "Susan
McCabe" <smccabe@mccabeandcompany.net>, "Scott Govenar"
<sgovenar@govadv.com>, "Ron Tom" <thackbarth@govadv.com>, "Robert Ross"
<robbiz@cwo.com>, "Phil Isenberg" <Isenberg@HMOT.com>, "Mike Monagan"
<mrmonagan@aol.com>, "Maureen OHaren" <Oharen@HMOT.com>, "Marie Moretti"
<mmoretti@mccabeandcompany.net>, "Jamie Parker" <jparker@hmot.com>, "Hedy
Govenar" <hgovenar@govadv.com>, "DJ Smith" <djsmith@smithandkempton.com>,
"Delany Hunter" <dhunter@smithandkempton.com>, "Chuck Cole"
<ccole@advocation-inc.com>, "Cary Rudman" <cjrudman@softcom.net>, "Bev
Hansen" <bhansen@lhom.com>, "Anne Kelly" <kelly@hnks.com>, "Rina Venturini"
<rventurini@teamgsi.net>
		 cc: "Jan Smutny Jones" <smutny@iepa.com>, "Steven Kelley" <steven@iepa.com>,
"Katie Kaplan" <kaplan@iepa.com>, "Chris Ellison" <CTE@eslawfirm.com>, "Andy
Brown" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, "Doug Kerner" <runwithmee@aol.com>
		 Subject: SB 28x amended

Attached is the amended version of SB 28x (Sher/Battin) which contains
several changes to the siting process, including many sponsored by IEP.  The
bill is being heard in the Senate Energy Committee today.

Julee Malinowski-Ball
Senior Associate
Edson + Modisette
916-552-7070
FAX-552-7075
jmball@ns.net

 - sbx1_28_bill_20010305_amended_sen.pdf


Guilt trips aren't nice.  Things have been a little hectic around here and
one of my best friends had surgery so I was back and forth to the hospital.
(All is well).  How are things going for you?  Are you guys going out tonight?

Also hope that you have a wonderful weekend, but I actually mean it.

>>> <Joe.Stepenovitch@enron.com> 02/09/01 01:44PM >>>

Hey,

Thanks for the e-mails yesterday.......

Have a nice weekend if I don't talk to you!!

-Step


John, if the meeting is Monday I have jury duty.  What did you and Ava decide to do?  I'll call you in the morning.  Thanks Lynn
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)

-----Original Message-----
From: Buchanan, John <John.Buchanan@ENRON.com>
To: Blair, Lynn <Lynn.Blair@ENRON.com>
Sent: Wed Oct 24 15:19:50 2001
Subject: Re: FW: Follow Up Meeting

 Lynn, are you going to be able to attend the meeting? I also just received my Blackberry cooool.     JWB
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


Muchas gracias!

From: Kathleen Carnahan/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/29/2001 03:17 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: RE: Midway

Good question.  I thought he was through with it last week.  I'll check up on
it.

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Mann, Kay
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 3:03 PM
To: Carnahan, Kathleen
Subject: Midway

How's Glenn doing with my binder?  Lots of Midway activity this week.

Thanks,

Kay


here's my flight info.  had to get a more expensive flight ($340 i think) with the monday flight out.

Thu, May 17   	2436  Calgary 3:00 pm     	Seattle/Tacoma 3:30 pm 0   	F28 Coach
    		2378  Seattle/Tacoma 5:00 pm     Portland 5:50 pm 0   		DH4 Coach

Mon, May 21   	2406  Portland 1:30 pm     	Seattle/Tacoma 2:15 pm 0   	F28 Coach
    		2439  Seattle/Tacoma 2:57 pm     Calgary 5:20 pm 0   		F28 Coach


not  much.  maybe golfing tomorrow.  you still going to austin?


Please review.  Also, if you could send an electronic copy of our master enfolio agreement, I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks.
Lindsay

Lindsay Culotta
Central Desk Origination
Enron North America
Phone: (713)853-5199
Fax: (713)646-3390

-----Original Message-----
From: ndrgroup@att.net [mailto:ndrgroup@att.net]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:36 AM
To: Culotta, Lindsay; gerald.raines@michcon.com
Cc: Robinson, Marchris
Subject: draft of NDR - MichCon language

To all Concerned

Included is a draft of the language for the transaction
between NDR and MichCon.  If you have any questions
please contact me at 301-516-1636 or by reply e-mail.

Rickey


Thank you for shopping at Lands' End

Your order #7144896 is being processed.
Please refer to this number if you have any questions.

Order Items:

Men's Polartec Clog Slippers
Item: 55301A81, MarineBlue, Size: 10
$19.50

$19.50   Your merchandise total
$3.95   Shipping costs
$0.00   Taxes*
---------
$23.45   Total for this order

Payment:$23.45 MasterCard xxxxxxxxxxx78859

If you have questions about your order, please call us at 1-800-963-4816
(USA), or 608-935-6170 (Intl).  You can also reply to this e-mail.

Thank you for shopping at landsend.com.

Are you getting our free e-mail newsletter?
You can receive a periodic "heads up" e-mail with the
latest word about new products, online overstocks specials,
plus all the news from Dodgeville and environs.
Visit our sign-up page and subscribe today!
http://www.landsend.com/newsletter

*Taxes are estimated by our Web site, based on the total cost of all items.
Actual tax will be calculated when your order is processed.
Your bill will reflect the correct charge.