Elizabeth:

We followed up on our discussions last week regarding the consequences of a
possible bankruptcy of a municipal counterparty and our ability to terminate
and liquidate our positions in such event, without regard to the generally
applicable automatic stay.  Attached is a brief memo discussing this issue.
The principal points to note are as follows:

(1) Municipalities, if they were to file for bankruptcy, do so under Chapter
9 of the Bankruptcy Code ("BC")--e.g., Orange County, CA.

(2) The "forward contract" exception to the automatic stay found in Sec. 556
of the BC presently is not explicitly made applicable to filings pursuant to
Chapter 9.  As you recall, Sec. 556 allows termination of a forward contract
because of the commencement of a bankruptcy case notwithstanding the general
prohibition for termination of executory contracts for such grounds in Sec.
365.  This appears to have been an oversight when Sec. 556 was added to the
BC in 1982 (according to the National Bankruptcy Review Commission) and
probably has not been a "high on the agenda item" to correct due to the fact
that Chapter 9 bankruptcies are relatively rare.

(3) It appears that the other amendments to the BC dealing with forward
contracts are applicable to Chapter 9, such as Sec. 362 (b) (6) which allows
the non-defaulting party to setoff or settle without regards to the stay if
there is an existing default other than an insolvency event.  Also note that
Colliers on Bankruptcy, the "Bible" in this area, suggests that one can
nonetheless make the argument that the forward contract exception can be read
to apply to Chapter 9 filings under present law (see also the discussion at
(6) below)--although it is uncertain whether a bankruptcy court would accept
this argument to effectively write something into the statute.

(4) There currently is pending legislation that has been passed by both the
House and the Senate (and is now the subject of a joint House/Senate
Conference Committee) that would make it clear that the forward contract
exception to the automatic stay shall apply to Chapter 9 bankruptcies.
Adding Sec. 556 to Sec. 901 (the section delineating which sections are
applicable to Chapter 9 bankruptcies) is not controversial and should survive
the joint conference committee since similar provisions exist in both the
House and Senate bills. These provisions are part of the overall legislation
making fundamental changes in the BC (that has received a lot of press and
which is controversial in terms of how it treats individual consumers filing
for bankruptcy).  Our sense, however, is that the bill will be passed and
signed by President Bush.

(5) Assuming the amendments to Chapter 9 filings are enacted, under the
existing bills they would first become effective for bankruptcy cases filed
after 180 days after the legislation is signed by the President.  Thus, to
the extent that ENA has existing contracts with municipalities, ENA would be
permitted to exercise its termination and liquidation rights thereunder
without regard to the automatic stay as long as the municipal counter party
does not file within 6 months after the date the legislation is signed.

(6) It is worth noting that the legislative committee reports describing the
changes provide that Congress is "clarifying" that the forward contract
provisions of the BC apply to municipal bankruptcies, noting that these
provisions "by their terms are intended to apply to all proceedings under
Title 11" (which includes Chapter 9 proceedings).  The Senate Report  goes on
to say that:  "Although sections...556...provide that they apply in any
proceeding under the Bankruptcy Code, this subsection makes a technical
amendment in chapter 9 to clarify the applicability of these provisions."
(Emphasis added).  Thus, this committee language would appear to support an
argument that Sec. 556 applies to Chapter 9 bankruptcies under Congress's
interpretation of existing law--obviously, the hoped for result from ENA's
standpoint.

(7) For your information, when Orange County, CA, filed for bankruptcy the
County filed under Chapter 9.  The investment pool that held the derivatives
and other financial contracts initially also made a separate filing under
Chapter 9. This filing was dismissed, essentially on the basis the investment
pool was not eligible for relief under Chapter 9 because it did not qualify
as a "municipality" and it had not been specifically authorized to file under
Chapter 9.  The dealers and brokerage houses terminated and liquidated their
positions shortly after the initial filing, based on their belief that the
investment pool's use of Chapter 9 was improper.  Their terminations and
liquidations were not undone.

(8) Lastly, as mentioned above, you should note that even if Sec. 556 is not
applicable to Chapter 9 filings under existing law, if ENA terminated a power
contract with a municipality prior to the filing date for a reason other than
the act of filing a bankruptcy petition (e.g., a bond downgrade; failure to
post collateral; a cross default; the existence of a condition where the
counterparty is "unable to pay its debts as they come due," etc.), ENA would
be permitted to proceed with the liquidation of its position (and it could
exercise any set off or settlement rights) without regard to the automatic
stay.

Hopefully, the pending legislation will be passed and the concern as to the
applicability of Sec. 556 to municipalities will be completely eliminated
within a relatively short period of time.  In the interim, particularly
during the upcoming summer (when prices in many locations will be highly
volatile and certain parties' credit positions could fluctuate rapidly and
materially in some cases, particularly if they are filling open positions in
the spot market), it may make sense to alert our credit group to be
particularly vigilant in their monitoring of the ongoing financial condition
of our municipal counterparties so that we preserve as much flexibility as
possible with respect to exercising our termination rights under the
contracts on account of defaults other than the filing of a bankruptcy
petition by or against our counterparty.

Please give me (or Carl, 303 291-2630, or Jim, 303 291-2632) a call if you
want to follow up on any of this.

Thanks.

John

"This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is
confidential and it may be protected by the attorney/client or other
privileges.  This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public
information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s).  If
you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including
attachments and notify me by return mail, e-mail or by phone at 212
424-8125.  The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction
of the e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

John Klauberg
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P.
212 424-8125
jklauber@llgm.com
 - bankr.wpd


it was ok.  i spent a lot of time at the casino.  did you stay home or go to
austin?  texas looked pretty good on friday.  how is your dad?


Dear Power Outage Database Customer,
Attached you will find an excel document. The outages contained within are forced or rescheduled outages. Your daily delivery will still contain these outages.
In addition to the two excel documents, there is a dbf file that is formatted like your daily deliveries you receive nightly. This will enable you to load the data into your regular database. Any questions please let me know. Thanks.
Greg Elliott
IIR, Inc.
713-783-5147 x 3481
outages@industrialinfo.com
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL IS LEGALLY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE.  YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPY OF THIS E-MAIL TO UNAUTHORIZED ENTITIES IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, PLEASE DELETE IT.
 - OUTAGE.dbf
 - 011602.xls
 - 011602R.xls


steve and rick-
mark halperin is the political director at abc -- the smart guy sitting to
peter jennings's right all night on election night who knew everything. his
brother is a speechwriter at the nsc. you'll see below his recommendation of
mark katz and his number.

i also emailed peggy noonan to ask for any ideas. haven't heard from her
yet. she's been very busy writing some of the more brilliant commentary on
the current situation which i'm sure hasn't been allowed into the shapiro
empire.

speaking of stock prices, what the hell happened yesterday? i'm still a
stock holder (very small) so pass my bitches along to koenig.

-----Original Message-----
From: Foster, Gary
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:42 AM
To: 'Halperin, Mark'
Subject: RE: We have a leak

what do you mean 'on principle'? there couldn't be a better issue for a
clinonista to stand for than busting up monopolies' hold on the little
people. actually enron's government affairs office is run by a bunch of
democrats and they just hired summer's  congressional person at treasury to
run their d.c. office. is your brother still at the nsc?

katz is the person i was thinking of. i'll pass his name along. thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Halperin, Mark [mailto:Mark.Halperin@abc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 4:22 PM
To: 'Foster, Gary'
Subject: RE: We have a leak

after re-reading your original email (the first words of which were that i
should share it with sam and gma) i felt a little less bad on my own....it
was still dumb...and our secret is safe..keep sending them

by brother is very funny...i'm not sure he would do it on principle...but i
can ask...the person to ask is mark katz...who wrote for clinton and
gore...very funny..very automatic...use my name...let me know if there is a
problem  212-496-7013
-----Original Message-----
From: Foster, Gary [mailto:GFoster@Antigenics.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:30 AM
To: Halperin, Mark
Subject: RE: We have a leak

your level of apologizing was not necessary but after re-reading my initial
email i can see where you could be mistaken that i was upset. i'm not. i
just don't want to break one of the only flows of insider information that i
have left -- even if it's into a has-been.

but while i have you gravelling, you could do something for me. i just got a
call from my old boss at enron and he is looking to hire someone as a
consultant who specializes in humor writing. they want to try a humorous
approach in taking on the monopoly utilities in the battle over electricity
deregulation. do you know anyone in the clinton administration who has been
responsible for some of the president's humorous speeches? or anyone that
fits this bill? what about your brother? it seems like i read a profile of
one of them recently who was leaving. the only republican i can think of is
landon parvin who has been around forever.

-----Original Message-----
From: Halperin, Mark [mailto:Mark.Halperin@abc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 8:49 AM
To: 'Foster, Gary'
Subject: RE: We have a leak

two people here did stupid things (first me, by in a hurry giving
instructions to my colleague about what to do with the information;then my
colleague for sending it to somebody untrustworthy)

so: i apologize...being in a hurry is no excuse for being careless.....

here's the silver linings:

1. gma seems to have gotten it some other way later in the day, so from
there point of view, they aren't focused on where it came from
2. there is literally no one at abc who knows i know you
3. i give you my word that i will never be at all careless with anything
from you again, and won't let even one person have access to
emails/information from you...the person in this case doesn't know it came
from you (or jb for that matter, since i had already taken her name and your
name off of it)

again, i'm sorry.....i have zero tolerance for such carelessness, and
pleading being overwhelmed with work on the story is no excuse

ps: i hope you saw jamie's interview...it was priceless

-----Original Message-----
From: Foster, Gary [mailto:GFoster@Antigenics.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 8:37 AM
To: Halperin, Mark
Subject: FW: We have a leak

when i said 'pass along', i only meant the information, not the entire
email. i'm not going to fess up if you and everyone else who has it doesn't
reveal their source.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jean Becker [mailto:jebeck@flfw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 7:33 PM
Subject: We have a leak

Everyone at ABC has a copy of the last e-mail I sent everyone concerning
President Bush's appearances on the morning shows tomorrow.

We have a leak.

I suspect someone in total innocence is forwarding my e-mails to friends and
family, etc.  I need for all of you to take a very careful look at your
forwarding lists and think about where this leak might be.  If you think you
know where the leak is, please, please let me know.

If we can't find it, these e-mails will cease and desist.

Jean

P.S. In case you were wondering, yeah, ABC is not happy.


Jim, as we discussed late last night I checked with all folks in the DC office who would have any conceivable reason to talk to Treasury.  No one had a conversation yesterday where the SEC issue was discussed.  Today, I have checked with the remainder of the DC office, and no one has had such a conversation.   I hope this is helpful.


Thanks!

Blanca


Please communicate or distribute as you see fit. Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 07/05/2001
03:32 PM ---------------------------
From: Mark Palmer on 07/05/2001 02:28 PM
To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Dunn Subpoena

Fighting the kangaroo court actually got us some points with the media.  If
we can continue without getting anyone (other than Dasovich) thrown in jail,
let's fight.

Mark
----- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 07/05/2001 02:27 PM -----

	Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate
	07/05/2001 02:20 PM

		 To: Mark E Haedicke/Enron@EnronXGate
		 cc: Richard B Sanders/Enron@enronXgate, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James
Derrick/ENRON@enronXgate
		 Subject: Dunn Subpoena

The Dunn Committee will be taking up the contempt citations again on Tuesday,
July 10.  We are currently contemplating two actions.   First, we intend to
offer to produce some documents, most notably the ISO bid data sought (which
the Committee already has anyway).  Secondly, as we do not expect this
voluntary partial production to placate the Committee, we are preparing an
action to file in federal court in Sacramento on Monday challenging the
subpoena to the extent it seeks to require the production of documents other
than those we offered to produce.  Robin Gibbs and Mike Kirby are on board
with this.  Please let me know if would like any additional information about
these matters.  Thank you.


I can never get both of your email addresses right at the same time.
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 01/05/2001 11:49
AM ---------------------------

Kay Mann
01/05/2001 11:40 AM
To: lee.johnson@ps.ss.ge.com, kent.shoemaker@ae.ge.com
cc:

Subject: CA Energy Development documents

Lee,

You should be receiving a package shortly containing the following:

1. Changed pages for CA Energy Development I and CA Energy Development II
facility agreements.  These are the same pages that were faxed to you and
Kent a few days ago.  I also included a couple of original pages (73, 74, I
think) which were missing from one of the originals.  This need to be
initialled and executed.
2. Acknowledgement letters for each of CAED I and CAED II which need your
Here's the form:

3. Assignment and assumption agreement to move the equipment from TurboPark
to the CAED I.  There will be one for CAED II as well.  This document is
being reviewed by the bank, so I'm not convinced it is in final form.  You
will note that there is an acknowledgement section for GE.  I cut and pasted
from the consent to assignment from the TurboPark documents, but shortened
the whole thing considerably.  Here's that document:

4.  Signature pages (signed by Enron) from the ESA deal, both the facility
agreement and the override letter.  Obviously, we need your signature.

I will forward the final CA facility agreements to you once again, along with
the blacklines against what you initialled.

Thanks,

Kay


EFF_DT PORTFOLIO_ID DOWN95
1/17/01  MANAGEMENT-COAL 2,949.
1/17/01  MANAGEMENT-CRD 24,764.
1/17/01  MANAGEMENT-GAS 778,397.
1/17/01  MANAGEMENT-PWR 179,421.
1/17/01  AGG-MANAGEMENT 707,236.


I would like to see your work as well.  I will give you a call.

Thanks
Hunter


Mary:   per my voice mail.  SS

Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas  77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
sara.shackleton@enron.com
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2001 06:48 PM -----

	Tanya Rohauer
	01/31/2001 09:20 AM

		 To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Cerberus

Your thoughts?
---------------------- Forwarded by Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT on 01/31/2001 09:17
AM ---------------------------

Susan Bailey
01/31/2001 09:16 AM
To: Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Brenda L Funk/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angela Davis/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Cerberus

Tanya,

With regard to Credit's "initialling-off" on the Confirmation signature
pages, that would be my call.  I know we have done so with some other
structured deals.

So my apologies if this was not to be the case.  If you prefer, Brenda can
run off new signature pages (where legal wil "initial-off" only).  The others
can be destroyed.

Brenda,

Please run-off new pages, and I will get legal to initial-off only.

Cordially,
Susan S. Bailey
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, Suite 3806A
Houston, Texas 77002
Phone: (713) 853-4737
Fax: (713) 646-3490
E:mail:  Susan.Bailey@enron.com

	Tanya Rohauer
	01/31/2001 09:10 AM

		 To: Brenda L Funk/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Susan Bailey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Angela Davis/NA/Enron@Enron, Sara
Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Cerberus

Brenda,

I am comfortable with the concept of the confirm you sent me; however, why
are we not circulating the actual final confirmation with the signature
pages?  The file you sent me still has a few blanks, etc.  I am not sure why
credit is signing off on the confirm as this is not standard procedure.
Please advise.

Thanks,
Tanya

Brenda L Funk

01/30/2001 07:39 PM

To: Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Cerberus

Tanya,

Susan Bailey asked that I forward this to you for your review.  I will send
the signature pages for the confirm to you for your initials.  Please let me
know if you have any questions or concerns.

Thanks,
Brenda Funk
(713) 853-6950
(713) 853-9252 (fax)
----- Forwarded by Brenda L Funk/HOU/ECT on 01/30/2001 07:37 PM -----

	"Sullivan, Danny" <dannysullivan@akllp.com>
	01/30/2001 07:33 PM

		 To: <brenda.l.funk@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Cerberus

Latest draft of confirm is attached.

Danny
 - BREN.DOC


enjoy!
---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001
05:18 PM ---------------------------

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  Rebecca W Cantrell @ ECT                           05/24/2001 05:11 PM

To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron

Subject: Fwd: The Answer!

I just had to share this with you.  I hope you haven't seen it already.
---------------------- Forwarded by Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT on 05/24/2001
05:09 PM ---------------------------

"Randall Rich" <rrich@bracepatt.com> on 05/24/2001 05:10:19 PM
To: <llawner@enron.com>, <rebecca.w.cantrell@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: Fwd: The Answer!

Thought you'd enjoy this.
Received: from mcafee.bracepatt.com by mail.bracepatt.com; Thu, 24 May 2001
00:49:13 -0500
Received: FROM hountnmail1.ngccorp.com BY mcafee.bracepatt.com ; Thu May 24
00:59:27 2001 -0500
X-Proxy: keymaster.bracepatt.com protected
From: Betsy.Carr@dynegy.com
Subject: The Answer!
To: tbradley@bracepatt.com, asettanni@bracepatt.com
Sender: Betsy.Carr@dynegy.com
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:11:59 -0500
Message-ID: <OF120FB6CE.1A60FE9A-ON86256A56.0016ECD1@ngccorp.com>
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on HOUNTNMAIL1/HOUSRV/Dynegy(Release 5.0.5
|September 22, 2000) at 05/24/2001 12:44:04 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/mixed ;
Boundary="0__=86256A560016ECD18f9e8a93df938690918c86256A560016ECD1"
Content-Disposition: inline

finally.......

(See attached file: windmilldavis.gif)

 - windmilldavis.gif


Hi Felix!  I return from Argentina this weekend.  I am having some problems
with the laptop which I'll need you to adjust upon my return. I am traveling
with an ESA person from Houston who has a laptop and never experiences any of
the daily problems which I have.  The problems are:

1.  Immediately upon logging in each day, I receive the following message:
"This install. will install CITRIX ICA Client  - YES or NO"

2.  "Unable to load workspace file destop.dsk.  File is in use by another
program.  Delete the file and create a new workspace?"

Also, the screen freezes frequently and I'm not sure what this is related
to.  I can't use the laptop offline to even get into word.
When can we review these problems?  Thanks.  Sara


Which way?

Enron Global Markets
520 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Tel: 212.715.5283
Fax: 212.715.5608
E-Mail: Limor.Nissan@Enron.com

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Jones, Tana
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 4:19 PM
To: Nissan, Limor
Subject: Re: Enron Canada isda with Transalta

One note.  We are currently negotiating some credit amendments to this
agreement.

	Limor Nissan/ENRON@enronXgate
	06/07/2001 03:02 PM
		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Enron Canada isda with Transalta

Hi Tana,

The executed ISDA list says that we,ve got one b/t Enron Canada and
Transalta.  Can I get a copy of the docs faxed to me asap??

Thanks a lot,

Limor

Enron Global Markets
520 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Tel: 212.715.5283
Fax: 212.715.5608
E-Mail: Limor.Nissan@Enron.com


Bob, you are correct in your statement.  But I want to be sure Koch understand
	when they nominate their receipt at Carlton of 2828 the delivery on that
	path will be 2828 less fuel.  Otherwise I agree with you statements.  I will
	be out next week, but Raetta is up to speed on this issue if you have any
	questions.  Thanks. Lynn

-----Original Message-----
From: Stevens, Bob
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:10 AM
To: Blair, Lynn
Subject: FW: Receipt Points

Lynn:  Please verify that if Koch realigns their 35,000/d contract (K# 20510)such that their MDQ at Carlton matches their Carlton flow obligation of 2,828 and has the rest of their 32,172/d at Marshall (They would need to realign 30 mcf from Carlton to Marshall to effectuate the above, and I've checked with Doug Aschwege to make sure he would approve it.) that Steve's and my interpretation as described below is correct.  Basically the question is whether the Carlton flow obligation is only the Tariff stated volume (ie., no fuel imputed) and that the remainder of the MDQ plus fuel on the whole 35,000/d will flow as primary firm receipts at Marshall.  Thanks for your help!

-----Original Message-----
From: Phillips, Steve (EKT) [mailto:Steve.Phillips@entergykoch.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 4:25 PM
To: Stevens, Bob
Subject: Receipt Points

Bob,

Per our conversations earlier this month,  My contract 20510 needs to have
only 2828 mmbtu at Carlton and 32172 at Marshall.  All of the fuel for the
transport needs to be taken from Marshall.  Currently, this contract has
2858 at Carlton.  This is 30 above my obligation.  After this change is
made, it is my expectation that under no circumstances will my volume at
Carlton be curtailed below a receipt volume of 32568 at Marshall.   A
combination of 2828 plus 32568 gives me a delivered volume of 35000.  That
is my firm entitlement and curtailments below that are unacceptable as long
as my nominations are primary FT.

Please contact me at 713-544-4017 if more clarification is needed.

Thank you.

Steve Phillips


pink collar (PINGK KOL-uhr) noun

   Pertaining to the type of jobs, such as telephone operator or secretary,
   traditionally held by women.

[From the color pink, traditionally associated with women, on the model of
phrases white collar or blue collar.]

   "Ever on the alert for social shifts among the power elite, the New York
   Times pointed out the other day that this is the year in which women
   entering law school may, for the first time, outnumber men. The Times
   drafted a number of learned observers to speculate on the meaning of it
   all: Perhaps the atmosphere of law schools will become more `teamlike';
   ... But the most interesting comment in the article came from one Deborah
   Rhode, a Stanford law school professor who worries that the law may become
   a `pink collar ghetto,' like other professions that have traditionally
   welcomed women."
   Marjorie Williams, Woman's Place Is At the Bar, The Washington Post,
   Apr 4, 2001.

This week's theme: words with color as metaphors.

............................................................................
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. -William Shakespeare, poet
and dramatist (1564-1616)

AWADmail Archives: http://wordsmith.org/awad/awadmail.html
AWAD Archives:     http://wordsmith.org/awad/archives.html
Unsubscribe:       http://wordsmith.org/awad/unsubscribe.html
Privacy Policy:    http://wordsmith.org/awad/privacy.html

Pronunciation:
http://wordsmith.org/words/pink_collar.wav
http://wordsmith.org/words/pink_collar.ram


Here is my revised list incorporating Leslie Hansen's power comments.


Hey Andy-

Long time since we last spoke.  I hope all is  well with you.  I assume you are still happily living in Texas.  I'm  still living in Colorado, and I met a nice girl named Paula, and we're getting  married.  Paula and I wanted to send you an invitation to our wedding in  August.  Can you send us your address so we can mail you an  invitation?

-Sully (and Paula)

Paula Veil & Mark Sullivan
9549 Garland Court
Westminster, CO  80021
(303) 420-8280

AOL IM:   SullivanMarkX


Ami,

Please attend this.

D
---------------------- Forwarded by Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT on 02/02/2000
10:40 AM ---------------------------

Tricia Bowen
02/02/2000 10:18 AM
To: George Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: KERR MCGEE meeting TODAY @ 1:30 - room 30C1

I wanted to let you know about this meeting in case you wanted any of your
schedulers to attend.
Thanks
Tricia
---------------------- Forwarded by Tricia Bowen/HOU/ECT on 02/02/2000 10:15
AM ---------------------------

Tricia Bowen
02/02/2000 09:51 AM
To: Joan Quick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric Wardle/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine L
Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Franklin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Molly
LaFuze/HOU/ECT@ECT, Clarissa Garcia/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip
Villagomez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Vachuska/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina
Sanchez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joann Collins/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joan
Veselack/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert Allwein/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jesse
Villarreal/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe A Casas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rhonda
Dempsey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sabra L Dinari/HOU/ECT@ECT, Briant
Baker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Meredith Mitchell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Victoria
Versen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anita K Patton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Beverly Beaty/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Victor Lamadrid/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward Terry/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: KERR MCGEE meeting TODAY @ 1:30 - room 30C1

If you currently have any Kerr McGee production on your pipe, please plan to
attend the meeting today in room 30C1 at 1:30.
This should be a very quick meeting.  We will be discussing everyone's roles
and responsibilities in maintaining the Kerr McGee tickets in Sitara.

I realize we are dealing with numerous cuts and renoms during the day, but if
at all possible, please try to attend.  We need to clarify some issue
immediately to avoid confusion in the future.

Thanks
Tricia
3-4222


Group,
Please note, the congestion management market is still $0-$250.
Please take into account RT price volatility when placing congestion bids,
see me with any questions regarding congestion management.

Bill

---------------------- Forwarded by Bill Williams III/PDX/ECT on 01/02/2001
09:50 AM ---------------------------

CRCommunications <CRCommunications@caiso.com> on 12/29/2000 01:14:53 PM
To: ISO Market Participants
<IMCEAEX-_O=CAISO_OU=CORPORATE_CN=DISTRIBUTION+20LISTS_CN=ISO+20MARKET+20PARTI
CIPANTS@caiso.com>
cc:

Subject: Price Caps

Notice To Market Participants

For trade date Monday, January 1, 2001 (DA market that runs on December 31,
2000) the following price cap validation changes will be implemented:

* Supplemental and A/S Energy: Soft price cap with a breakpoint at
$150. Bids above $150 will be accepted but will not be allowed to set the
clearing price.

* A/S Capacity:  Soft price cap with a breakpoint at $150.  Bids above
$150 will be accepted but will not be allowed to set the clearing price.

* Congestion Management Adjustment Bids:   Status quo will be
maintained with respect to congestion management adjustment bids.  The
adjustment bid range will be from $0 to $250.

Mark Rothleder
Manager of Market Applications


I will be in California beginning this Friday through next week . . . so
I won't be at work to check e-mails.
If something changes with the planned conference call you'll have to
send e-mail to home ---   cattlepig@earthlink.net
or leave a message on my home voicemail for me to retrieve.  Otherwise,
I'll just plan on speaking with you all on Saturday morning, August 12th
@ 11:00 a.m.

Matthew Gillaspie
NASD Registered Series 7, 63, 53, 55
Fixed Income Trading - Ingersoll
Brenton Investments Inc.
515/237-5379
2840 Ingersoll Avenue
Des Moines   IA  50312
matt.gillaspie@brentonbank.com
Tax Equivalent Yields that may be noted above are ESTIMATES ONLY and may
not take into consideration unique qualities of the bonds or your
clients tax situation.  Your client should CONSULT WITH THEIR TAX
PREPARER OR ATTORNEY TO DETERMINE THEIR TAX EQUIVALENT FOR THEIR
SPECIFIC INCOME SITUATION.
Brenton Investments, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brenton Bank.
Investment and insurance products offered through Brenton Investments,
Inc. are not FDIC insured, are not deposits nor obligations of any bank,
are not guaranteed by any bank and involve investment risk, including
the possible loss of principal.


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 04/13/2000
11:00 AM ---------------------------

"Vadim Pokhlebkin" <vpokhleb@ideaus.com> on 04/13/2000 10:23:35 AM
To: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>, <vkamins@enron.com>, <erms@bloomberg.net>
cc:
Subject: Thursday's IDEA

Dear Vince,

I hope you're doing weel.  Have you heard any feedback about our research
from your colleagues? Please let me know whom I may contact: that will save
you from forwarding our reports to them daily.  I look forward to your
reply.

As usual, attached are today's issues of our daily morning faxes:
1. Financial Markets Today - FX majors and key bond markets' analyses.
2. Fixed Income Today - US treasuries, agencies, and corporates' analyses.

Best regards,
Vadim Pokhlebkin
Account Manager
vpokhlebkin@ideaglobal.com
tel. 1 (212) 571 4332
fax  1 (212) 571 4334

IDEAglobal.com
140 Broadway, 21st Floor
New York, NY 10005, USA

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
IDEAglobal.com. This email, its content and any files transmitted with it
are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may be legally privileged
and/or confidential. Access by any other party is unauthorized without the
express written permission of the sender. If you have received this email in
error you may not copy or use the contents, attachments or information in
any way. Please destroy it and contact the sender via the IDEAglobal.com
switchboard in one of the following three offices: New York +1 212 571 4332;
London +44 171 430 2888; Singapore +65 332 0700

 - FMT0413A.pdf
 - FIT1304A.pdf


At its special meeting today, FERC released the results of its eagerly
awaited probe into California's summer power crisis, concluding that under
certain circumstances, California ratepayers were subjected to unjust and
unreasonable power rates due to California's "seriously flawed" market
structure and rules in conjunction with tight demand and supply conditions
throughout the West.

The FERC staff report on western markets and the causes of the Summer 2000
Price Abormalities, entitled, Part I of Staff Report on U.S. Bulk Power
Markets, is available at the following website:
http://www.ferc.fed.us/electric/bulkpower.htm

In response, FERC issued an order proposing a series of sweeping structural
changes to the California ISO and PX to help remedy the pricing problems, and
solicited public comment by November 22.  A technical conference has also
been scheduled for November 9, to discuss the proposed solutions and other
remedies that might be suggested (details TBA).  While all four commissioners
supported the order, the order stretched the Commission.  Chairman Hoecker
and Comm. Breathitt expressed strong endorsements, while Comms. Hebert and
Massey concurred, citing areas where they felt the Commission had either
"over-reached" or not gone far enough, as discussed below.  A final order is
expected to be issued by year's end.

At the same time, the Commission warned California consumers of their
continued risk of paying higher prices unless policy makers there resolve
state issues, such as: (1) immediately implementing the availability of day
ahead markets for power purchases; (2) development of demand responses; (3)
siting of generation and transmission; and (4) assurance of sufficient
reserve requirements.

Highlights of Proposed California Structural Remedy

In its order, FERC proposed a series of market overhauls, including:

(1) Eliminating the state's mandatory requirement that the state's
investor-owned utilities buy and sell electricity through the PX, and allowing
these utilities to purchase electricity through forward contracts and other
alternative mechanisms to manage supply risks.

(2) Requiring market participants to schedule 95 percent of their
transactions in the day-ahead market and instituting a penalty charge for
under-scheduling (in excess of five percent of hourly load requirements), in
order to discourage over-reliance on the real-time spot market.

(3) Establishing independent, non-stakeholder governing boards for the ISO
and PX.

(4) Modifying the current single price auction system by (a) imposing a
temporary $150/MWh "soft cap" that prohibits supply bids in excess of $150
from setting the market-clearing price for all bidders; (b) requiring sellers
bidding above $150/MWh to report their bids to FERC on a confidential, weekly
basis and provide certain cost support; and (c) requiring the ISO and PX to
report monthly information on such bids.  The Commission's price mitigation
measures would remain in effect through December 31, 2002.

(5) Declining to order retroactive refunds for the state's ratepayers and
utilities, citing insufficient authority to do so, but subjecting sellers to
potential refund liability for transactions from October 2, 2000 until
December 21, 2002, but no lower than their marginal or opportunity costs, if
FERC finds non-competitive behavior.

(6) Encouraging accelerated state siting approval and introduction of demand
response management programs.

Separately, the draft order rejected the ISO's request for an extension of
its current purchase price cap authority, and the PX's request for price
capping authority.

Commissioner Responses

Comm. Herbert reluctantly concurred, noting that his decision may change when
a final order is considered based on comments filed or testimony offered at
the November 9 meeting.  He stressed that he would have preferred that the
order address four areas: (1) eliminate all price controls in California
markets; (2) abolish the single price auction entirely; (3) terminate the
"buy and sell" mandate in the PX; and (4) direct the ISO to address a long
list of cited problems in its January 2001 RTO filing, rather than having the
Commission prescribe specific remedies.

Hebert stated that while he was opposed in principle to the "soft cap"
concept, if one had to be adopted, then the soft cap should increase
incrementally increase over time at specific pre-announced dates.  He
believes that this would serve to both encourage greater investment in
facilities and additional forward contracting as well as provide an incentive
for California regulators to address market design and other flaws.  Also, he
would not have disbanded the stakeholder governing boards at this time, but
allow the ISO and PX to address this issue in their January 2001 RTO
filings.  In addition, he would not dictate risk management methods,
preferring instead that market participants determine appropriate actions on
their own.  Finally, he advised Californians not to be so environmentally
focused that they do not realize their tremendous need for generation
capacity.

Comm. Breathitt stated her approval of the Order while warning that FERC
cannot allow the events of this past summer to reverse or slow the progress
towards open and competitive markets.  She noted that it was the Commission's
job to guide the market to self-correct and not to conduct "command and
control."  She also commended the managers of the ISO and PX, saying that
they have performed admirably.  However, she noted she is awaiting comments
on the single price auction remedy and its accompanying confidential
reporting requirements.

Comm. Massey concurred, but emphasized that he advocates a more aggressive
approach.  He feels that the Congress has "put its thumb on the scale" in the
Federal Power Act to protect consumers.  Stating that prices will continue to
be unreasonable in the future, he believes that this Order moves in the right
direction, by proposing solutions to identified problems such as an over
reliance on the spot market, lack of demand response, the need to
reconstitute governance of the ISO and PX and the elimination of the buy/sell
mandate.  Comm. Massey specifically called for comments regarding whether the
$150/MWh soft cap went far enough, whether FERC has the legal authority to
issue refunds and to determine whether there should be a requirement for a
certain percentage of forward contracting to hedge against the spot market
price volatility.

Finally, Chairman Hoecker stated his strong support of the Order, but noted
that this is "no time to pull punches."  He emphasized that the Commission
needed frank comments from the industry.  He echoed Comm. Breathitt's warning
that competition is at risk and that they needed to get the markets back on
track.  Noting that the Commission lacked authority to order refunds, he
stated that the responsibility rests with Congress.  Addressing
jurisdictional issues, he stated that siting problems encountered at the
state level are slowing the "meandering transition" to competition.  He feels
that the state of California and FERC need to work together to resolve these
problems and that FERC is not attempting to usurp power.  Rather, California
is part of a broader interstate market and is dependent on the western region
for reliable energy, thus placing the burden on federal action to make things
work, Hoecker maintained.  The Chairman also said that the Commission will
fully investigate and act upon complaints of market power abuse or further
evidence provided by staff's ongoing investigation.

If you have any questions or comments, please call Jack Cashin at
202/508-5499.


California's Finances
The State of California will be walking a fiscal tightrope for a while until
wholesale energy costs come down.  At first look, it seems California's
financial position seems OK in the short term; however, the picture remains
troublesome in the medium term.  For one thing, instead of the bridge loans,
the state can and probably will resort to Revenue Anticipation Notes, and has
also scheduled a billion dollar G.O. offering for June, which will help with
the cash situation.   There are also still substantial borrowable resources
available to the state within its own accounts.  However, they would prefer
not to resort to that, as doing so could have further implications for their
bond ratings, but the option is there.   Another reason California might be
OK in the short term, is that, everyone except Moody's, had conflated the
money allocated for power purchases, $7.2 billion, with the money actually
spent for power purchases, $4.3 billion. This indicates that even the pure
cash component of the state's general fund has a longer shelf life.   So now
the question shifts from a near term liquidity issue to asking how much of an
economic effect will the combination of blackouts and much higher retail
energy prices have on California's already flagging economy, and what will
the knock-on effect of this be on the state budget.

The state is completely assured that the proceeds of the bond offers, and the
use of the rate hikes to service those bonds, are "bankruptcy remote"
vehicles.   Second, California legislatures are not concerned by the
possibility of a ballot initiative.  Other areas of concern are about the tax
revenues in light of an economic slowdown, as well as the medium-term risk of
high electricity costs for debt service for the next 15 years.  This will
exert a sizable drag on California's growth which could itself have budgetary
consequences. This is actually a best case scenario, and it is clear that the
ratepayer has more pain to come, especially if California bails out Edison
and PG&E creditors with a "Plan B."
Legislative Matters
Nine key Democratic members are preparing legislation that would authorize a
buyer's cartel along with Washington state and Oregon state to set a firm
upper limit on what each state will pay for electricity during peak demand
periods.  Under this legislation, the state would simply refuse to pay more
than a predetermined price for electricity, no matter what happened.  The
Senate is having a hearing on this issues next Tuesday.  Davis commented
yesterday that he is in support of this legislation.
As mentioned in Wednesday's report, of the two viable Plan B's, success will
be determined by the following questions: (1) will it trigger a rate-payer
rebellion among California voters?; and (2) will it pass in time for SoCal
Edison to be rescued before bankruptcy?  One problem is that even if the Plan
Bs worked out for both SoCal Edison and PG&E, what happens with the other 64%
of their power needs?   One legislator notes, "even the good Plan B from
SoCal's perspective makes them essentially a vessel of the state and if we
are still talking about eminent domain with the other plants in California
how do you add new capacity -- which is the ultimate solution -- when
everybody who has come in has their assets seized?"   The real issue still
remains for any Plan B is: who pays for it and how much more does it cost
taxpayers.   Rate payers in California are already looking forward to a
future where their electricity rates will be paying not only for the
colossally high cost of the power itself, but also the coupons and ultimately
the principal on the $13 billion in bonds just authorized, on the "rate
reduction" bonds already outstanding and -- if the Plan B advocates get their
way -- on bailout debt issues for SoCal Edison and PG&E.


Karen- please print this out. I need to edit this. Thanks, Rick
---------------------- Forwarded by Rick Buy/HOU/ECT on 12/03/2000 02:22 PM
---------------------------

Jeannie Mandelker
11/30/2000 09:11 AM
To: Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, William S
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Read this version of the article

I changed the second paragraph in the attached article on RAC for Enron
Business. Please read this version rather than the first version I sent you.

Thanks,
Jeannie


++++++++++++++$PIRATEBOUNTY$+++++++++++++++

Your personal financial information is available
to others! Find out who's been checking your credit
file! Also, there are often serious mistakes and
innacuracies on your record!! Click below today to
check for FREE your current personal information!

Click Here:
http://r1.postlite.com/?u=128&l=68&id=159916

 AOL Users Click Here

Thanks,
PirateBounty.com
http://www.piratebounty.com

->>-------------------------------------------------------------<<-
TO UNSUBSCRIBE click here:

http://www.postlite.com/u/?l=piratebounty&e=alewis@ect.enron.com

AOL users click here to unsubscribe

or...

Reply to this email with the word "remove" as the subject.

This email was sent to: alewis@ect.enron.com

X-Postlite-Recipient: alewis@ect.enron.com
X-Postlite-Userid: piratebounty
->>-------------------------------------------------------------<<-


Francisco Pinto-Leite
Enron Americas
1400 Smith Street, EB 3888
Houston, TX 77002-7361

Tel: 713-345-7942
Fax:713-646-3490
fleite@enron.com

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Conwell, Wendy
Sent:	Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:26 PM
To:	Leite, Francisco Pinto; Pinto, Anil
Cc:	Cook, Mary
Subject:	FW: CW for G6 Energy Retailing

Anil - Please disregard

Francisco -  I was trying to send this to you as well as Mary as I am not sure which of you will be working on it.

Sorry
Wendy

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Conwell, Wendy
Sent:	Wednesday, October 24, 2001 3:24 PM
To:	Cook, Mary; Pinto, Anil
Cc:	Devries, Paul; Brown, Kortney; Ngo, Tracy; Radous, Paul; Rance, Susan; Sacks, Edward
Subject:	CW for G6 Energy Retailing

Mary/Francisco,

Please find attached the credit worksheet for G6 Energy Retailing, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Enersource Corporation.  Enersource Corporation will be the guarantor under this contract.  New guarantees need to be exchanged.  Please call with questions or comments.

Paul - Please be advised that the proposed terms are for discussion and negotiation purposes only as I am still waiting to here back from the counterparty on a few issued.

Thanks
Wendy


Per our meeting yesterday, here is the clean version of the redline I sent
to you on Monday. This doesn't incorporate any of the changes we discussed
yesterday. If you have any questions, please call.
 <<Enron Purchase Agreement v.2 Clean.doc>>
Ross Levine

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Levine, Ross
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 6:58 PM
> To: 'Heather.Kroll@enron.com'; 'Kay.Mann@enron.com';
> 'Stephen.Plauche@enron.com'; 'Scott.Healy@enron.com'
> Cc: Nock, Herb; Bentley, Chris; Leitman, Jerry; Leo, Tony; Mahler,
> Joseph
> Subject: purchase contract markup
>
> Heather, Scott, Kay, Stephen:
>
> The attached file is a redlined markup of your draft purchase contract
> prepared by our outside counsel, with a few added comments from our group.
> Please note these comments are intended to be preliminary and non-binding,
> for discussion only. Most of these comments don't address the scope of our
> meeting today, but are more detail oriented. Please call me if you have
> any questions before we meet Wednesday.
>
>  << File: RMLredline version 2.doc >>
>
> Ross M. Levine, Esq.
> Director of Contracts and Contracts Counsel
> FuelCell Energy, Inc.
> 3 Great Pasture Rd.
> Danbury, CT 06813
>
> (203) 825-6057
> (203) 798-2945 (fax)
> rlevine@fce.com (email)
>
> This transmittal and its attached files (if any) may contain proprietary
> or confidential information belonging to FuelCell Energy, Inc. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received
> this transmittal in error. Any review, disclosure, use, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you
> suspect that you have received this communication in error, please notify
> us immediately by telephone at 1-(203) 825-6000, or e-mail at
> jryan@fce.com and immediately delete this message and all its attachments.
>

 - Enron Purchase Agreement v.2 Clean.doc


did I not responde to something I was supposed to?

Katie Trullinger
Wilshire Credit Corporation (REO Dpt.)
800-776-0100 x7804
katie.trullinger@wfsg.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Bronstein, Mara
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:47 AM
To: Ward, Kim S (Houston)
Subject: FW: If Santa answered his mail honestly

-----Original Message-----
From: Corbett Scott [mailto:ascott@tulane.edu]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:43 PM
To: Tracie Ashe; Tiffany Putman; Ricardo Romo-Leroux; Philip Arnold; Maya Goldberg; Mark Freeman; Lucia Windsor; Lane Williams; Krystal Putman; Kristen Gillis; Joel Roberts; Gaines Pittenger; Ellen Goldberg; Edna Echandi-Guzman; Deuce Greathouse; Cindy Tysdal; Catherine Turnipseed; Catherine Sonderman; Bronstein, Mara
Subject: Fw: If Santa answered his mail honestly

>If Santa answered his mail honestly...
>
>
>Dear Santer I wud like a kool toy space ranjur fer
>Xmas. Iv
>ben a gud boy all yeer.
>
>Yer Frend, BiLLy
>
>
>Dear Billy, Nice spelling. You're on your way to a
>career in
>lawn care. How about I send you a fucking book so you
>can learn to read
>and write? I'm giving your older brother the space
>ranger. At least HE
>can spell!
>
>Santa
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, I have been a good girl all year, and the
>only
>thing I ask for is peace and joy in the world for
>everybody!
>
>Love, Sarah
>
>
>Dear Sarah, Your parents smoked pot when they had you,
>didn't
>they?
>
>Santa
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
>
>Dear Santa, I don't know if you can do this, but for
>Christmas,
>I'd like for my mommy and daddy to get back together.
>Please see what you can do.
>
>Love,Teddy
>
>Dear Teddy, Look, your dad's banging the babysitter
>like a screen
>door in a hurricane. Do you think he's gonna give that
>up to come
>back to your frigid mom, who rides his ass constantly?
>It's time to
>give up that dream. Let me get you some nice Legos
>instead.
>
>Santa
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, I want a new bike, a Playstation, a train,
>some
>G.I.Joes, a dog, a drum kit, a pony and a tuba.
>
>Love, Francis
>
>Dear Francis, Who names their kid "Francis" nowadays?
>I bet
>you're gay.
>
>Santa
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, I left milk and cookies for you under the
>tree,
>and I left carrots for your reindeer outside the back
>door.
>
>Love, Susan
>
>Dear Susan, Milk gives me the runs and carrots make
>the deer
>fart in my face when riding in the sleigh. You want to
>do me a favour?
>Leave me a bottle of scotch.
>
>Santa
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, What do you do the other 364 days of the
>year? Are
>you busy making toys?
>
>Your friend, Thomas
>
>Dear Thomas, All the toys are made in China. I have a
>condo in
>Vegas, where I spend most of my time making low-budget
>porno films.
>I unwind by drinking myself silly and squeezing the
>asses of cocktail
>waitresses while losing money at the craps table. Hey,
>you wanted to
>know.
>
>Santa
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, Do you see us when we're sleeping, do you
>really
>know when we're awake, like in the song?
>
>Love, Jessica
>
>Dear Jessica, Are you really that gullible? Good luck
>in
>whatever you do. I'm skipping your house.
>
>Santa
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear Santa, I really really want a puppy this year.
>Please
>please please PLEASE PLEASE could I have one?
>
>Timmy
>
>Timmy, That whiney begging shit may work with your
>folks, but
>that crap doesn't work with me. You're getting a
>sweater again.
>
>Santa
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dearest Santa, We don't have a chimney in our house,
>how do you
>get into our home?
>
>Love, Marky
>
>Mark, First, stop calling yourself "Marky", that's why
>you're
>getting your ass whipped at school. Second, you don't
>live in a
>house, you live in a low-rent apartment complex.
>Third, I get inside your pad
>just like all the burglars
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
>http://shopping.yahoo.com
>--=_38650742.1574189D--
>
>


Looks like Prentice and Nancy will be getting together in Napa to do a little bonding this weekend.  Therefore, it looks like an opportunity to golf on Saturday or Sunday (screw football).  Any takers?  (Eldon has promised not to be the score Nazi.)

Best,
Jeff


Please find to below/to follow our Weekly Report for Monday 24th July 2000.


please print this plus attachments and file in Garden State file.  Thanks.
MHC

---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT on 12/05/2000 11:53
PM ---------------------------

HThomas@gspcorp.com on 11/03/2000 01:48:00 PM
To: david.howe@enron.com, marty.blick@enron.com, michelle.cash@enron.com
cc: david.oxley@enron.com, fran.l.mayes@enron.com
Subject: Use of Enron's name in GSP recruiting

Gentlemen, Michelle Cash in Legal has reviewed the engineering advertisement

that we put together for campus and had the comments below.  Michelle is
concerned about how much we tie Enron into the document.

I revised the document as Michelle suggested, see engradv3.  It does not
have
quite the flow that the preceding document had.

Let's discuss this document next week when we are all in New Jersey.  David,
you
might want to talk to Michelle about the bigger issue of keeping Enron's
name
separate from GSP, her phone number is 853.6401

______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
Subject: Re: campus recruiting
Author:  "Michelle.Cash@enron.com" <SMTP:Michelle.Cash@enron.com> at
RICHMOND
Date:    11/3/00 12:12 PM

I agree with the issue of de-emphasizing Enron in the communications.  I
would suggest that the communication, as written, could be used to imply
that the candidate would be an Enron employee.  If possible, we should say
that GSP is an LLC that currently is owned 100% by Enron, because, as I
understand it, Enron is going to sell down portions of that facility.
Thus, I want to manage the expectations that the person would be an "Enron"
person.

Could you please forward this message?

Thanks.  Michelle

HThomas@gspcorp.com on 11/03/2000 06:22:00 AM

To:   david.oxley@enron.com, michelle.cash@enron.com,
      fran.l.mayes@enron.com
cc:
Subject:  campus recruiting

     David, Michelle, Fran, see the following.  Michelle, once you have
     your discussion with David Howe about the Enron influence, perhaps we
     need to have some writeup that states what we should say and what we
     should not say.

     Hoyt

______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
Subject: campus recruiting
Author:  Hoyt H. Thomas at GARFIELD
Date:    11/3/00 7:17 AM

     Jim Burkhead: Dave (Syracuse) and Marty (Miami Ohio) are both going to
     campus on the 14th.  If you could move your date at Maine up to that
     week from the 29th, then we could convene after all three interview
     trips and decide who we want to bring on-site.

     I propose (based on Marty's suggestion) that we try to bring all our
     leading candidates in for a mill visit on the same day (or perhaps one
     day for Dec grads and one day for May grads, if we get that many
     interested candidates), preferably the last week of November.  It will
     be a busy day, but then we can knock it all out then.

     Regarding your campus visits, we are looking for at least two process
     engineers, December grads are fine (actually preferred at the present
     time), and we should also look at environmental engineers if they are
     available at the school you are visiting.  In order to hire two
     process engineers, we probably have to bring eight in for a mill
     visit.

     Margo, is there any way we can get some GSPCLLC brochures or handouts
     for Jim, Mary and Dave to use on campus?

FYI, Houston Legal is recommending that we do not emphasize the Enron
connection.  I think that we are probably okay with the reference to Enron
in
the attached blurb that Marty and Dave put together (attached) but let's
avoid
suggesting to candidates that they can hire on here and then move into
Enron.
Jim and Marty, when you send the attached doc to campus, you might want to
add
your name at the bottom in addition to Dave's to make sure that the
students

know that they can contact you.

David Howe and Mike Parker, do you want to go to any of these campus
visits?

Thanks, Hoyt

______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: Process Engineer
Author:  David Freeswick at GARFIELD
Date:    11/3/00 12:31 AM

     Hoyt;

     I'm scheduled at Syracuse Nov 14.

     Dave

______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re: Process Engineer
Author:  Hoyt H. Thomas at GARFIELD
Date:    11/1/00 7:29 PM

     Dave, do you have a date set up?  Let's talk.  go ahead and send it to
     Syracuse.

     Jim Burkhead is working on Maine, i have to call Rutgers and NJIT.
     But I would really like to find 2 Dec grads from the paper schools if
     we could.

     Hoyt

______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Process Engineer
Author:  David Freeswick at GARFIELD
Date:    10/30/00 4:05 PM

     I believe the attached document is the final version for the process
     engineering position. Please review it. If it looks OK I would like to
     send it off to Syracuse to be posted in the Pulp and Paper Science
     Department. I will schedule a recruiting trip there in November.

     Is anyone going to Maine or Rutgers/NJIT?

     Dave

(See attached file: engradv2.doc)
(See attached file: Forward.txt)

 - ENGRADV2.DOC
 - FORWARD.TXT
 - engradv3.doc
 - Forward.txt


FYI.  Good idea.  But, I think we may have some exposure to manage if there are follow-up articles.  If the 200 lot product is not offered universally to all EOL customers, it's a change from the way we have positioned EnronOnline.  There may a legal issue with it as well.  It will be helpful for me to know how offering the product selectively benefits Enron.

Kal

UK:
Enron ups online metals transaction sizes.

09/27/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.

LONDON, Sept 27 (Reuters) - Commodities trader Enron has amended its internet
trading platform EnronOnline (www.enrononline.com) to allow some users to
increase the size of metals transactions.

For selected clients, Enron is now making markets in three months copper and
aluminium for maximum 200-lot transactions, compared with the standard 20-lot
markets on the system.
For the larger-volume deals Enron is quoting a wider $4 bid-ask spread rather
than the standard $2 spread.

Joe Gold, president of Enron Metals, said, "The 200-lot market was developed
because a number of people asked us to put something of a larger size on
there."

He said the 200-lot market was open to a restricted number of users, but was
not focused on any one particular section of the market.

"People who like large lots tend to be big producers, some of the funds, and
so on. They're people who have a commercial relationship with us already," he
said.

Traders said the increased transaction size could give Enron an added edge
when competing for fund business.

"It's a big step up in liquidity. If I was them my first call would be to the
top 10 fund managers to say 'why don't you stop messing around with phone
calls and come to the screen where you can trade 200 lots at the click of a
button?'" said one.

"Even if they don't manage to get these guys' business, they've raised the
bar. Their other clients may have to conform to the Enron model, offering
200-lot deals and maybe a $3 spread if they want to beat Enron."

U.S.-based Enron Corp became a major player in the metals trade in May last
year when it acquired MG plc, a leading independent international metals
dealing firm in London which had previously absorbed fellow LME ring-dealers
Rudolf Wolff & Co and Billiton Metals Ltd.

In July last year the company announced the first physical metals transaction
on EnronOnline.

The system differs from the screen trading systems operated by the London
Metal Exchange (LME) and UK-based metals and energy broker Spectron in that
the trading platform is open to a broad range of users but Enron is the sole
counter-party in each transaction.

Both the LME's LME Select and the Spectron trading platform enable trading
between individual users, but limit membership to Category 1 (ring dealing)
and Category 2 (associate broker clearing) members of the LME.

Folder Name: Rahil Jafry
Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 89

______________________________________________________________________

To review or revise your folder, visit http://www.djinteractive.com or contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at custom.news@bis.dowjones.com or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.)
______________________________________________________________________

Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved


Attached please find a sheet of pro and con statements.

 <<Statements.doc>>

 - Statements.doc


Here's the latest revision of the Delta letter agreement. I'm reviewing it
now.

Kay

---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 04/02/2001 09:36
AM ---------------------------

"Campbell, Carolyn" <CCampbell@KSLAW.com> on 04/02/2001 09:28:21 AM
To: "'gregorylang@paulhastings.com'" <gregorylang@paulhastings.com>,
"'rvicens@deltapower.com'" <rvicens@deltapower.com>,
"'iparker@freshfields.com'" <iparker@freshfields.com>
cc: "'kay.mann@enron.com'" <kay.mann@enron.com>, "Keffer, John"
<JKeffer@KSLAW.com>

Subject: Revised Draft of ENA/PPL Letter Agreement

 <<2XFLRED.DOC>>

Gentlemen:

Enclosed is a revised draft of the letter agreement between ENA and PPL
marked to reflect revisions from the prior draft dated March 31, 2001.
Please review the enclosed and advise of any questions or comments.  Thank
you.

Carolyn M. Campbell
King & Spalding
7130276-7307 (phone)
713-751-3280 (fax)
ccampbell@kslaw.com <mailto:ccampbell@kslaw.com>

Enclosure: 136641vR9/8

                    Confidentiality Notice
This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer.  It is intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  This
communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure.  If you are not the
named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or
disseminate this message or any part of it.  If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete
all copies of the message.

 - 2XFLRED.DOC


-----Original Message-----
From: Brady, Don
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 1:46 PM
To: Appling, Mike; Josephs, Bob; Leahy, Steve; Medeles, Ismael; Boase,
Allan; Van Zijll, Dan
Subject: FW: FW: IF DEAR ABBY WAS A MAN

Don E. Brady
Director, Auctions
CheMatch.com
713 956-2369  direct
832 594-5673  cell
dbrady@chematch.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Richardson [mailto:godingo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:53 AM
To: sgray@waterbornelpg.com; nassar1959@yahoo.com;
victor.peeke@ndirect.co.uk
Subject: Fwd: FW: IF DEAR ABBY WAS A MAN

>Dear Mr. Abby:
>  >> Q: My husband wants a threesome with my best
>friend
>  >> and me.
>  >> A: Obviously your husband cannot get enough of
>you!
>  >> Knowing that there is only one of you he can only
>  >> settle for the next best thing - your best friend.
>  >> Far
>  >> from being an issue, this can bring you closer
>  >> together. Why not get some of your old college
>  >> roommates involved too? If you are still
>  >> apprehensive,
>  >> maybe you should let him be with your friends
>  >> without
>  >> you. If you're still not sure then just perform
>oral
>  >> on him and cook him a nice meal while you think
>  >> about
>  >> it.
>  >>
>  >> Dear Mr. Abby:
>  >> Q: My husband continually asks me to perform oral
>  >> sex
>  >> on him.
>  >> A: Do it. Sperm can help you lose weight and
>gives a
>  >> great glow to your skin. Interestingly, men know
>  >> this.
>  >> His offer to allow you to perform oral sex on him
>is
>  >> totally selfless. This shows he loves you. The
>best
>  >> thing to do is to thank him by performing it
>twice a
>  >> day, then cook him a nice meal.
>  >>
>  >> Dear Mr. Abby:
>  >> Q: My husband has too many nights out with the
>boys.
>  >>
>  >> A: This is perfectly natural behaviour and it
>should
>  >> be encouraged. The man is a hunter and he needs to
>  >> prove his prowess with other men. A night out
>  >> chasing
>  >> young single girls is a great stress relief and
>can
>  >> foster a more peaceful and relaxing home.
>Remember,
>  >> nothing can rekindle your relationship better than
>  >> the
>  >> man being away for a day or two (it's a great time
>  >> to
>  >> clean the house too)! Just look at how emotional
>and
>  >> happy he is when he returns to his stable home.
>The
>  >> best thing to do when he gets home is for you and
>  >> your
>  >> best friend to perform oral on him. Then cook him
>a
>  >> nice meal.
>  >>
>  >> Dear Mr. Abby:
>  >> Q: My husband doesn't know where my clitoris is.
>  >> A: Your clitoris is of no concern to your husband.
>  >> If
>  >> you must mess with it, do it in your own time or
>ask
>  >> your best
>  >> friend to help. You may wish to videotape yourself
>  >> while doing this, and present it to your husband
>as
>  > > a
>  > > birthday gift. To ease your selfish guilt,
>perform
>  > > oral on him and cook him a nice meal.
>
>
>
>  > > Dear Mr. Abby:
>  > > Q: My husband is uninterested in foreplay.
>  > > A: You are a bad person for bringing it up and
>  >> should
>  >> seek sensitivity training. Foreplay to a man is
>very
>  >> stressful and time consuming. Sex should be
>  >> available
>  >> to your husband on demand with no pesky requests
>for
>  >> foreplay. What this means is that you do not love
>  >> your
>  >> man as much as you should - he should never have
>to
>  >> work to get you in the mood. Stop being so
>selfish!
>  >> Perhaps you can make it up to him by performing
>oral
>  >> on him and cook him a nice meal.
>  >>
>  >> Dear Mr. Abby:
>  >> Q: My husband always has an orgasm then rolls over
>  >> and
>  >> goes to sleep never giving me one.
>  >> A: I'm not sure I understand the problem. Perhaps
>  >> you've forgotten to cook him a nice meal.
>  >>
>
>
>

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


---------------------- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 09/13/99 02:37 PM
---------------------------

Harry M Collins
09/03/99 03:39 PM
Sent by: Jenny Helton
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Alan B Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Enron Online Market Descriptions

Please find attached for your further handling the revised, legally approved
market descriptions for SO2 and NOx Emissions Allowance.

Please advise if I may be of further assistance.


Info re the Bingham deal team
----- Forwarded by Barton Clark/HOU/ECT on 09/12/2000 09:55 AM -----

	"Politan, Nicholas H." <PolitaNH@bingham.com>
	09/07/2000 11:25 AM

		 To: "Barton Clark (E-mail)" <Barton.Clark@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: BIOS OF NICK AND RICK - NO PICTURE.DOC

 <<BIOS OF NICK AND RICK - NO PICTURE.DOC>>  Rick and me

 - BIOS OF NICK AND RICK - NO PICTURE.DOC


Thanks.

From: Jeff Dasovich on 01/02/2001 10:13 AM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Re: Utility M&A Seminar

Yep.

	Richard Shapiro
	01/02/2001 09:52 AM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc:
		 Subject: Utility M&A Seminar

Can you do this?
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 01/02/2001
09:52 AM ---------------------------

"JOHN G KLAUBERG" <JKLAUBER@LLGM.COM> on 12/07/2000 01:44:52 PM
To: Richard.Shapiro@enron.com
cc:

Subject: Utility M&A Seminar

Rick:  it was great to catch up with you the other day in NY.  It seems like
it was a very long time ago that we worked together on the PECO deal, doesn't
it?

I look forward to doing the panel with you at the Utility M&A Symposium in NY
on Monday, January 29, 2001.  Our panel is set for around 4:00 that
afternoon.  I'll get off a brochure to you, but the panel will discuss price
volatility and what strategies there may be for dealing with it.  I thought
it would be great if you could address the California situation and your
thoughts on why it occurred and what the causes are and perhaps what remedial
measures should be undertaken.  Your thoughts on price caps and the "hard"
and "soft" nature of the various approaches would also be on interest.  I
think people would also have a keen interest in the differences between CA
and other markets, such as PA and perhaps the soon to open Texas market.
I'll follow up with more info as the time gets closer, but you probably may
want to think of a talk in the 25 minute range or so.  I will let the EXNET
(the seminar sponsor) know of your participation.

As you may also know, LeBoeuf sponsors a dinner that evening at LeCirque for
our energy industry clients.  It is usually a good time and many of your
compatriots, including Steve Kean, have attended in the past.  If you can
possibly make it, that would be great.  My guess is that there also may be
some people in attendance that you may wish to catch up with on various
industry things that you may be working on.

Thanks again, Rick, and I'll be in touch soon.  John


Matt

 I am passing on these penalties for non-performance Friday for the
firm volumes that did not flow.  The firm sales amount of which you did not
perform was  5000 mmbtu at $6.90.  Gas daily reported that the weekend
traded as low as $3.70.  Therefore, we are assessing liquidated damages in
the amount of US$16,000, the amount of which Lisa Feisst will invoice.  I
would like to ensure that this problem does not happen again. Wildgoose is
not the swing market, and all transactions completed on your screen are firm
as are all transactions, unless otherwise specified, with Wildgoose and
Alberta Energy Company.  We, at Alberta Energy Company consider this a
serious matter, not the dollar figure associated but the implications in the
California market place and are treating it as such.  Our companies have had
a longstanding relationship and we would like rectify this problem so we can
regain trading together in the future.  A letter outlining the above will be
sent to yourself  and John Lavorado for your records.

 Thanks


Hey Sugar Bear!

I was just thinking about you and was hoping that everything is going okay
for you.  I constantly keep you in prayer regarding your situation.   How's
Erika doing?

You missed church Sunday when they forceably removed one of the guys (aaron
Burr) from the church.  You remember he was the one that used to sit on the
front row and get happy alllllllllll the time.  You remember him, anyway they
hauled his tail out of there.  It was terrible to see someone hauled from the
church, not matter what the situation is.

Oh well, take care, and call me if we need to talk!!!!


Oak -11 or Atl +11  ????

Bet voided

John J Lavorato@ENRON
11/23/2000 09:42 AM
To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:

250 per

New England +6
Over 37 1/2 NE/DET
Minn -7 1/2
Buff +3 1/2
Miami +5 1/2
Phil +6 1/2
Clev +16
Chic +7
Oak +11
Jack +3 1/2
Den -3
KC -2
Giants/Ariz over 38

Current 3730


>From: "Josh Hogarth" <josh_hogarth@hotmail.com>
>To: edo711@hotmail.com, b_strachan@hotmail.com, davidclement2@hotmail.com,
>damclean10@hotmail.com, wtrower@hotmail.com
>Subject: Fwd: The First Wives Club
>Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 16:42:58 -0400
>

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

>From: "Fraser Chapman"
>To: zcurry@hotmail.com, anthony@keen.com, jeffmagwood@hotmail.com,
josh_hogarth@hotmail.com, nthomas@premiumtv.co.uk, dylan@brodiebikes.com,
scmaw@ucalgary.ca, tomaussie@hotmail.com, bosselindblad@hotmail.com,
jagartson@hotmail.com, tiggerty@hotmail.com, zacharyclark@hotmail.com,
jlund88@hotmail.com, brianmmorgan@hotmail.com, jamie_crain@hotmail.com,
denji_yiu@hotmail.com, carve173@hotmail.com, dwyer_mike@hotmail.com,
bpadua@netcom.ca, marc.belcourt@bmw.ca, justin.leblanc@dartmouth.edu,
csloan@stylecon.com, bobce_brown@hotmail.com, bigdaddymacmatty@yahoo.com,
glenn@visualfrenzy.com
>Subject: Fwd: The First Wives Club
>Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 16:58:20
>
>
>
>
>>From: "jamie crain"
>>To: mtmacgregor@home.com, jeffboots@hotmail.com,
>>DuBarrington.Gray@can.xerox.com, mevans@gallop.ca,
>>fchapman@hotmail.com, garyt@sympatico.ca, jboard@NORIGEN.COM,
>>dlevine@idirect.com, Kmcewen@baystdocs.com,
>>jason_j_marsh@sympatico.ca, kmiller@plmgroup.com,
>>myb786@hotmail.com, Brianmmorgan@hotmail.com,
>>poleary@baystdocs.com, peetorc@hotmail.com,
>>pascallewin@hotmail.com, sraino@hotmail.com, dicknemis@hotmail.com,
>>shahin.eskandari@can.xerox.com, acampbell@chadwickengineering.com,
>>Strahan.Mccarten@ipix.com, sdelmon@ngco.com,
>>tom.marshall@can.xerox.com, gregvinton@hotmail.com
>>Subject: Fwd: The First Wives Club
>>Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 23:00:52 -0400
>>

>From: Jamie.Crain@CAN.XEROX.com
>To: jamie_crain@hotmail.com
>Subject: The First Wives Club
>Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:24:23 -0500
>
> <> <> <> <>
><> <> <>
>
>
>
> <> <> <> <>
><> <> <>
 - elsa_1_lg.jpg
 - elsa_2.jpg
 - elsa_3.jpg
 - elsa_4.jpg
 - elsa_5.jpg
 - elsa_6.jpg
 - elsa_7.jpg
 - lujan_1.jpg
 - lujan_2.jpg
 - lujan_3.jpg
 - lujan_4.jpg
 - lujan_5.jpg
 - lujan_6.jpg
 - lujan_7.jpg


Based on latest info hear's latest assessment of Gov's talk:

I'm in charge.
Here's all the wonderful things I've done thus far to address the crisis
(likely to include Edison TX talks, since it seems he has no choice but to
continue that charade).
It's bad and getting worse and we've got to pull together as a state to get
through it.
Rate increases are a necessary evil that---painful as they are, and they will
be painful---must be part of the solution; and future increases may well be
likely.
Blame FERC and the generators, because it's their fault.
Windfall profits is a good idea.

Kari Dohn of the Gov's office  and I have been trading voicemails.  She's
going to LA with Governor Backbone later this afternoon for the speech.  If
she and I hook up, I'll report back on what, if anything, I hear.

Best,
Jeff


Based on what we heard from FERC last week, we should:

Be taking a leadership role in either EPSA, WPTF, our whichever entity thinks
most like Enron and has the largest number of members.
Decide the five most important issues we want FERC to address and try to work
on these issues through that group.
I think Joe should be spearheading this effort.
Accordingly, I think it is most appropriate to work on things like responding
to the Joskow/Hogan papers through that group.

From: James D Steffes@ENRON on 12/11/2000 10:02 AM CST
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Analysis of Joskow / Hogan Papers

Having read the Hogan paper, I think that the "academic" community is
somewhat divided on this issue.  If we want to move forward on the issues
Joskow addresses, I would recommend that EPSA be the vehicle.  The entire
marketer / generator community needs to counter.

What do people think about seeking activity through EPSA, WPTF, and/or IEP of
CA  to push back on the studies and analysis especially after the Dec 13
Order?  I don't think that the discussions will be ending very soon.

Jim

	Alan Comnes@ECT
	12/07/2000 03:07 AM

		 To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT
		 Subject: Re: Analysis of Joskow / Hogan Papers

The Joskow/Kahn paper raises two issues:  price above cost  and witholding.

Enron obviously has concerns with the "price above cost" analysis.  I drafted
some specific concerns and put them into a draft to Enron's reponse to Hoeker
Question 1.  Although the detail was dropped in the final draft, the basic
technical concerns were laid out there. To really rebut Joskow/Kahn would
take considerable work.  Jeff D's idea was to write a paper that raised
issues and indicated how complicated a "correct" response would  be.

The Joskow/Kahn withholding section has recieved criticism from the ISO so I
am not sure Enron needs to respond to that.

I think my bottom line now is that the debate at FERC will soon be over or
enter a new stage on the 13th.  As far as how a response would help us in
California, I think requires a discussion with Jeff.

Alan

From: James D Steffes@ENRON on 12/05/2000 07:22 PM CST
To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Analysis of Joskow / Hogan Papers

Alan --

Before we bring in Seabron Adamson to do some analysis, I'd like your read of
the Joskow and Hogan papers.   When we have our understanding straight, let's
talk.

Jim

----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 12/05/2000 07:20 PM -----

	Jeff Dasovich
	Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
	11/30/2000 11:49 AM

		 To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, mpalmer@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: From Today's Electricity Daily

FYI. In bizarre times, help can sometimes come from bizarre places.  Granted,
we're likely to disagree strongly with Hogan's continued obsession with
Poolco, but the discussion in his paper regarding market power may be
helpful---I've read the Joskow paper, but haven't yet had a chance to review
the Hogan piece.

Steve and I discussed the need to do a focused assessment of the Joskow/Kahn
"analysis"  (remember it's Ed Kahn, not Alfred Kahn).  Seems that it would be
very useful to fold into that analysis any useful stuff on market power
included in the paper done by Hogan & Co.  If, in the end, there ain't
nothing useful, so be it.  But seems like there's little downside to
exploring it.

Jim, my understanding is that Alan is already working with the fundamentals
folks on the Portland desk to deconstruct the Joskow paper.  Might want to
include the Hogan paper in those discussions and might also be useful to pull
Seabron Adamson into the thinking, too.  Ultimately, may be preferable to
have any assessment of Joskow and/or Hogan to come from economists, rather
than directly from us.

Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 11/30/2000 11:38 AM -----

	"Daniel Douglass" <Douglass@ArterHadden.com>
	11/30/2000 11:29 AM

		 To: <Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <dcazalet@apx.com>, <BillR@calpine.com>,
<jackp@calpine.com>, <glwaas@calpx.com>, <Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>,
<cabaker@duke-energy.com>, <gavaughn@duke-energy.com>,
<rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <gtbl@dynegy.com>, <KEWH@dynegy.com>,
<jdasovic@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>,
<foothill@lmi.net>, <camiessn@newwestenergy.com>,
<jcgardin@newwestenergy.com>, <rsnichol@newwestenergy.com>,
<Nam.Nguyen@powersrc.com>, <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>,
<Roger.Pelote@Williams.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: From Today's Electricity Daily

Has FERC Gone Far Enough in California?
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission isn't going far enough in its
attempt to reform the California wholesale electric market, according to a
paper by three prominent economists done for San Diego Gas and Electric. The
paper by John D. Chandley, Scott M. Harvey, and William W. Hogan argues that
FERC should first end the artificial separation that divides the California
Power Exchange and the California Independent System Operator, rather than
worrying about the governance of the two institutions.
"The change in governance may help," says the paper - "Electricity Market
Reform in California" - "but it is not likely to be decisive in the near
term. Explicit guidance from the commission regarding the nature and
trajectory of reforms will be essential if market reform is to be
accomplished within an acceptable time frame." Hogan, of the Kennedy School
of Government, has been writing since 1995 in opposition to California's
market separation.
Also, argues the paper, freeing the California utilities to engage in forward
contracting is no panacea. "The expectation that merely allowing utilities to
participate in forward contracting necessarily would be the solution to high
prices is problematic and not supported by the commission's staff report,"
says the analysis, adding that "putting pressure on buyers to sign contracts
in the present environment may make things worse." If the underlying problem
in California is high cost and low capacity, requiring forward contracting
could harm not only California but also the entire Western U.S. electric
system.
FERC's $150 so-called "soft cap" is a wild card that has the three economists
scratching their heads. "It does not appear in the staff report and there is
little critical analysis of their implications, other than the discussion of
Commissioner [Curt] Hebert." If the intent of the soft cap is to move toward
cost justification for bids above $150/MWh, then FERC is headed into an
administrative morass "that would rival those under wellhead price controls
in the natural gas industry."
If, on the other hand, the soft cap is "truly soft" and would only require
some paper work at FERC and the possibility of a refund if the price is
eventually deemed not just and reasonable, "there might be little impact on
consumer prices (particularly if the principal sources of those high prices
are high costs and regional capacity shortages rather than the exercise of
market power). Even so, the proposal might serve to deter entry and new
investments, thus combining the worst of both worlds, high consumer prices
and little or no new investment."
FERC's proposed order in California also demonstrates confusion about just
what constitutes market power. The paper cites the proposed order's lawyerly,
obfuscatory conclusion that "while this record does not support findings of
specific exercises of market power, and while we are not able to reach
definite conclusions about the actions of individual sellers, there is clear
evidence that in California market structure and rules provide the
opportunity for sellers to exercise market power when supply is tight and can
result in unjust and unreasonable rates under the [Federal Power Act]." The
economists note, "In this regard, the debate is confused because we are
dancing around the words where the truth may be hard to face."
In the case of California, say the economists, there is no evidence of market
power. Even the practice of generators avoiding the day-ahead market in favor
of the real-time market "is a response to bad market design and pricing
incentives (including price caps), but does not demonstrate the exercise of
market power." Nor is bidding above marginal cost necessarily an exercise of
market power, they add. "The distinction between direct marginal cost and
opportunity cost is sometimes lost in the discussion. Hence, a competitive
bidder whose direct cost of generation is $40 but who could sell the same
energy outside California for $100 should bid no less than $100. This would
not be an exercise of market power."


---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 08/25/2000
02:19 PM ---------------------------

"Pierre-Philippe Ste-Marie" <stemarie@icubed.com> on 08/11/2000 03:39:39 PM
To: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc: <rlbryant@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: MSCF Speaker Series

Thx,

We are very anxious to hear her answer

Pierre-Philippe Ste-Marie
--------------------------------------
pstemarie.homestead.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
To: <stemarie@icubed.com>
Cc: <Mary.Alison.Bailey@enron.com>; <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: MSCF Speaker Series

>
> Pierre-Philippe,
>
> I have contacted Allison Bailey to ask her to move her visit
> to the campus to coincide with my presentation.
> I hope to hear from her soon.
>
> Vince Kaminski
>
> P.S.  Nice WEB site
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Pierre-Philippe Ste-Marie" <stemarie@icubed.com> on 08/10/2000 05:13:53
PM
>
> To:   <vkamins@enron.com>
> cc:
> Subject:  MSCF Speaker Series
>
>
>
> Dear Mr. Kaminsky,
>
> Just checking if there was any progress... or  anything I could do to help
> you.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Pierre-Philippe  Ste-Marie
> --------------------------------------
> pstemarie.homestead.com
>
>
>
>
>


Subject: FW: Choking!!! Sorry this is just too funny not to pass along!

> Choking-what to do?
>
> Two cowboys from Texas walk into a roadhouse to wash the trail dust
> from their throats. They stand at the bar, drinking their beers and
> talking
> quietly about cattle prices.
>
> Suddenly, a woman at a table behind them, who had been eating a
> sandwich, begins to cough. After a minute or so, it becomes apparent that
> she is in real distress, and the cowboys turn to look at her.
>
> " Kin ya swaller?" asks one of the Texans. The woman shakes her head.
>
> " Kin ya breathe?" asks the other. The woman, beginning to turn a bit
>   blue shakes her head again.
>
> The first cowboy walks over to her, lifts up the back of her skirt,
> yanks down her panties, and slowly runs his tongue from the back of her
> thigh,up her buttock, and up to the small of her back. This shocks the
> woman
> to the point that with a violent spasm, the obstruction flies out of her
> mouth, and she begins to breathe again.
>
> The cowboy walks back over to the bar and takes a pull on his beer.
>
> His partner says, " Ya know, I'd heard of that there 'hind lick'
> maneuver, but I never seen anybody do it."
>
>
>


--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


I'm not sure whether we want Hoecker to make the fourth point.  What do
others think?

To: Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Draft Talking points about California Gas market

We thought it would be good to basically give Chair Hoecker talking points
with any numbers that Enron provides.  We will visit on these later today
when the numbers are ready (before 3:00).  Comments?
---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 12/12/2000
10:38 AM ---------------------------
From: Leslie Lawner@ENRON on 12/12/2000 11:56 AM
To: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rebecca W
Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ruth Concannon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie
Miller/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane M
Tholt/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: Talking points about California Gas market

Here is my stab at the talking points  to be sent in to FERC along with the
gas pricing info they requested for the California markets.  Let me or
Christi know if you have any disagreements, additions, whatever.  I am
supposed to be out of here at 2:15 today, so if you have stuff to add after
that, get it to Christi.  Thanks.


Start Date: 1/9/02; HourAhead hour: 16;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2002010916.txt


Lamentably, I'm out of the country next week.  Given the B.S. that continues
in Sacramento, I suspect that these legislators are likely to be extremely
cranky at this event (assuming they're not forced to cancel due to the
continued inability to find an answer).  Under the circumstances, I would
suggest that it's likely not the best forum for us.  Might be best to let the
legislators slow roast a bit.  If we feel compelled to participate, I suggest
Steve Kean.

Best,
Jeff

	Paul Kaufman@ECT
	03/23/2001 10:43 AM

		 To: David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Jeff Dasovich
		 Subject: Re: California Energy Summit -- March 30

I always knew you were kind and wise.  Now I know you're generous too!!

I'm out of town next week (I think Jeff is also).

From: David Parquet on 03/22/2001 04:33 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: California Energy Summit -- March 30

I am not interested.  I sent to Mark Palmer, who suggested one of you guys.
Happy Birthday!

----- Forwarded by David Parquet/SF/ECT on 03/22/2001 04:32 PM -----

	"Neudeck,Randall D" <rneudeck@mwd.dst.ca.us>
	03/22/2001 09:10 AM

		 To: "'david.parquet@enron.com'" <david.parquet@enron.com>,
"'swehn@enron.com'" <swehn@enron.com>
		 cc: "Cole Frates (E-mail)" <cfrates@azurix.com>
		 Subject: California Energy Summit -- March 30

Cole Frates asked me to drop you a note  regarding the upcoming California
Energy Summit on March  30.??We previously  sent a letter to Jeff?Skilling
inviting Enron to the Summit, hosted by the  Valley Industry and Commerce
Association (VICA).??Confirmed attendance  includes CEOs and California
legislators (see list below).? News media will  be covering the event.? We
expect approximately 100 attendees.? We  believe it is important that Enron's
views are expressed "by Enron" not by one  of your colleagues.? Please let me
know if you can participate.? The  Summit lasts from 7:45 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.?
You would be on Panel #2 that  lasts from 9:45 to 10:30 a.m.? The Energy
Summit will be held at the  Sheraton Universal Hotel, 333 Universal Terrace
Parkway, Universal City.? I  look forward to hearing from you.???? -- Randall
Neudeck,  213-217-7537, VICA Board of Directors
?
Overall  Moderator? -- KCBS Channel 2  News Anchor Paul Dandridge?

Panel  #2
?-- Los Angeles  Department of Water & Power ) S. David Freeman, General
Manager?
?-- Reliant Energy ) Curtis Kebler,  Director of Asset Commercialization?
?-- Southern California Edison ) Stephen E.  Frank, Chairman, President & CEO
?-- The Gas Company ) Lee Stewart,  President, Energy Transportation Service?
?--?Trans-Elect, Inc. ) Robert  Mitchell, Executive Vice President
Panel?#3?
?--?Senator Richard Alarc?n, Majority  Whip, Chair, Labor & Industrial
Relations Committee
?--?Senator Debra Bowen, Chair,  Committee on Energy, Utilities &
Communications
?--?Assemblymember John Campbell,  Assistant Republican Leader for Policy
Development
?--?Assemblymember Keith S. Richman,  Minority Whip
?--?Assemblymember Fred Keeley, Chair,  Joint Legislative Audit Committee
(tentative)
?--?Assemblymember Paul Koretz, Chair,  Committee on Labor and Employment
?--  Los?Angeles City Council President Pro Tem, Ruth Galanter, and  Chair,
Commerce, Energy & Natural Resources Committee

Keynote Speaker ) Speaker of the Assembly Robert  Hertzberg

?


Donald,

Back in October we had the gas received by HPL at the above meter moved to
Strangers Gas pending a call from Coastal to renegotiate a contract for Sept
2000 gas.  Since volumes can no longer be allocated to stranger,s gas it has
been placed on an MJG deal which was the only valid deal available for Sept
2000.
I assume Coastal has not contacted Brian as of yet.  Is it possible to have a
deal created for Coastal with a price of zero?  I know that we definitely do
not want to pay MJG for this gas, but as long as the volume is sitting on
their deal there is a possibility that someone may inadvertently send the
payment out.  Let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Nick
x36454
---------------------- Forwarded by Nick Moshou/Corp/Enron on 01/29/2001
08:34 AM ---------------------------

Donald P Reinhardt@ECT
10/27/2000 11:09 AM
To: Mary Poorman/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Nick Moshou/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Anita Luong/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian M
Riley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Pat Clynes/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Melissa Graves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vance L Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Coastal Ctr# 96008903 Meter 0984179 Sit#135714

Having discussed the matter with Brian Riley, HPL has no intention of
contacting Coastal to negotiate any type of deal affecting the gas received
in September at at Meter 4179.  It was Brian's opinion that the gas should be
considered Strangers gas since HPL has no contract or price.   It is
suggested that Nick Moshou contact his counterpart at Coastal, relaying this
information and suggesting Coastal's trader contract Brian Riley.

Donald

Mary Poorman@ENRON
10/27/2000 10:05 AM
To: Nick Moshou/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Anita Luong/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian M Riley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Pat
Clynes/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donald P
Reinhardt/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Coastal Ctr# 96008903 Meter 0984179 Sit#135714

Nick,

I understand that they terminated their agreement.  However, I don't feel
that we can confiscate their production.  We need to either pay them for the
gas, or cut a deal to redeliver a like volume to them at another meter.
Given the decrease in prices from September to current and prompt month, I
would guess that they want to be paid.  We won't know that until we call
them.  I don't know where the responsibility lies as far as calling to
explain to them that we took delivery of their gas until the meter was
shut-in.

Please let me know if I can do anything further to assist.

Mary


Attached is a revised version of the consent to assignment.  This version is
specific to the ESA deal, but I'm told that the TurboPark version can be
expected to be close to the same.

Kent, I'm awaiting final Enron input on the facility agreement as well, and I
will let you know as soon as I get it.

Thanks,

Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 12/01/2000 02:15
PM ---------------------------
From: Roseann Engeldorf on 12/01/2000 01:47 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject:

See attached.


I have scheduled a loss payback to APS of 5 mws from EPE for HE 23,24 MDT and
HE 1-5 MT for tonight and tomorrow.  For HE 6 MDT (5 PDT) we will send APS 6
mws.  All mws are delivered to APS at PV.  The Enpower deals are:#569111,
569126 buy from EPE -please input price, and #569116, 569129 sell to APS at
zero.  Prices need to be corrected for the purchase from EPE.  The deals are
routed.  They should show up in the scrape as losses.

Thanks,
Bill