---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT on 12/07/2000
09:54 AM ---------------------------

Bruce Mills@ENRON
11/30/2000 11:24 AM
To: Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: FW: NEW elf bowling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

---------------------- Forwarded by Bruce Mills/Corp/Enron on 11/30/2000
11:22 AM ---------------------------

"Cantu, Veronica" <vcantu@bcm.tmc.edu> on 11/30/2000 11:05:54 AM
To: "'Adrian Cantu'" <acantu@hotmail.com>, "'Amy_Copes@Dell.com'"
<Amy_Copes@Dell.com>, "'Bruce.Mills@enron.com'" <Bruce.Mills@enron.com>,
"'elena morales'" <elena_morales@excite.com>, "'Francisco Sanchez'"
<hcdpsecretary@hotmail.com>, "'Gina.Kane@AACN.org'" <Gina.Kane@AACN.org>,
"'Kristine Best'" <kristinebest@hotmail.com>, "Liau, Katherine"
<Kliau@www.urol.bcm.tmc.edu>
cc:

Subject: FW: NEW elf bowling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonietz, Laurie
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 10:38 AM
To: 'ludmilla'; 'andrea'; Coleman, Angela; Cantu, Veronica; Riezner, Melanie
Subject: NEW elf bowling!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i'm too dumb to figure this version out.  maybe it would help if i read the
rules.....

 - elves2.exe


Jerry's question prompts me to share with all of you my latest one-page
summary of our extraordinary collective achievements in demand reduction
during 2001.  He (and all of you) should take a bow.

Subject: RE: MEETING NOTICE

What solutions?

Jerry Jordan
916-441-1733
fax 916-441-4053

-----Original Message-----
From: Delaney Hunter [mailto:dhunter@s-k-w.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:00 AM
To: Aaron Thomas (E-mail); 'Allan Lippincott'; Ann Cohn (E-mail); 'Ann
Watson'; Anna Ferrera (E-mail); 'Art Carter'; 'assistant for John
Fielder'; Audra Hartmann (E-mail); Barbara Barkovich (E-mail); Bill
Booth (E-mail); 'Bill Dombrowski'; Bill Keese (E-mail); Bill Zobel
(E-mail); 'Bob Foster'; 'Bob Houston'; Brian Kelly (E-mail); Carolyn
McIntyre (E-mail); Catherine Hackney (E-mail); Charles Bacchi (E-mail);
Cindy Richburg Howell (E-mail); 'Craig Brown'; Dan Carroll (E-mail);
Delbert Fore (E-mail); 'Denice Cazalet'; 'Denny Samuel'; 'Dominic
DiMare'; Dorothy Rothrock (E-mail); 'Ed Yates'; Eloy Garcia (E-mail);
Evie Kahl (E-mail); Gary Heath (E-mail); Greg Hardy (E-mail); 'Jack
Flanigan'; Jack Gualco (E-mail); 'Jack Stewart'; 'James Boyd'; Jan
Smutny-Jones (E-mail); Jeanne Cain (E-mail); Jeff Dasovich (E-mail);
'Jerry Jordan'; Jim Groniger (E-mail); Joe Lyons (E-mail); 'Joe Ronan';
John Bridges (E-mail); 'John Fielder'; John Fistolera (E-mail); John
Larrea (E-mail); John Rozsa (E-mail); John White (E-mail); 'Joseph
Alamo'; Julee Malinowski-Ball (E-mail); 'Julia Wright'; Kelly Boyd
(E-mail)
Cc: Anne Davidson (E-mail); Carol Hudson (E-mail); Dave Gamson (E-mail);
Derek Naten (E-mail); Gary Schoonyan (E-mail); Grace Davis (E-mail);
John R. Redding (PS, NE) (E-mail); Karen Jarrell (E-mail); 'Karen
Lindh'; Karen Mills (E-mail); 'Kari Harteloo'; Kassandra Gough (E-mail);
Kathy Brandenburg (E-mail); Katie Kaplan (E-mail); Kay Grosulak
(E-mail); Keith McCrea (E-mail); Kent Palmerton (E-mail); Kent Smith
(E-mail); Kevin Lynch (E-mail); Kevin Smith (E-mail); Kip Lipper
(E-mail); Lawrence Lingbloom (E-mail); Lenny Goldberg (E-mail); Marc
Joseph (E-mail); Marilyn Hawes (E-mail); Mark Smith (E-mail); Marwan
Masri (E-mail); Michael Alcantar (E-mail); Mike Florio (E-mail); 'Mike
Kahl'; Mona Petrochko (E-mail); Pete Conaty (E-mail); Peter Bray
(E-mail); Peter Miller (E-mail); 'Phil Nails'; Phil Stohr (E-mail);
'Rachel King'; Ralph Cavanagh (E-mail); Randy Chinn (E-mail); Ray
Thompson (E-mail); Richard Costigan (E-mail); Richard Mersereau
(E-mail); 'Rick Counihan'; Robert Berry (E-mail); Robin Larson (E-mail);
Scott Tomashefsky (E-mail); Sheryl Carter (E-mail); Steve Pike (E-mail);
Steve Ponder (E-mail); Stu Wilson (E-mail); 'Sue Mara'; Susan Reeder
(E-mail); Terry Winter (E-mail); Tim Schmelzer (E-mail); 'Tommy Ross';
Tony Braun (E-mail); Victoria Schaefer (E-mail)
Subject: MEETING NOTICE

Folks-
We will be having a meeting of the CA Energy Solutions Group on

Wednesday August 15, 2001
9:30 am to 3:00 pm
California Farm Bureau
2300 River Plaza Drive

DJ and I will be working on an agenda in the coming days. Please let us
know
if there is something specific you would like to cover or if the 15th
appears to be a bad date.

Thanks much,
Delaney

P.S. Also be thinking of where you like to have the Annual Retreat --
should
we stick with Yountville or try somewhere new?
 - californiaconsumptiontrendsrevised.doc


Costilla

	From:  Yvette G Connevey @ ENRON                           03/03/2000 10:31 AM

To: Eric Moon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eric Bass/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Castilla Meeting

Please plan to attend a meeting with Brenda Herod regarding Castilla from
1:30 - 2:00 in her office (3748).

 If you have any questions, please call.

Thank You!
Yvette
x3.5953


Back by Popular Demand...

Due to an overwhelming response from the Enron Federal Credit Union sponsored
Financial Planning Workshop in February,
we are pleased to announce that a second workshop has been scheduled:

Wednesday, June 28
5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
Enron Building, Room 5C2
Cookies and beverages will be served.

Each workshop attendee will receive a personal financial management binder
that offers detailed information about
Risk Management, Cash Management, Investment Planning, Tax Planning,
Retirement Planning, and Estate Planning.
Plus, each attendee will have the opportunity to take advantage of a free
financial planning consultation.

Roy Varner, Jr., of Horner, Townsend and Kent, a Penn Mutual Company, will
lead this informative workshop.  Mr. Varner
has been in the Securities Industry for 9 years, and is a Manager at Penn
Mutual. He holds a Bachelor of Arts
in Psychology from the University of Texas-Austin, and has a Series 7 General
Securities License.

Family members are welcome to attend.  Seating is limited, so please reserve
your seat today via E-mail to amanda.quiller@enron.com.


I have changed this deal to Sempra Energy Trading Corp. from Sempra Energy
Resources.  Please select Trading Corp. for all physical power deals.


Per our discussion earlier.

Terri
---------------------- Forwarded by Terri Clynes/HOU/ECT on 12/14/2000 04:25
PM ---------------------------

"Terry Harmel" <harmel@WAPA.GOV>@mapp.org on 11/02/2000 11:44:02 AM
Sent by: owner-rin@mapp.org
To: <John_Olsen@wr.com>
cc: <owner-rin@mapp.org>, <rin@mapp.org>, "Jim Croston" <Croston@WAPA.GOV>,
"Ron Klinefelter" <KLINEFEL@WAPA.GOV>, "Lloyd Linke" <Lloyd@WAPA.GOV>,
"Darrick Moe" <Moe@WAPA.GOV>, "Steve Sanders" <Sanders@WAPA.GOV>
Subject: RE: MAPP Transmission Customers,

John,

Sorry for the delay in responding to your Email,  but I'll do my best to
answer your questions.  Please keep in mind that my knowlege of MAPP's
transmission charges are limited to what I have been told or read and if
someone at MAPP has any additional information that would be helpful, they
should respond or perhaps you could address your questions to them.

It appears that you may be confusing MAPP's "scheduling" fee with the S/D fee
for the CA's - it is confusing that they call their's a scheduling fee also
and there's two of them.  The CA's didn't charge their S/D fee in the past as
that was the practice, but also MAPP was in the past telling CA's that they
should/could NOT charge their S/D fee also.  I believe that it was for
simplicity, based on the assumption that if no one charged that would be the
same if all charged, as we were all members.    Clearly the language in Sched
F now indicates that the transmission customer will pay MAPP's "Scheduling
and Tariff Administration" fee and also the CA's S/D fee.

The following is an excerpt from MAPP tariff found on their Home page:

Ancillary Services are needed with transmission service to maintain
reliability within and among the Control Areas affected by the transmission
service.  The Contractor shall provide, and the Transmission Customer is
required to purchase under this Tariff, (i) Scheduling and Tariff
Administration and (ii) Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation
Sources.  In addition, the Transmission Customer shall schedule transmission
service directly with the applicable Transmission Provider, and shall be
subject to the Transmission Provider's charges for scheduling service, for
each Transmission Provider system in which (i) the Transmission Customer's
resource is located, (ii) the Transmission Customer's load is located, (iii)
power is scheduled into the MAPP Region, and (iv) power is scheduled to leave
the MAPP Region, provided that the Transmission Customer shall not be subject
to more than one scheduling charge for a single system.
A Transmission Provider that is the local Control Area operator shall offer
to provide through its individual open-access transmission tariff (either
itself or through arrangements with other parties) the following Ancillary
Services to a Transmission Customer serving load within the Transmission
Provider's Control Area (i) Regulation and Frequency Response, (ii) Energy
Imbalance, (iii) Operating Reserve - Spinning, and (iv) Operating Reserve -
Supplemental.  The Transmission Customer serving load within the Transmission
System is required to acquire these Ancillary Services from the local Control
Area operator, from a third party, or by self-supply.
Sections 3.1 and 3.2 list the Ancillary Services offered under this Tariff.
3.1 Scheduling and Tariff Administration Service:  The rates and/or
methodology are described in Schedule 1.
3.2 Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service:  The
rates and/or methodology are described in Schedule 2.

In regards to the examples that you have listed, it would be my opinion that
the act of reserving transmision does not result in a Scheduling and Dispatch
fee, it is the actual Scheduling of the energy which would incur the charge.
Transmission reserved but not scheduled on would not incur a charge.  If you
were to schedule energy on the examples you have given, then a S/D fee would
be charged against each of your examples..

If I can be of any more help, please let me know.

Thanks

Terry>> <John_Olsen@wr.com> 11/01/00 04:05PM >>>

Terry,

Excuse me for my ignorance but it is my understanding that the original
MAPP F rate included scheduling fees when transacting between MAPP members.
With MAPP F being extended to the border company's interconnects, again it
was my understanding that the border company would charge their scheduling
fee for any schedule that left/entered their control area as part of a MAPP
F request.

So that I am clear on what you are planning to do, could you please tell me
what charges WAPA would assess for the following examples.

1.  WR reserves transmission from OAHE to ShercoGen using MAPP F.
2.  WR reserves transmission from OAHE to KCPL.WR using MAPP F.
3.  WR reserves transmission from MILESCITY TO KCPL.WR using MAPP F.

Thank you in advance for clearing this issue up for me.

John
Energy Trader
Generation Services

                    "Terry
                    Harmel"              To:
<Bruce.McIver@BCHydro.bc.ca>, <Dean.Luciuk@BCHydro.bc.ca>,
                    <harmel@WAPA.        <Lisa.Will@BCHydro.bc.ca>,
<Michelle.Hiley@BCHydro.bc.ca>, <rin@mapp.org>
                    GOV>                 cc:     "Jim Croston"
<Croston@WAPA.GOV>, "Ron Klinefelter"
                    Sent by:             <KLINEFEL@WAPA.GOV>, "Lloyd Linke"
<Lloyd@WAPA.GOV>, "Darrick Moe"
                    owner-rin@map        <Moe@WAPA.GOV>, "Steve Sanders"
<Sanders@WAPA.GOV>
                    p.org                Subject:     RE: MAPP Transmission
Customers,

                    11/01/00
                    14:58

Bruce,

I'll try to answer your question and clarify our current policy.  As you
will recall, WAPA originally administered it's own tariff and transmission
was purchased directly from WAPA for all of our constrained paths.  There
wasn't a separate Scheduling and Dispatch fee assessed for transmission
purchased under the WAPA tariff, as this fee was built into the
transmission rate.  We posted ATC's for all of our constrained paths (Miles
City, SPC, SWPA (now AECI)) and MAPP Schedule F was not offered for energy
transfers into or out of the MAPP area.  WAPA did not charge a Scheduling
and Dispatch fee for transmission purchased under MAPP Schedule F, because
it was not a common practice by any of the MAPP members to do so.

 A FERC ruling required MAPP  to offer  MAPP Schedule F to Members and
non-members alike, and to eventually open up the use of MAPP F from border
to border, without the requirement to purchase transmission from the border
company. These were major changes, and they occurred in steps, with MAPP
initially offering service schedule F to everyone, then offering Service
Schedule F rates or the border company tariff across the constrained
interfaces, and finally using service schedule F for all transmission into,
out of, or through MAPP, if less than 2 years in duration. During the
transition, WAPA was still responsible for posting the constrained
interfaces, monitoring the flows and re-posting when required.   We charged
our Scheduling and Dispatch fee for all requests that used service Schedule
F to transition across the constrained interfaces, and continue to do so
today. Now the system has evolved where anyone can purchase MAPP schedule F
and MAPP F can be utilized to transfer e!
nergy into, across and out of the entire MAPP member system.  WAPA no
longer administers the constrained interfaces for short term transactions
and MAPP as the transmission provider is responsible for approving all
transmission requests (less then 2 years).  When that change took place,
MAPP was approached and asked to include the S/D fee as part of the MAPP
Schedule F service Fee but MAPP was unwilling to take on this
responsibility.  WAPA management therefore made the decision to start
separately charging a Scheduling and Dispatch fee for all service Schedule
F utilizing our transmission.  This was initially delayed, until we were
able to develop  the software necessary to implement a billing program
automatically..   If the software and programming had been available
earlier, WAPA would have assessed the fee earlier.  Now the programming is
in place and the decision was made to proceed.
I hope this answers your question.  Yes, we have always charged the S/D fee
for MAPP Schedule F transactions across our constrained interfaces but have
now expanded this fee to include all MAPP Schedule F OASIS requests into,
out of , or through our system whether they cross a constrained interface
or not.  The fee is per OASIS request per day and the fee is assessed to
the purchaser of the transmission.

If you have any additional questions, please feel free to call or Email.

Thank you

Terry

>>> "McIver, Bruce" <Bruce.McIver@BCHydro.bc.ca> 11/01/00 06:01AM >>>
I thought we were already getting charged this.

> ----------
> From:   Terry Harmel[SMTP:harmel@WAPA.GOV]
> Sent:   Tuesday, October 31, 2000 2:26 PM
> To:     rin@mapp.org
> Cc:     Jim Croston; Ron Klinefelter; Lloyd Linke; Darrick Moe; Steve
> Sanders
> Subject:     MAPP Transmission Customers,
>
> MAPP Transmission Customers,
>
> Effective Wednesday, November 1, 2000 @ 00:00 CST. Western Area Power
> Administration (Western), Upper Great Plains Region (UGPR) will begin
> charging the current Western UGPR "Scheduling, System Control and
Dispatch
> Service" charge, as outlined in Western's Open Access Transmission
Service
> Tariff, for all schedules into, out of, and across the WAUE/WAUW control
> areas utilizing MAPP Schedule F.
>
> If you have any questions about this change related to MAPP Schedule F,
> please contact MAPP Transmission Operations (651-632-8508, or
> transcoords@mapp.org).  For other questions related to this billing by
> Western, please contact Mr. Terry Harmel at 605-882-7541.
>
> Thankyou
>


Once I get the draft I will set up a conference call with the people who can
provide the input on the document.  If it would be better to have the call
before let me know, and I will try to set it up.  I'm free tomorrow am if
that is a good time for you.

kay

"Heather Brown" <hbrown@bracepatt.com> on 10/05/2000 10:48:54 AM
To: <Kay.Mann@enron.com>
cc:

Subject: Re: enovate revolver DASH

Kay -- We've started on a draft of the Credit Agmt, but it will have a lot of
holes in it.  Have there been any further discussions re:  the specific terms
of the loan (financial covenants, etc.), how the guaranties will work, etc.?

Thanks!  Heather


Fellow Analysts and Associates,

The following is the agenda for the DePelchin Service Project on Saturday,
July 15th.

We look forward to seeing you then, so we can paint the Children's Gym.  (If
you think you're going to be messy, be sure to wear some old clothes!!)

The same schedule still applies.   Thank you so much for your participation
and patience!!!    Also, if you know of any other people who may be
interested we'd love to hear from them!   Or if you don't see your name below
- please let us know!

Gallin Fortunov  x58706
Julie Davidson   x36882

******************************************************************************
********************************************************
The following is the agenda for the DePelchin Service Project on Saturday,
July 15th:

8:45a.m.-9:00a.m.   - Meet at Depelchin Children's Center.       Please, see
attached file for Directions.
9:00a.m. - 9:15a.m. - Brief introduction by DePelchin's staff.
9:30a.m. - 12:00p.m. - Service Project.
12:30p.m. - Lunch.    End of Project

Make sure to come and pick up your free A/A T-Shirts as well as a detailed
map of DePelchin at EB0603b on the 6th floor.

Please note to which team you have been assigned:

******************************************************************************
********************************************************


Paul:

Great news!  Were there any difficult questions raised by the SFA?

Mark


No position currently. To volatile and crazy. Was thinking about how this
would affect the generators.

Keep me posted.

Thanks,
Michelle


Start Date: 4/26/01; HourAhead hour: 20;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No
variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001042620.txt

---- Energy Import/Export Schedule ----
*** Final schedule not found for preferred schedule.
     Details:

  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  SC_ID: ECTRT
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 4/26/01
  TIE_POINT: PVERDE_5_DEVERS
  INTERCHG_ID: CISO_EPMI_DESERT
  ENGY_TYPE: NFRM


Susan,
I don't know if such a letter exists.  Tom, do you know - also, who might be
able to help
Susan with the information requested below?

	Susan Elledge @ ENRON
	02/06/2001 01:33 PM

To: scott.neal@enron.com
cc:
Subject: Reliant Energy-Entex -- Large Volume Contract Customers Agreements

Hello Scott,

I recently received a request from Entex to provide a list of active
contracts between ENA and Reliant Entex.  I have come across a file
containing more than one contract for them, specifically the Natural Gas
Services Agreement - Large Volume Contract Customers (96001983, dated
9/1/93), and the Natural Gas Sales Agreement - Large Volume Contract
Customers (96001980, dated 9/1/93).  By letters from you dated 2/21/97, both
of these contracts' terms were extended to 3/31/00. Additionally, there is a
letter dated 1/13/00 extending the term of the Services Agreement
to10/31/02.  I would like to know if there was a 1/13/00 letter extending the
term of the Sales Agreement.  If there was, I need to get a copy for the
file, and make the amendment in Global Contracts.

Thanks for your help.  If you have any questions, please give me a call.

Susan Elledge
5-9989


Jan,

Attached is a graph describing a structure that you guys might also be interested in.  It is a floor and an indexed ceiling around an at the money call.  Give me a call if you are interested and I can go over it with you.

thanks,

Kim


It appears that the following email may not have been clear.  You have to copy all documents yourself.

This is my cheat sheet if it helps:

H Drives:
1.  Each person will have to move any data over personally from the old H drive (which is now Z:) drive to their new H drive.
2. The Z: drive (old H:) will be removed from UBS employees on Thursday night.

O Drives:
1. For the old O or M drives go to O:\ESTATE\ O (or M ? pending location of data) and copy to the new common O.  The Estate O and M will be removed from UBS employees on Thursday night.

Do not delete anything and only copy information which is complies with the policy.  Please make sure that those people who are not in the office are contacted and comply.

Louise

To:		All Enron Employees Transferring to UBS Warburg Energy (or its affiliates)

Under the terms of the various agreements among certain Enron entities and UBS AG, certain Enron data and documents may be provided to UBS.  To ensure compliance with those agreements, Enron's document retention policy, as well as directives of various investigative agencies, the attached protocol regarding the process for migration of any information or data to UBS has been developed.

Please review the protocol carefully.  Then, complete the attached Certification and return it, with attachments, to Linda Guinn at EB 3829a no later than February 11, 2002.

Questions about this matter may be directed to Michelle Cash at (713) 853-6401 or Francisco Pinto-Leite at (713) 345-7942 .

Protocol Document and Data Copy Instructions

Certification Document


Thanks for the offer Ms Kupiecki, but since you carried so much of the weight
last case, I feel obliged to compile this time round.


Outside of moving the deals to another book, I don't think you can avoid
liquidating at the end of the month.  So I'm going to leave these in the
portfolio.

Thanks for the info.
Robin

	Enron Capital Management

	From:  David Baumbach                           11/16/2000 02:40 PM

To: Robin Rodrigue/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: OutDated Book IDs

Robin, the book for Todd Richardson is technically dead.  We are the deals
that are in there monthly.  Is there a better way to do this?  We hate having
to remember to liquidate it at the end of the month.  I think it deals in
there until Aug 2001.

Dave

Robin Rodrigue
11/16/2000 02:32 PM
To: Crystal Hyde/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kyle R Lilly/HOU/ECT@ECT, B Scott
Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jason Wolfe/NA/Enron@ENRON, David Baumbach/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Dutch Quigley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Errol McLaughlin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Souad
Mahmassani/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bruce
Mills/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Bilal Bajwa/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: OutDated Book IDs

Please review the attached file.  The books listed for each trader are marked
for removal from the portfolio.  If you are currently using one of these
books or will be using it in the future please highlight the book id in
YELLOW.  If the book is no longer used please highlight the book id in BLUE.
When you have finished please return the file to me.

Thanks for your help,
Robin


Jeanne,
It seems that we are suggesting that the price of energy be representative of
PG&E's avoided cost.  The previous decisions seem to mix up the use of
"avoided cost"  and the real "market price" that the PX was intended to
portray.

If we stress the "avoided cost" aspect, it seems that we would be agreeing
with PG&E's use of the soft-capped-ISO price -- or even with the use of
something as low as embedded cost.

I think we might stress using a substitute for what the PX was intended to
portray -- the price that buyers and sellers are really transacting upon.  We
could refer to some of the good words in the "Preferred Policy Decision":

"From the perspective of both wholesale and retail customers the most
critical contribution of the Exchange lies in the auction determination of
real time pricing of electricity and the transparent manifestation of these
price signals.  In the absence of such an institution the market will be
hidden and the price signals obscured or subject to selective, discriminatory
dissemination" (page 12)

Another point might be the fact that implementing PG&E's proposed change
would, in effect, be a selective rate increase for Direct Access with no
notice.

Note to Internal people:
I'm still working on our discussion document -- I will forward as soon as I
can.

/Tamara.


Another victory at FERC!

Although Enron did not file a protest in this docket, nor was a signatory to
the joint Coral/Dynegy protest, I worked with Dynegy on forming the arguments
against the proposed change to OASIS (first to confirm after scheduling
deadline) at NERC.   Dynegy and Enron and a few others voted against the NERC
request but lost the vote thus leading to the NERC filing.  In my opinion,
such a practice would advantage incumbent utilities and their affiliate
marketers who tend to buy pre-confirmed Firm service.

One of the main arguments I made at NERC and a chief reason why FERC denied
the request is cited in the order:

"Dynegy/Coral argues that the proposed standard addresses the problem of
unused transmission capacity caused by some customers not confirming accepted
transmission requests, but does not address the underlying problem caused by
the practice of some transmission providers of delaying their acceptance of
requests for daily, firm transmission service, even when customers submit
their requests early. "

FERC further acknowleded:
"If transmission providers would all respond to requests for daily,firm
transmission service on a timely basis, then customers would have adequate
time to confirm before reservations are scheduled, and the MIC's proposed
business practice might not be needed."

This is the correct message for FERC to send back to NERC - to put the burden
on the transmission providers to expedite requests - not penalize the
customers for getting OASIS requests in early.

---------------------- Forwarded by Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT on 07/02/2001 02:59
PM ---------------------------

"Grabiak, Terri J." <TGrabia@alleghenypower.com>@nerc.com on 07/02/2001
01:39:42 PM
Sent by: owner-mips@nerc.com
To: "'mips@nerc.com'" <mips@nerc.com>
cc:

Subject: Business Practice Ruling

For those of you that haven't seen this.  FERC denied our request.

T

 95 FERC 4  61,492
                          UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                    FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

     Before Commissioners: Curt H'bert, Jr., Chairman;
                          William L. Massey, Linda Breathitt,
                          Pat Wood, III and Nora Mead Brownell.

     Open Access Same-time Information
       System (OASIS) and Standards of           Docket No. RM95-9-013
       Conduct

     ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR EXPERIMENTAL BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARD

                           (Issued June 29, 2001)

          We will deny the request from the Market Interface Committee

     of the North American Electric Reliability Council (MIC) for

     expedited approval of its proposed experiment on the treatment of

     unconfirmed requests for daily, firm transmission service, for

     the reasons stated below.

     BACKGROUND

          On May 29, 2001, the MIC filed a request to modify the

     Commission's OASIS Business Practice Standards adopted in Order
             1
     No. 638,  to add a new business practice standard dealing with

     accepted daily, firm point-to-point transmission service that has

     not been confirmed and to modify a related footnote to Table 4-2

     on Reservation Timing Limits.  The MIC requests that the

     Commission implement this proposal on a mandatory, experimental

     basis for six months beginning no later than June 30, 2001.  The

     MIC further states that, within four months of the effective

     date, it will provide the Commission with an assessment of the

               1
                Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of
          Conduct, Order No. 638, FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations
          Preambles 1996-2000 4 31,092 (2000).

          Docket No. RM95-9-013     -2-

     experiment and whether it should be revised, discontinued, or

     made permanent.

          On June 5, 2001, the Commission issued a notice of filing

     and request for comments regarding the MIC filing.  The notice

     gave a brief description of the MIC proposal and invited comments
                                2
     on or before June 11, 2001.   Comments were invited on the MIC

     proposal generally and specifically on whether Commission action

     is needed by June 30, 2001, as requested by the MIC.

          On June 11, 2001, Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc. and Coral

     Power, LLC (collectively "Dynegy/Coral") jointly filed a protest

     opposing the MIC request.

     Dynegy/Coral argue that the MIC proposal should not be granted on

     an expedited basis and that it should be rejected outright.

     Dynegy/Coral's protest was the sole comment filed in response to

     the June 5, 2001 notice and request for comments.

     DISCUSSION

          We will deny the MIC s request for expedited approval of its

     proposed experiment on the treatment of unconfirmed requests for

     daily, firm transmission service for three reasons.  First,

     although the MIC requests expedited approval of its proposed

     experiment, the MIC s proposal presents no reason why expedited

     treatment is needed.  Moreover, although our June 5, 2001 notice

     specifically invited comment on this issue, no comments were

     filed in support of expedited treatment or giving reasons why

               2
                This shortened comment period was used to accommodate the
          MIC's request for action on or before June 30, 2001.

          Docket No. RM95-9-013     -3-

     prompt action is needed.  In fact, Dynegy/Coral s protest, the

     sole comment filed, argued against expedited approval of the

     proposed experiment both because it opposed approval of the

     experiment outright, and because Dynegy/Coral argues that

     implementation during the summer peak period would cause problems

     for customers denied service under the MIC s proposal.  Given the

     absence of a showing of need for expedited treatment, we will

     reject MIC s request for expedited approval of its proposed

     experiment.

          The MIC proposal would allow transmission providers, at

     reservation request deadlines, to retract their prior acceptance

     of unconfirmed customer requests for daily, firm transmission

     service and substitute pending pre-confirmed requests for such

     service, in order of queue time, up to the amount of daily, firm

     available transmission capability remaining.  The proposal

     includes phrases such as, "the transmission provider has the

     right to move to a retracted status" and "after which time that

     request may be retracted."  These phrases do not provide a

     standard for the transmission provider to use in deciding whether

     to retract customers' unconfirmed accepted requests for daily,

     firm point-to-point transmission service.  Careful monitoring

     would be necessary to insure that the proposal is not implemented

     in a discriminatory manner.  A customer whose request for

     transmission service had been accepted would have no way to

     predict whether a transmission provider might choose to retract

          Docket No. RM95-9-013     -4-

     its acceptance, which would make it difficult for the customer to

     make alternative arrangements.

          Dynegy/Coral argues that the proposed standard addresses the

     problem of unused transmission capacity caused by some customers

     not confirming accepted transmission requests, but does not

     address the underlying problem caused by the practice of some

     transmission providers of delaying their acceptance of requests

     for daily, firm transmission service, even when customers submit

     their requests early.  Dynegy/Coral contends this practice puts

     customers in a bind that forces them to make alternative

     arrangements as a protective mechanism.  Dynegy/Coral argues that

     customers should not be punished for taking such precautions,

     even if they result in some unused transmission capacity.

     Dynegy/Coral argues that a better solution to avoid unused

     capacity would be for transmission providers to more uniformly

     respond to requests for daily, firm transmission service on a

     timely basis, rather than by taking the unwarranted step of

     giving greater priority to pre-confirmed service requests.

     Further, Dynegy/Coral argues that the MIC proposal would force

     customers to purchase transmission services they will be unable

     to use.

          We agree with Dynegy/Coral that the MIC proposal does not

     address whether the time period for transmission providers to

     evaluate requests for daily, firm transmission service needs to

     be clarified or shortened and that this is a relevant issue.  If

     transmission providers would all respond to requests for daily,

          Docket No. RM95-9-013     -5-

     firm transmission service on a timely basis, then customers would

     have adequate time to confirm before reservations are scheduled,

     and the MIC's proposed business practice might not be needed.  We

     request that the MIC reconsider its motion in light of the

     concerns raised by Dynegy/Coral.  After considering these issues,

     the MIC may, at its option, make a revised request for an

     experimental business practice standard.

     The Commission orders:

          The request by MIC for expedited approval of a proposed
     experiment on the

     treatment of unconfirmed requests for daily, firm transmission
     service is hereby denied

     without prejudice, as discussed in the body of this order.

     By the Commission.

     ( S E A L )

                                        David P. Boergers,
                                              Secretary.

Terri J. Grabiak
General Manager, Transmission Marketing

Allegheny Power
800 Cabin Hill Drive, Room B101
Greensburg, PA  15601

(724) 838-6748
(724) 838-6156 - fax

mailto:tgrabia@alleghenypower.com <mailto:tgrabia@alleghenypower.com>


Please find attached the ETS IT 2001 Goals and Objectives.  Through year end
we will continue to review the goals/objectives from the other ETS depatments
to insure the IT goals are properly aligned to assist in the successful
completion of all appropriate ETS activities.


----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 12/13/2000 03:14 PM -----

	"Julee Malinowski-Ball" <jmball@ns.net>
	12/13/2000 02:57 PM
	Please respond to "Julee Malinowski-Ball"

		 To: "Katie Kaplan" <kaplan@iepa.com>, "Tom Ross" <tross@mcnallytemple.com>,
"Sue Mara" <smara@enron.com>, "Stephanie-Newell"
<stephanie-newell@reliantenergy.com>, "Rob Lamkin"
<rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, "Richard Hyde" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, "Pigott
Jack" <jackp@calpine.com>, "Paula Hall-Collins"
<paula.hall-collins@williams.com>, "Norton Kelli"
<knorton@mcnallytemple.com>, "McNally Ray" <rmcnally@mcnallytemple.com>,
"Marty Wilson" <mwilson@pstrategies.com>, "Lynn Lednicky" <lale@dynegy.com>,
"Kristin Vellandi" <kvellandi@pstrategies.com>, "kent Palmerton"
<kent.palmerton@williams.com>, "Kassandra Gough" <kgough@calpine.com>, "Karen
Edson" <kedson@ns.net>, "John Stout" <John_H_Stout@reliantenergy.com>, "Joe
Ronan" <joer@calpine.com>, "Jeff Dasovich" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>, "Jean
Munoz" <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com>, "Jan Smutny-Jones" <smutny@iepa.com>,
"Greg Blue" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, "Curtis Kebler"
<curtis_l_kebler@reliantenergy.com>, "Bob Weisenmiller" <rbw@mrwassoc.com>,
"Baker Carolyn" <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, "B Brown Andy"
<andybrwn@earthlink.net>, "Andy Brown" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, "Douglas Kerner"
<DKK@eslawfirm.com>, "Dave Modisette" <dmodis@ns.net>
		 cc: "Cary Rudman" <cjrudman@softcom.net>, "Hedy Govenar"
<hgovenar@acom2.com>, "Scott Govenar" <sgovenar@govadv.com>, "Bev Hansen"
<bhansen@lhom.com>
		 Subject: Follow-up to Governor's Press Conference

The following is the list of suppliers referenced by Governor Davis in today
's Washington, DC press conference.  For those of you that are IEP members,
it would be helpful if you forwarded to IEP any comments you have made or
plan on making to the press.

These suppliers have advised the ISO that they are unwilling to sell power
into the California markets.

Dynegy Power Marketing
Trans Alta
Eugene Water and Electric
Southern Energy Trading
PowerEx (BC Hydro)
Public Service Colorado
Enron Power Marketing
Portland General
Avista (Washington Water Power)
Idaho Power Company
PPL Montana
Seattle City Light
Puget Sound Energy

Julee Malinowski-Ball
Edson + Modisette
jmball@ns.net


Start Date: 2/6/02; HourAhead hour: 2;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final Schedules\2002020602.txt
###Cannot locate a Preferred or Revised_Preferred Schedule that matches the FINAL Individual Interchange Schedule.  Unable to assign deal number.


Given the overwhelming response so far, I think a meeting may be necessary to
get this project moving.  Thanks. DF

	From:  Susan Scott                           06/28/2000 11:41 AM

To: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK
Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michele Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bill Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum@ENRON,
Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Julia White/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, sstojic@gbmdc.com
cc:

Subject: Capacity Options on TW

So far I have not received comments from anyone on the attached.
If you think it would be productive to get everyone together (possibly as
early as Friday?) for about an hour to discuss capacity options, I will set
up a meeting.   Please let me know one way or the other.
Thank you.
---------------------- Forwarded by Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron on 06/28/2000
11:39 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Susan Scott                           06/21/2000 12:41 PM

To: Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin
Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, TK
Lohman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michele Lokay/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine
Stokes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bill Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum@ENRON,
Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Julia White/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley
Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, sstojic@gbmdc.com
cc:

Subject: Capacity Options on TW

Attached is a preliminary draft of a filing for capacity options on
Transwestern.  The attachments include a filing letter, proposed tariff
language and a proposed form agreement.

Obviously there are still quite a few details to be worked out.  I am
distributing a draft at this early stage in hopes of initiating a dialogue
about the larger issues first.  A few that come to mind are whether we want
to commit to selling options online, how best to explain or justify the
option fee, and what specifically in the industry has changed such that FERC
should depart from existing policy and allow TW to essentially reserve future
capacity for shippers.  Please let me know your thoughts on these and any
other issues.

I would prefer to wait to discuss comments on wording, other conforming
changes to the tariff, and other comments concerning form until after we have
resolved the substantive issues.  Thanks.


Nelson,

I don't see any problems with #1. For number 2, mention that the paper was written when you were a studentt
at Rice.

Vince

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Neale, Nelson
Sent:	Wednesday, June 20, 2001 8:46 AM
To:	Kaminski, Vince J
Cc:	Shanbhogue, Vasant
Subject:	Rice

Vince,

A couple of brief issues:

1) I have been asked to deliver a lecture(s) to a Rice environmental engineering class in the fall.  Most of the preparatory work for the class is already complete, so I don't foresee any large time commitment for this endeavor.  If there is a problem, let me know.

2) A manuscript based on my dissertation work was recently accepted for publication by ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering.  I would like to use my Enron address and contact information on the work, but am unsure of company policies.  I can certainly default to the Rice information if there is a problem.

Nelson


Please reserve the below date and time on your schedule for a mandatory
training session.  The training is in regards to "End of Month Roll-off & End
of Month Roll-in, on Positions."
The training session will take place as follows:

     Tuesday, November 21, 2000
      9:30 AM - 11:00 AM
       EB32C2

Again, this training is mandatory.

Thank you.


Susan, Thanks to you and Walt and all others who worked on this.  Having a
check of that magnitude come to us by June certainly
exceeded my expectations.  And this did not just happen...you folks did an
excellent job of making it happen.

Now Walt, if you can just assure us that in Mr. Todoroff's situation that
justice will be served!

Thanks again.

	Walt Zimmerman
	06/08/00 03:26 PM

		 To: Susan Ralph/Houston/Eott@Eott
		 cc: Michael Burke/Houston/Eott@Eott, Steve Duffy/Houston/Eott@Eott, Dana
Gibbs/Houston/Eott@Eott, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lori
Maddox/Houston/Eott@Eott
		 Subject: Insurance Recovery on Todoroff Matter

Susan, I spoke this morning with Nancy Manderson (outside counsel for our
crime policy insurer).  She has accepted my changes to the Assignment and
Release, and she will be forwarding an original of the Assignment and Release
to EOTT for execution.  She said we will have our check for $2,503,000.00
next week!  The check will be delivered to Phillip Bair with our insurance
broker.

We also had a long conversation about the insurer's claim against Gas
Producers.  I shared with Nancy some of the research we have done on the
conversion claim against Gas Producers.  I assured her that EOTT would fully
cooperate if the insurer did pursue the claim against Gas Producers.  I
gathered from her comments, however, that the insurer is concerned that Gas
Producers may not have sufficient assets to satisfy anything but a small
judgment.  I do not know whether the insurer has actually conducted a
"financial investigation" of Gas Producers.


Do you mean an ENA sale to Keyspan?

	From:  Joann Collins @ ENRON                           01/22/2000 04:25 PM

To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT, Victor Lamadrid/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Missing dealtickets in Sitara

Chris, besides the dealticket i mention below, another one is missing.
Keyspan on 1/14/00 for 900dth to COH7-1???

thanks
joann

---------------------- Forwarded by Joann Collins/Corp/Enron on 01/22/2000
04:23 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Joann Collins                           01/22/2000 03:39 PM

To: Chris Germany/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Re: Xtra Gas bought @ COH

Chris, i cannot find this dealticket in Sitara??????which means i cannot path
Please look at the "highlighted red" below.

thanks
joann

---------------------- Forwarded by Joann Collins/Corp/Enron on 01/22/2000
03:37 PM ---------------------------

	Enron North America Corp.

	From:  Joann Collins                           01/18/2000 10:46 AM

To: kdestep@columbiaenergygroup.com
cc:

Subject: Re: Xtra Gas bought @ COH

FOR 1/19 ONLY:
K38021  NOW=14163

kdestep@columbiaenergygroup.com on 01/18/2000 09:31:33 AM
To: Joann Collins/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject: Re: Xtra Gas bought @ COH

That's when the deal was done apparently.  I don't care when I get the gas as
long as it's before the month's over.  I guess you didn't know about it??

Joann_Collins@enron.com on 01/18/2000 10:23:16 AM
Please respond to Joann_Collins@enron.com

To: Kara Destephanis/CES/ColumbiaGas@COLUMBIAGAS
cc:

Subject: Re: Xtra Gas bought @ COH

the date is 1/13???

kdestep@columbiaenergygroup.com on 01/18/2000 09:19:36 AM

To:   Joann Collins/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:

Subject:  Xtra Gas bought @ COH

On 1/13 Brian Perrone bought 14,163 dth from Chris Germany at COH 7-5 at
$2.60.

Please let me know when/how you would like to deliver this gas.
Thank you Joann.