Homan,  please print this memo and the attachment so we can review.  Thanks
Cindy
---------------------- Forwarded by Cindy Horn/LON/ECT on 16/05/2001 09:02
---------------------------
From: Rein amund Schultz/Enron@EUEnronXgate on 15/05/2001 07:14 GDT
To: Cindy Horn/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: FW: Access PowerDesk & EDM (Enron Data Manager)

;-----Original Message-----
From: ; Schultz, Rein-Amund;
Sent:;; 14 May 2001 10:35
To:;;;; Horn, Chris
Cc:;;;; Lien, Thor; Kristiansen, Hein; Branem Hansen, Trond
Subject:;;;;;;; Access PowerDesk & EDM (Enron Data Manager)

PowerDesk:
For further description of the different roles Trond will probably have more
information.

EnronUserName;;;;;;; Administrator NormalUser ReadOnlyUser PLReportUser
MTMApprover
-------------------- ------------- ---------- ------------ ------------
-----------
abartary;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
acoll1;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
akirk;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N
banderse;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
blokken;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
CFindlay;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
cviejou;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
dhardy;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
eseidel;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
fflykt;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
gartmann;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
hkleven;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y
jpatel1;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
kasklund;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N
kurdahl;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
LAlfarru;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
Landerss;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
mlarsson;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
ncornish;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
OAgdeste;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y
ofacih;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
Pbekkest;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y
pmaley;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N
prichter;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
psymons;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
pyoxall;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
randerse;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
rhareton;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
sbain;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
sschumac;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
stenngre;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
tbranemh;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y
tlien;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
trickett;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; N
tulset;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
vmortens;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N
YTakei;;;;;;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;; N;;;;;;;;;;; Y;;;;;;;;;;; N

EDM:
Analyst & controllers have full access to timeseries they own (in the DB they
have the role in).
Read to others timeseries.

Administartors:
Full access (in the DB they have the role in).

Physical data (meter values etc) are located in database
ndr_core_oslo_physical
Nord Pool data, weather data, etc are located in database
ndr_core_oslo_trading

For furher information please contact Hein Kristiansen.

<<edm_access.xls>>

Rein


Louis

Thank you!

I have been really crazy and was going to come down and talk to you this
afternoon.

They were deducting me for parking 9 and parking 11.

Thanx again,

Chris Dorland


Do you code or approve invoices for goods and services that are processed by the Houston-based Accounts Payable center?
If yes, please read and respond to this e-mail.

On May 1st, iBuyit Payables will be activated for all organizations supported by the Houston-based Accounts Payable processing center (for example, invoices submitted via AP drop box to 600 Jefferson, Houston).  If you code or approve these invoices, the iBuyit Payables project team has important information to share with you about the iBuyit Payables system, training, and the May 1st transition to the new system.

To identify yourself as a future iBuyit Payables Coder or Approver, please respond to this e-mail upon receipt with the following information:
*  Full Name (First, Middle, Last)
*  E-mail address
*  Business unit (For example, Corporate, ETS, EWS, EES, or EBS)
*  Do you code invoices? (Yes/No)
*  Do you approve invoices? (Yes/No)
*  Are you a remote user? For example, do you dialup to access the Enron network? (Yes/No)

This will ensure that you receive important iBuyit Payables information.  Thank you for your response!

Attached is important iBuyit Payables training information:

<Embedded Picture (Metafile)>


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Poston, David
Sent:	Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:20 PM
To:	Williams III, Bill; Mallory, Chris; Platter, Phillip; Bishop, Serena; Gilbert, Scotty
Cc:	Nat, Steve; Davis, Pete; Burleigh, Matt; Amador, Susan
Subject:	FSP Ready Again for Production

Good Afternoon FSP users,

We have just finished a comprehensive FSP rebuild & testing phase for the next release of FSP.  The rebuild should address all the issues raised in the previous go-live as well as some additional capabilities for robustness.  Please note that we have already executed several hundred different test case scenarios & performed some stress testing using data before the Enron collapse.

What we need now is help from you to continue to identify enhancements and/or bugs with FSP so that we can go-live with FSP once the new company starts trading.  Susan Amador will be available to help in any testing.  You should probably also coordinate with her when you are about to start testing so that our continuing testing doesn't interfere with your testing.  PWRTESTN & PWRTESTP should be all setup for your use.

Here are some of the bug fixes & enhancements we have rolled-out with this latest release:
1.  Bid Curve - Ability to bid on zero volumes (for import, export, and wheels)
2.  Rebuild of all FSP application utilizing Direct Oracle Access components for faster database access & higher reliability.
3.  Bug Fixes on database commits to eliminate database "deadlocks".
4.  New aggregation scout to "stream-line" the template writing process & improve template writing performance.
5.  SQL tuned "Hour Ahead" template writing.  Confirmed performance of 1min 30 seconds on heavy transaction volume days.
6.  And many other small previously unidentified bugs.

We are very excited about this newest release and are looking forward to your feedback over the next couple of days.  Susan will probably be your best contact but please feel free to contact me at anytime.

Thanks,  David Poston
# 713-345-7834


RTO Week

Day 3 -- October 17, 2001

Standardizing RTO Tariffs

The morning panel focused on which transmission services should be standardized in RTO tariffs across an interconnection or the entire country.  There were many diverse views on the panel, and the Staff and commissioners were somewhat more engaged in this session.

The panelists were:  Ricky Bittle, Arkansas Electric Coop; Jim Caldwell, American Wind; Peter Esposito, Dynegy; Rory McMinn, New Mexico PSC; Glenn Ross, Dominion Resources; Audrey Zibelman, XCEL Energy.

General Observations

This panel had a lot less agreement than the previous panels.  Dynegy opposes standardization of a transmission tariff and urges FERC to give strong guidance to stakeholders and then let the stakeholders work out the details of a new tariff.  Dominion advocates a more prescriptive approach by FERC, noting that stakeholders have been unable to reach agreement over the last five years.  EXCEL has it's own focus - they want to be an ITC and want to provide many of the RTO services without being an RTO.  The Wind group is mostly concerned about the ability to provide generation on an "as available" basis.   The commissioner from New Mexico does not want standardization, does not want FERC stepping on the state's jurisdictional toes, and does not want New Mexico ratepayers' rates to go up.  Arkansas Electric Coop insists that SPP transmission capacity is full, so if competitors want to move power through SPP, new transmission must first be built.

I am somewhat concerned that some of the Commissioners may believe that tariff standardization is not necessary.  While the Dynegy concept had merit at one time, it may be too late to rely on the stakeholder process to resolve issues, and it could take many months to go through the process, only to have FERC, in the end, decide the details anyway.  We may want to submit comments on this issue to FERC at the conclusion of RTO Week.

What Services Should be Standardized?

Overall, Dynegy opposes standardizing tariffs but believes certain aspects of reservations should be standardized -- timing, confirmation processing, maintenance issues, bus names, ramping protocols, assumptions for ATC calculations, posting times, bumping rules, and settlement time.  With regard to congestion management, it should not be standardized between RTOs.

XCEL does not support a standardized tariff but urges FERC to standardize some issues such as CBM calculations, reserve obligations and load balancing and penalties.  American Wind says FERC must focus on having liquid spot markets in RTOs and not worry about tariff standardization.  Dominion cautions FERC about Dynegy's proposal to let the industry work out the details.  He says this is what happened with Order No. 2000 and the industry was unable to work it out.

Should FERC Retain CBM?

Ricky (Arkansas Coop) believes that the bigger the RTO, the less important CBM is because the RTO will have enough resources internally to effectuate reserve sharing.  Dynegy thinks CBM should be eliminated.  Dominion thinks CBM should be retained but the rules need to be changed.  CBM should not be set for a year - it changes on a daily basis and this should be reflected.  Nor should CBM be standardized because needs vary region to region.  However, because CBM is used for load, the cost of CBM should be allocated to load.  All panelists agreed with the concept that if CBM is retained, load should be required to purchase it as a service provided under the tariff.

Network Versus Point to Point Service

Peter (Dynegy) discussed the need to develop a new type of transmission service that combines the best features from network and point to point, similar to transportation service offered in gas -- firm and interruptible.  Peter suggests starting with the CRT tariff proposed several years ago.  Glenn (Dominion) thinks the CRT is outdated and thinks we need a new type of service but agrees that it should combine the best elements of network and point to point.

Should all Transmission Service Be Under the RTO's Tariff?

Most of the panelists said yes, all service should be under the tariff, but Ricky Bittle said there needs to be a transition period - minimum of 5 years, no more than 10 years.  Commissioner McMinn said no - he sees this as an infringement on the states' jurisdiction.

What Services Need to Be Changed Under a New RTO Tariff?

Jim (Wind) believes that the imbalance provisions must be revised so as not to penalize "as available" resources.  Ricky thinks transmission expansion is the most important issue to address in a new tariff.  XCEL urges FERC to recognize the distinction between RTOs and ITCs and allow ITCs to design and offer their own transmission tariffs.

Ray Alvarez will circulate a summary of the afternoon panel on Cost Allocation.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sarah


I am meeting with Shona tomorrow to review the scheduling of doorstep reviews
for the first quarter.  As long as the New York review isn't the week of
January 15th, then I think I will still target that week for a London trip.
Don't feel as if you have to clear the whole week for me  - I know that you
are very busy, so I expect that we will work in time together around critical
things that you need to handle.  I will try to send you a list of topics that
I would like to cover by the end of the day tomorrow to give us a starting
point.  You may have some suggestions on others that I should meet with while
I am there.  Thanks.  --Sally

Mike Jordan
12/28/2000 02:46 AM
To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Holiday Wrap Up and January Plans

Hope you had a good week - mine was enjoyable despite illness in the family
and a houseful of guests. I am also grateful for the opportunity to get back
to work!!

As to your visit

I will try to clear the week - the only potential curveball is my desire to
be in NY when we do the NY doorstep( timing is uncertain ). I want to hammer
home the need for absolute clarity re the remote office control structure and
to review the SAP implementation work - both should be in place .

I will put together a list of issues/subjects that I would like to update you
on over the next day or so  - we should be able to use that as a working
agenda and a start point for scheduling time.

If there is anything else you would like to review specifically, I will get
the necessary preparation done.

Cheers and Happy New Year

Mike

	Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.

	From:  Sally Beck                           27/12/2000 23:12

To: Mike Jordan/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Holiday Wrap Up and January Plans

Hope that Christmas with your family was fun and that your days off for
shopping were fruitful.  I enjoyed my week off before Christmas, but
certainly felt as if I worked very hard -- shopping, wrapping, baking,
volunteering, birthday party for Tyler on the 22nd (3 years old - not very
good planning to throw that into the mix each Christmas season), etc.   It is
nice to be back in the office this week, although I still have all of those
Christmas decorations to put away sometime soon!

I have tentatively planned a trip to the London office during the week of
January 15.  I will fly over on Sunday, so that I would have Monday through
Thursday in the office there.  I have blocked those days on my calendar and
Patti has made flight reservations for me just to hold that week open.  How
does that work with your schedule?  Will you be in the office that week and
what is your schedule like?  I certainly wouldn't occupy all of your time
during that week, but I wouldn't want to make the trip that week if  you
don't have some time available.  Let me know, and then we can firm up
discussions topics and agendas.  (My thought on that particular week is that
it gets us past year end closing issues and that I could be back in the
office during the week of January 22 and thereafter to communicate bonus
information.)

I am in the office all of this week.  --Sally


There will be an update meeting on the status of the TW customer meeting on
	Tuesday, July 10 at 1:00 p.m. in EB4194.

	The meeting will focus on the following:

		Finalizing date - October 23 or October 24, 2001
		Ensuring everyone has seen the customer list
		Boat - Size
		Meals
		Gifts
		Access to training room in Enron Building on 5
		Agreement on invitation (Mark your Calendar) to be sent mid July

		Status of Agenda

	Thanks. Lynn


Fernley,
As we discussed earlier this year, I have serious concerns about Barry that I
think are both well-founded and reasonably well documented.  To be fair, I
will say that since Q1 of last year, I have not seen any FURTHER
"prosecutable" offenses and he has made some attempts at being more
communicative.  However, I am clearly unwilling to stake my career on his
transformation, particulary with as influential person as John Sherriff in
charge of the office.  Probably more to the point,
it continues to concern me that London has not developed an operations team
that is not so Barry-dependent.  Evidence to this effect are, the fact that
he is your only candidate for the Global Products position, that someone from
Houston has to be part of the "World Tour"  in Europe (Brent Price), that
your candidates  for a senior interim operations head in Helsinki was David
Port or Richard Sage, and that your suggestion for additional depth is Steve
Young.

Further for the record, I believe that I am not the only one with whom Barry
has a credibility issue - Arthur Andersen, other Global Products personnell,
and other risk people in London have expressed similar concerns to me - I
just happen to be the most vocal.
Ted

Fernley Dyson
02/08/2000 04:07 PM
To: Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Trading Support Operations - London

Rick,

Not wishing to delay the comprehensive review of our trading support
function, particularly as it relates to our Global Products business, we
already have Barry Pearce taking a lead in this area.

The issue of concern is whether this should be an interim measure or a more
permanent solution.  Well - nothing is permanent in Enron and I think Barry
understands this as well as anybody. If we had a more suitable candidate, we
would give him/her the job.

I have seen Barry develop and mature over the last 12 months along with the
team that we have built around him. I'm convinced that he can add significant
value by drawing the Global Products support functions 'in to the fold'.
However, he clearly has a credibility issue with Ted in particular and,
whilst I do not share Ted's views, I do not hold Barry out as a saint and I
can see recurring problems if such a key relationship is not well grounded.

I suggest that we continue to search for a candidate - known and trusted
within Houston, who can instill confidence there. Steve Young (head of RAC in
London) may be an interesting option, although I'm sure he would not be easy
to replace. In the meantime we need Barry to take things forward and I will
be monitoring the situation very closely.

Regards

Fernley.


Please see the attached overlays for Aquila Energy Corporation and Beau
Canada Exploration Ltd.  Please refer to the Mar 2001 tab for details.

Short name changes will be coordinated w/ERMS IT today, Mar. 02.