NGI's Daily Gas Price Index
published : November 13, 2001
Watson: Enron Upside 'Clearly Worth Doing the Deal'
Dynegy CEO Chuck Watson told the investment community Monday that he was "90% sure" that the risk/reward ratio in the planned merger with Enron Corp. made it "clearly worth doing the deal," because the issues that decimated the former market leader were with its non-core businesses. Explaining that his team had "adequately bracketed the downside," as the deal fell together over the past few weeks, Watson said he could not be "99% positive," but noted that the upside was "substantial," and said he had a "good deal of confidence...that we'll be absolutely fine here."
Dynegy, which announced a $22 billion cash, stock and debt deal with its downtown Houston rival on Friday night, joined with Enron executives including Chairman Kenneth Lay on Monday to answer as many questions as they could in about 90 minutes. If all goes to plan, the two companies would become Dynegy Inc. by the third quarter of 2002, the clear leader in natural gas and power marketing.
In the second quarter 2001, Enron and Dynegy combined sold a total of 36.2 Bcf/d of gas, which represented 21% of the volumes sold by the top 20 gas marketers in North America (168.9 Bcf/d), according to a ranking by NGI. Enron was the top gas marketer with 25.3 Bcf/d and Dynegy was No. 6 with 10.9 Bcf/d. Statistics provided by Maryland-based Energy Performance Review (EPR) show that Enron and Dynegy combined sold 143,824 million kWh of power in the second quarter. That total represented 14% of the power sold by the top 20 largest power marketers (1,000,961 million kWh), according to EPR. Enron was in fifth place among power marketers with 73,724 million kWh sold, while Dynegy was in sixth place with 70,100 million kWh.
The blending of the two will not come without challenges, but Watson stressed he expects to see more opportunities than problems. The opportunity appears to have come none too soon for Enron. Greg Whalley, Enron's president and a future member of Dynegy's executive team, confirmed that without some kind of equity investment in the company, the once market leader probably could not have sustained its liquidity through the rest of this year.
"We definitely needed to raise some type of equity capital," said Whalley. "Under normal market conditions, we would have had adequate liquidity. This was not normal for Enron. We would not have had liquidity to the end of the year."
Asked about asset sales in anticipation of meeting federal requirements to merge, executives acknowledged there would be some, but did not elaborate. Whalley said that from an "Enron perspective, we have not spent a lot of time with Dynegy people to agree on a plan. Chuck (Watson) has to clear what is core to Dynegy. There are several (assets for consideration to sell) on the list."
Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay, who will not be part of the management team, but may hold a place on the Dynegy board of directors, added that Enron already has $4 billion in sales under contract, all expected to close by the end of 2002. "We also have three other significant international assets under contract," said Lay, referring to the among other things, the Dabhol power plant in India.
Once the merger of Dynegy with Enron is successfully completed, the new Dynegy will become the "primary market player in all markets," but there will be a significant difference in how the company moves forward, noted Dynegy CFO Rob Doty. Enron's financial-backed trading strategy will merge with the "strong asset base" of Dynegy's.
Dynegy has protected itself on the downside, however. The deal includes an out for Dynegy if Enron's legal liabilities exceed $3.5 billion.
Asked about the possibility that some of Enron's marketing and trading team may desert the company for another company, Watson, stressing that teamwork will be the guiding force going forward, said, "if I were in this industry, this is the combination I'd work for. This is an exciting day here. It's been an exciting couple of weeks" creating a "platform for something really special in the future."
Enron's Whalley said that he believes the company will keep most of its team intact. "They're accustomed to being part of a winning deal," he said, and "going forward, they will be very pleased with the additional infusion of equity and the stability in the marketplace." As of Monday morning, Whalley said that "activity looks pretty good," and said there had been a positive reception to the merger. "Right now, people are pleased with the introduction of new liquidity, and really want to go about establishing or re-establishing the energy franchise."
Dynegy President Steve Bergstrom agreed. "Most traders want to be part of a winning team. This is a combination that will be a winning team. We have similar issues there as well. The 'A' players will stay around to be part of the winning team." Bergstrom explained that when the merger is complete, the new Dynegy will become the "primary player in all markets." He said Dynegy has a "more asset-backed strategy," adding that he has said before that "you can only have one market maker and Enron clearly was it." By combining the two companies, there will be a blend of Dynegy's asset strategy with Enron's "financial skill set," giving the new entity "more liquidity market-making than Dynegy itself has historically done."
Added Watson, "both companies had a successful ratio and nothing is going to change there...I'm a strong believer in teams and the team concept. I don't want to see individuals do well if the company doesn't do well. It (will be) imbedded in the whole company."
Ben Schlesinger, whose company Schlesinger & Associates analyzes the energy industry, said Monday that the big problem in the merger is "whether these two companies are able to pull together...to harness what's there." He said the "two parties are clearly leaders," but theoretically, they will have to streamline their operations. "Both books are fairly strong," he said, and once their efficiencies are put together, the new company will offer "stable returns." In the "very short term," however, Schlesinger said there will be moves to other traders.
Other analysts also seemed to be throwing support behind the merger. UBS Warburg reiterated its "strong buy" rating on Dynegy, noting that "if successfully executed, this transaction would yield the most widely recognized, respected and downright credible wholesale/retail energy merchant in the world." However, UBS warned that Dynegy still faces a "daunting" task in merging the operations and employees. "We are not naive in underestimating the enormous challenge at hand. In the near-term, Enron must remain highly liquid, investment grade and its employees must remain focused on keeping its core wholesale/retail franchises up and running."
Merrill Lynch's Donato Eassey reiterated the "buy" on Dynegy and "moving to no opinion" on Enron. He said, "Dynegy has all the necessary skill sets and as importantly, the financial stability, resources and investor confidence and experience to get the job done...Enron's unparalleled online trading business should translate to significant prospects for the new Dynegy."
Curt Launer, an analyst with Credit Suisse First Boston, added that despite the size of the new company, "we do not expect major divestitures or closing issues because of the lack of asset concentration and the inherent competitiveness of the natural gas and power marketing business." He noted too that with the combination, "we have modeled a merchant unit that does 25% less business," because of "cross trading between them and some expectation of a loss of market share." Still, Launer said Dynegy would become a "formidable competitor" benefiting from a market share in excess of 20% of U.S. natural gas and power trading markets."
As expected with most major merger announcements, Moody's Investors Service placed the ratings of Dynegy and its subsidiaries under review for possible downgrade, noting that "notwithstanding the franchise benefits of the proposed merger, the financial and business risks associated with the transaction could negatively impact Dynegy's credit fundamentals." The review affects about $4 billion of Dynegy securities, including its subsidiaries Illinova Corp. and Illinois Power Co.
In its rating review, Moody's said it will "assess Dynegy's plans to meet the liquidity needs of the combined entity and to deal with the uncertainty surrounding Enron's off-balance sheet transactions and contingent risks...and examine the ultimate structure of the transaction, and its impact on Dynegy's financial leverage and on management's targeted debt levels." The ratings service also plans to "consider the governance framework within which the combined trading activities will operate."
Ratings under review are: Dynegy's Prime-3 rating for commercial paper; Dynegy Holdings' Baa2 senior unsecured debt rating and its Prime-2 rating for commercial paper; Illinova Corp.'s Baa3 senior unsecured debt rating; and Illinois Power Co.'s Baa1 senior secured and Baa2 senior unsecured debt ratings, and its Prime-2 rating for commercial paper.
Fitch revised its rating watch on Enron's outstanding securities to "evolving" from "negative," where they were placed in late October. The rating watch evolving means the ratings may be raised, lowered or maintained. Fitch also placed a rating watch negative on Dynegy and Dynegy Holding's long-term credit ratings, which also means they could be lowered or affirmed. The outstanding "F2" rated commercial paper programs for Dynegy and Dynegy Holdings were not affected.


[IMAGE]

	[IMAGE]

	[IMAGE]

To unsubscribe from the email list, click here

[IMAGE][IMAGE]


Hello and Welcome!

Your ENRON GMAT class starts this Thursday
June 22 at the ENRON building in room EB560.

You will be taking a paper and pencil test on this
first day and you will receive your materials and
first assignment. Your class schedule is listed below.

Your instructor will be Robbie Westmoreland.

The schedule is as listed here:

Test Thursday Jun 22 6-10 pm
Class  Thursday Jun 29 6-9 pm
Class Thursday July 6 6-9 pm
Class Thursday July 13 6-9 pm
Class  Thursday July 20 6-9 pm
Class  Thursday July 27 6-9 pm
Class Thursday Aug 3 6-9 pm
Class  Thursday Aug 10 6-9 pm

If you have any questions now or while the class is going on,
please do not hesitate to call either Amy or Richie at the
Princeton Review office at 713/688-5500.

Thank you and Enjoy!

Amy Fogarty
Assistant Course Director
The Princeton Review
701 N. Post Oak Road, suite 8
Houston, TX 77024
phone-713/688-5500
fax-713/688-4746
email-amyf@review.com


Attached is the Errata to the "Prepared Direct Testimony of Harry J.
Kingerski on Behalf of Enron Energy Services Inc."  This errata (to which
the changes from the original version are highlighted) will be the version
offered into evidence when Mr. Kingerski testifies tomorrow (April 20,
2001).

Additional copies of the testimony will be available in the hearing room.

 <<X23727.DOC>>

Jeanne Bennett

Attorney for Enron Energy Services, Inc.

 - X23727.DOC


This is a reminder of Enron's Email retention policy.  The Email retention policy provides as follows:

Message Location - Maximum Retention
Inbox - 30 days
Sent Mail Folder - 30 days
Trash/Deleted Items - Rollover from Inbox for one day
Folders - All Email messages placed in folders will be destroyed after one calendar year. This includes public folders in Outlook.

Furthermore, it is against policy to store Email outside of your Outlook Mailbox and/or your Public Folders.  Please do not copy Email onto floppy disks, zip disks, CDs or the network.  Such actions are prohibited and will not be supported by the IT Department.

There will be no exceptions to this policy.


COLUMBIA GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION
                        NOTICE TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES
                                NOVEMBER 27, 2001

Notice ID: 3298
5 - NO RESPONSE REQUIRED

SUBJECT: CAPACITY ALLOCATION-TIMELY NOMINATION CYCLE FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2001

PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL ALLOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON THE RECEIPT OF
ANY NEW NOMINATIONS OR INTRADAY NOMINATIONS.

RECEIPTS:

KA-1 LINE (819288 AND 827280):  There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There
is no capacity for ITS customers.  There is no capacity for secondary firm
customers.

INTERNAL CONSTRAINT:

LANHAM:  There is no capacity for IPP customers.  There is no capacity for ITS
customers.  There is no capacity for secondary firm customers.

Excess MDWQ               Available +
ISS Withdrawals           Available
SIT Withdrawals           Available
Imbalance Drawdowns       Available

Excess MDIQ               NOT Available +
ISS Injections            NOT Available
SIT Injections            NOT Available
Imbalance Paybacks        NOT Available

PAL Lends/Unparks         Available
PAL Parks/Loan Paybacks   NOT Available

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

Columbia Gas Transmission has completed allocating all of its receipt and
delivery points for the gas day of November 28, 2001.  You may now view the
quantities you are authorized to flow on November 28, 2001.  On the Internet
NAVIGATOR, view Nominations, Scheduled Quantity, Scheduled Quantity for Service
Requestor-Summary, Nominations to be Viewed, and select Reduced Nominations.
The quantities confirmed to flow for your account are available on the Internet
NAVIGATOR after 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 27, 2001.

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


Ted,

I checked with Sally and she says Wednesday, May 31 is good for lunch & she
looks forward to seeing you.

Patti


Any GCP adjustments will be highlighted in blue.

Best Rgds.

Samuel x3-9890 (GCP Team)
Enron Net Works _ Global Data Management

From: Aparna Rajaram/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/17/2001 01:40 PM
To: Kelly Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice
Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bill D Hare/HOU/ECT@ect, Steve Venturatos/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Camille Gerard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya
Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Frank L Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ken Curry/ENRON@enronXgate, Nicole
Hunter/NA/Enron@Enron, Lesli Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: 04-17-01 ClickPaper Approvals

Please see attached.

Aparna Rajaram
Ph: (713) 345-4563
Fax: (713) 853-9476
Aparna.Rajaram@enron.com


Jon:

Thanks!  I will be in London for the ISDA meeting in mid-January.  See you
then!

Regards,

Mark

	Jon Chapman
	11/09/2000 03:18 AM

		 To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: EWS

Mark

Many congratulations on your new role as General Counsel with EWS - I wish
you every success in it in the future .

Hope to see you before too long .

Best wishes.

Jon


You're the best!

	Michael Slade
	10/25/2000 11:27 AM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: EnronCredit.com Houston signatory

Hi Tana - got your message - should be possible to get EnronCredit.com
director to sign here tomorrow morning and faxed to you in time for meeting.

Best wishes

Mike


Ben:

Attached is the ComEd Letter of Intent to interconnect at the Pontiac TSS.
Under the guidelines of Appendix K of ComEd's Open Access Transmission
Tarriff, we are required to execute this LOI within 15 days of the date of
receipt (7/7/00) in order to maintain our current position (6/12/00) in the
ComEd queue.  If we execute after 7/22/00, then the date our date in the
ComEd queue becomes the date of execution of the LOI.

Appendix K provides that once the LOI is executed, ComEd shall provide Enron
with an Interconnection Study (IS)  and Project Diagram (PD) within 45 days
(ComEd has the option to extend another 30 days, if needed).  The IS and PD
will provide Enron with a description of the upgrades required and an
estimate of the proposed allocation of the cost to interconnect.  The IS and
PD do not provide Enron with information on transmission availability (ie
ATC), this would be addressed by the Interconnection Feasibility Study
currently in progress by ComEd (I am expecting the results of this IFS in the
next 2-3 weeks).

ComEd informed me in a discussion yesterday afternoon that their current
interpretation of AppendixK provides that if the commercial start date of a
proposed IPP project is delayed, that there is no impact to that proposed
projects' queue position relative to competing projects provided that all
interconnection milestones (LOI, PD, Notice To Proceed, and IA) remain
current.  ComEd further indicated that such a delay would result in a project
with an inferior queue position (i.e. Wizvest) being charged with the
necessary system upgrade costs even though their project would come on line
prior to the project with the superior queue position.  I will request that
this interpretation be confirmed by ComEd in writing to Enron. (This
interpretation obviously has a large value implication for the Torrence site
relative to the Wizvest planned '01 interconnect).

I will review this letter on the plane to Houston this afternoon.  I believe
that it authorizes ComEd to spend up to $100K on engineering related to the
interconnect design.  It also addresses the ordering and payment
responsibilities for long-lead equipment required to facilitate the proposed
interconnection.  Based upon our development budget discussions earlier this
week,  we obviously do not want to incurr long-lead equipment charges prior
to having a clear value proposition in our sights.  I will have
recommendations ready for you on these issues by Wednesday.  I am
simaltaneously forwarding it to Kay Mann for her review so that we will be in
a position to move forward to execution prior to 7/22 if we choose to do so.
From a legal standpoint, this is ComEd's boilerplate LOI.  I believe that we
executed a similar LOI for Wilton Center in early 1999 under Des Plaines
Green Land Development, L.L.C.

Call me if you wish to discuss.

Fred
---------------------- Forwarded by Fred Mitro/HOU/ECT on 07/07/2000 05:43 PM
---------------------------

<Bruce.L.Tanouye@ucm.com> on 07/07/2000 04:20:33 PM
To: fred.mitro@enron.com
cc: Robert.D.Koszyk@ucm.com, Carter.C.Culver@ucm.com
Subject: Titan Land Development, LLC; Pontiac Letter of Intent

Fred,

Thank you for your request to Interconnect new generating facilities per
your request to, Steven T. Naumann, Transmission Services Vice President.
Please execute the Letter of Intent per the attachments to maintain your
place in the queue of Applicants for interconnection.

 <<1XM10!7.7.00.DOC>>  <<LOI attachmwn_7_7_00pontiac.doc>>

Thank You

Bruce L. Tanouye
Com*Ed Transmission Services
Independent Power Production Services
Phone:  708-410-5276
Fax:  708-410-5900
E-Mail:  bruce.l.tanouye@ucm.com

******************************************************************************
***
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Unicom proprietary
information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright
belonging to the Unicom family of Companies.  This E-mail is intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  If
you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation
to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful.  If you have received this E-mail in error, please
notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and
any copy of this E-mail and any printout.  Thank You.
******************************************************************************
***

 - 1XM10!7.7.00.DOC
 - LOI attachmwn_7_7_00pontiac.doc


I'd LOVE to.  Have class from 6:30 to 9:30......

	"Scott Laughlin" <scottwl@hotmail.com>
	02/28/2001 05:23 PM

		 To: cameron@perfect.com, jdasovic@enron.com, psellers@Haas.Berkeley.EDU
		 cc:
		 Subject: I'd rather be in some dark hollow

Tomorow night at Atlas Cafe the Dark Hollow Band is playing, featuring Larry
Cohea on banjo, that guy who tried to kiss Prentice on guitar (John
Kornhauser), and that thick-glasses, stick-thin, white-trash lookin' woman
on bass (y'all know the one, 'specially you Cameron). I figure we should go
on down there as a preliminary rage for Jeff's Fowtee-ieth. What you say?
Goes from 8-10, so they say.

Here's the URL: http://members.home.net/ukecat/dkhollow.html

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


Start Date: 2/28/01; HourAhead hour: 23;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No
variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001022823.txt

---- Generation Schedule ----
*** Final schedule not found for preferred schedule.
     Details:

  TRANS_TYPE: FINAL
  SC_ID: Wheelabrat
  MKT_TYPE: 2
  TRANS_DATE: 2/28/01
  UNIT_ID: MARTEL_2_AMFOR


Ben:

Some last minute additions to the site visit attendence list I set you
yesterday:

10/13/2000 Wheatland

Also attending will be

Bob Bruner
Manager, Technical Services
DENA

10/17/2000 Gleason
10/18/2000 Linclon

Also attending will be

Pete Wyberila
Director, Technical Services
DENA

Hopefully the addition of these gentlemen will not cause any issues, but if
not please don't hesitate to contact me.

Regards,

Joe Synnott


Unless their is a reason having to do with the case( ie we can somehow
recover our attys fees} I see no reason why we should separate the bills.Send
me one bill.

	SHoward@milbank.com
	07/13/2000 07:55 PM

		 To: Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com
		 cc:
		 Subject: Farallon/Legg-Mason Bills Allocation

Richard:

Spending a block of time on Busse's deposition this week focuses me on a
question that we have never really discussed:? How would you like Milbank to?
allocate its time between the Farallon and Legg-Mason cases?

To date, without really discussing it with you, we have (1) billed the
Farallon and Legg-Mason cases separately and (2) allocated our time
specifically relating to each case to that case but allocated "common" time
entirely to the Farallon case.

Is this what you want?

Should we just send one bill for the two cases together?

If we continue separate bills, what should be the allocation principle??
Should common time be allocated all to Farallon (the current practice)??
divided 50/50 between the two cases?? divided 18/5 between the two cases
(i.e., allocated by the respective amounts in issue in the two cases) ?

Any thoughts?

Steve

This e-mail message may contain legally privileged and/or confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee
or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify
the sender and delete this e-mail message from your computer.


The third quarter PCB meeting with Southern California Gas Company was held
this morning.  SoCal presented a third quarter invoce of their PCB management
and disposal activities for which Transwestern is responsible for
$120,602.19.  All charges were appropriate and considered normal operating
expenses for PCB activities in California.

The public hearing was held in Williams, AZ for the Kingman and Flagstaff air
permits under the Redrok Expansion.  There were no comments or concerns
brought up at the meeting as no individuals came to the meeting.  An email
was received from the ADEQ presenting the minor additions which will be added
to each permit.  Each comment and addition will not impact or change the
draft permits which were received earlier this month.  The permits for
Klagetoh and Luepp were received from the EPA last week.  The permits from
the ADEQ for the Kingman and Flagstaff C/S will be issued the later part of
this week.

Attended the incident investigation and technical writing workshop in Omaha.

Assisted the Mountainair team with the semiannual Title V compliance
monitoring report  for C/S No.7.

A meeting was held in Phoenix, Az with PG&E to review charges and invoices by
PG&E for PCB management and disposal activities on their system for the last
several months.   Also discussed was recent liquids sampling results and
proposed PCB activities on the PG&E system for 2002.


Hello Shmuel,

Thanks for your message. The end of 2000 and the beginning of 2001 were
extremely busy
and I could not focus on PSERC issues. I shall consult a few people in Enron
on this subject and get in
touch with you. Our concern right now is that the results of research are
widely shared with
our competition.

I am out on the 19th, but the 20th would work for me. I would be glad to
cover the cost of your Austin
to Houston trip.

Regarding your son. The Analyst / Associate program will interview again on
the campus
in the spring and they will be more than happy to interview him.

"Shmuel Oren" <oren@ieor.berkeley.edu> on 12/19/2000 01:40:02 PM
To: <vkamins@ect.enron.com>
cc: "Dennis Ray" <djray@engr.wisc.edu>, <Lance.Cunningham@enron.com>,
<Alex.Huang@enron.com>
Subject: Fw: PSERC nuggets related to market Stem

Hello Vince
Happy Holidays.
I wanted to connect with you regarding the possibility of Enron Joining
PSERC. As you might have heard from Lance and Alex we are going through a
transition period having doubled the number of universities and industry
members within the last year. Consequently, our business processes are not
well developed. One of the problems we are facing is the balance between the
electrical engineering folks and industry members that are more interested
in market related research. I hope to recruit more of the later so tat we
have more of a constituency in the Advisory Board  that sees the value of
market related research. I already have a verbal commitment from people at
Electrabell that expressed interest in joining PSERC. With members like
Electrabell and Enron we will be able to support more market Stem projects
such as the one that Shijie Deng proposed (not funded in this round). Please
let me know if I can do anything to facilitate the decision at Enron. I am
going to be in Austin on January 19 to participate at a PUCT hearing and
could come through Huston for a visit. Attached are some items that I shared
with our PSERC members and thought that you might be interested in them as
well.
Regards, Shmuel.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shmuel Oren" <oren@ieor.berkeley.edu>
To: "Power Systems Engineering Research Center" <PSERC-L@cornell.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: PSERC nuggets related to market Stem

> The following are 3 items that demonstrate the impact of PSERC research in
> the market stem area.
>
> 1. On December 12,  I (Shmuel Oren) testified at a hearing in San
Francisco
> before the Blue Ribbon Panel (chaired by Alfred Kahn) for the that is
> investigating the implications of Uniform Price vs. Pay as Bid Auctions in
> the California PX . As part of my testimony I presented a movie produced
by
> Tim Mount and Bob Thomas that show results of an experimental economic
study
> showing how bidders respond by raising their bids in a pay as bid auction.
> Following is an acknowledgement I received.
>
> Dear Shmuel:
>
>
> Thank you for attending the Blue Ribbon Panel this past Tuesday in San
> Francisco.  Your presentation was very informative and valuable to all the
> panel members and other participants.  The Panel greatly appreciates your
> involvement in this important project.
>
>
> Thanks again,
> Natalie Efland
>
>
> 2. A recent E-mail from the Texas PUC
>
> Professor Oren, I hope you and your family are doing well.  We are
seriously
> considering your help and advice to facilitate the Commission's final
> decision regarding retail competition in ERCOT.
>
>  I wanted to let you know that ERCOT Stakeholders filled an Application
for
> Approval of the ERCOT Protocols in November.  We received Comments
including
> List of Issues on November 22 and Reply Comments on December 1.  Staff
will
> draft and submit a Preliminary Order to the Commissioners for their
> discussion on December 13.  There will be a Pre-hearing on December 15
when
> parties will be asked to brief the Commission on list of issues by the end
> of first week in January.  There will be a Hearing on January 16 followed
> with another Hearing if needed.  Parties have asked the Commission to
> finalize its decision by mid March.
>
> To give you some more background, I have to mention that almost most of
your
> suggestions were accepted and will be reflected in the final Protocols,
> except for problems with intra-zonal gaming regarding congestion
management
> and Pay-As-Bid compensation for selected ancillary services.  A few
> additional concerns are raised regarding ancillary services and congestion
> management.  Stakeholders are still working toward more load participation
> in ERCOT market.  However, the main problem is the fact that market (pilot
> that covers 100% of wholesale, but only 5% of retail load) will be open on
> June 1, 2001 based on a version of the Protocols locked on August 1, 2000.
> (That was the deadline for ERCOT to give a final design to Anderson
> Consulting.)  That version does not include some of your recommendations
to
> address market design flaws.  The full version is highly possible to be
> implemented by January 1, 2002 when market for 100% retail competition is
> scheduled to open.  Given this gap, some parties have recommended not to
> implement incomplete Protocols and wait for full implementation by January
> 2002.  In other words, they say let's go ahead with 5% pilot retail load,
> but wait for full design implementation before allowing 100% wholesale
load
> (and retail load) be subject to the rules of the game described in the
final
> Protocols.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Parviz Adib, Ph. D.
> Director of Market Oversight Division
> Public Utility Commission of Texas
> 1701 N. Congress Avenue
> P.O. Box 13326
> Austin, Texas 78711-3326
> Ph. No.: 512-936-7365
>
> 3. The following is a segment from a published summary of the Dec 13 PUCT
> hearing. This segment describes the commision's deliberation on an agenda
> item addressing the possibility of instituting price caps as part of the
> ERCOT protocols. (see reference to my involvement in the next to last
> paragraph)
>
>   Docket No. 23220 - Petition of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
> for Approval of the ERCOT Protocols.  (Discussion and possible action)
> Parviz Adib, Jess Totten, Keith Rogas, and Tammy Cooper
> Chairman Wood turned to page 2 item number 3 of the draft order
identifying
> issues, recommending that the word "including" be changed to "other than"
in
> the parentheses.  He thinks they know the ups and downs of the two
> mechanisms, which are bid caps and price caps, but would not mind having
> parties focus on what other protections might be used.  Commissioner Walsh
> would say "including, but not limited to" because she does not think it is
a
> bad idea for ERCOT to at least consider in their protocols a fail-safe
> mechanism.  It's kind of like the stock market suspending trading when
> something crazy happens.  They could consider a maximum scenario, such as
> "we don't think this will ever happen but if it does we need to muffle
it",
> whether it is $1,000 or $99 or whatever it is.  They could consider
whether
> to put into the protocols a self-enacting price cap.  While not expecting
it
> to happen, if it did, you don't have to declare it an emergency and have
the
> Commission have to act.  Chairman Wood asked if they could leave the
> question without the parenthetical at all and just say "what protections
> should be added to avoid extreme price spikes."  Commissioner Walsh
> reiterated that she wants ERCOT to think about the unlikely possibility of
> unacceptable price spikes.  She would like for them to have their own
> fail-safe mechanism that is self-initiating as opposed to leaving that to
> having someone have to come in and act.  Commissioner Perlman stated that
he
> thinks the California-type price caps is what the concern is about.  He
> thinks everyone in this state is opposed to those, but he thinks the point
> Commissioner Walsh is making is an interesting one.  He had not thought
> about the circuit breaker idea, and it might have some merit.  He agreed
> that it was worth considering something like that.  Then the question
> becomes what the level is.  Chairman Wood suggested the wording "what
> self-implementing protections should be added to avoid the price spikes.
> Commissioner Perlman said he did not think anyone is talking about $250
> price caps.  Commissioner Walsh agreed, but noted that if the unexpected
> happens we should be prepared.  Commissioner Perlman indicated that if
> someone is making $10,000 in one particular hour that it probably does not
b
> enefit the market and is probably a windfall to them.  It is not something
> they would normally put in their business plan for determining whether
they
> are going to build a plant in Texas.  Chairman Wood stated that they want
to
> lean toward the market as heavily as they can on these issues.
>
> Chairman Wood noted that some of these issues date back to when Dr. Oren
was
> assisting the Commission, and asked if he could be brought back again.
> Staffer Dr. Parviz Adib said that staff had already talked to Dr. Oren and
> that he is available to assist the Commission further.  Chairman Wood
noted
> that Dr. Oren had helped people think outside the box without just
focusing
> on California.
>
> The final wording was clarified to state "self-implementing mechanisms"
and
> to delete the parenthetical part of the sentence in question.  The order
was
> approved as amended.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Please change the desk on deal 680472 from IM ME TCO to IM NE GULF3.

thanks


Executive Summary:

SB-7X gives Dept. of Water and Resources given legislative authority to
undertake short-term power purchases with no price cap through Feb.2nd
New legislation (AB-1X and SB-6X) would seek (1) long-term contracts with 5.5
cent cap and (2) creation of California Power and Conservation Financing
Authority
The long-term contracts proposed in AB-1X are likely to be subject to
significant amendment and renegotiation prior to the Feb.2nd expiration of
SB-7X.
The authority proposed in SB-6X would have bond issuance powers to finance
new generation capacity and conservation measures
Negotiations under way on using bond authority for a utility
bailout--utilities and state government split over debt obligations of
utility parents
State borrowing plans and power purchases create credit risks for state
treasury; SoCal Edison misses more payments
Bush Administration opposes price caps, but is supporting state efforts to
split PG&E into separate gas and electricity companies in order to assure
continued gas supply
Absent urgent passage of a bailout plan or an agreement on longer-term
contracts, utility bankruptcy is still the most likely scenario.

For further information, contact Robert Johnston (x39934) or Kristin Walsh
(x39510).

1. Legislation Passes- Short-Term Measures

SB-7X passed the California State Senate easily.  As we said yesterday, the
bill gives the state the immediate authority to purchase power via the
Department of Water and Resources until February 2nd.  The Department will
have $400 million available to finance power purchases, but there
expectations that these costs could easily rise to $1 billion by next week.

AB-1X has evolved into a longer-term solution and in its current form, would
authorize the Department of Water and Resources to enter into long-term
contracts (as opposed to the 15 day contracts in SB-7X) to buy power at a
price cap of 5.5 cents per kw/h.  This legislation is not expected to pass
today and will likely be changed considerably during the upcoming two week
period covered by SB-7X, when negotiations between generators, the utilities,
and the state are likely to resume.

2. SB-6X- What Will the State Do With the Bond Authority?

A second piece of legislation currently under consideration --SB 6X--has
created uncertainty in the markets.  This legislation will create a
California Power and Conservation Financing Authority with bond issuance
authority.  The uncertainty concerns whether the new authority will address
the problem of the $12 billion in outstanding debt owed by the utilities.
The current text of the legislation focuses only on longer term measures such
as expanding generation capacity and improving efficiency. Yet the
legislation also says "the authority may issue bonds, exercise power of
eminent domain, and enter into joint power agreements and buy, own, and sell
land and facilities necessary for the financing of a project."  The general
nature of this language leaves open the possibility of either issuing bonds
to finance past debts, or using eminent domain or the bond authority to
finance the utilities as they enter into a Ch.11 proceeding.  While neither
Davis nor Senate leader Burton are talking about a full $12 billion bailout
at this point, the idea of using bond money to pay past debts continues to
circulate in the legislature.

One of the reasons none of the utility creditors have moved to demand
repayment is that they are being quietly reassured by the Governor's office
that
there will be a government-supported debt workout in the near future.

3. Bailout Could Depend on Parents of Utilities Absorbing Losses

The big problem -- and one which have kept the Governor nor the utility
companies from opting for this solution -- is a massive battle over how much
of the
 outstanding $12 billion in back debt the holding companies of the two
utilities will absorb in any restructuring deal. As we have reported,
something like half
of that debt is owed by the utilities to their own sister power-generating
companies within their holding company structure (the partial de-regulation
allowed the utilities to split into power-generating and power-distributing
companies so one side of the holding company buys power from the other side)
--
and public opinion polls show overwhelming majorities understand this quite
well. Davis wants the utility companies to acknowledge the nature of this
debt, and to absorb some substantial part of the internal debt within their
corporate structures; we believe he then could be willing to guarantee or
issue
bonds to deal with the rest.

As one very senior California political leader explained, getting the utility
holding companies to eat a substantial part of the debt they owe themselves
 is the key to solving the back debt problem without provoking widespread
public outrage about a "bailout" of private price-gouging companies with
taxpayer money. Since 75% of Californians currently blame the utilities and
the PUC for this crisis (and only 10% blame Davis), this is a crucial
 political stance for the Governor.

But, of course, absorbing anything like $6 billion in debt would be quite a
shock to the seemingly healthy holding company and power-generating branches
 of the two utilities, and they began spreading the word that they were quite
willing to accept bankruptcy. Thus by mid-week, both
sides had pushed themselves toward a resolution in federal bankruptcy court
that would be a worst case solution for all sides: The country's economy
would
suffer from the resulting credit shock, the Governor's political future would
suffer from the electricity rate increases almost certain to be mandated by a
bankruptcy judge, while most private sector legal authorities believe the
utilities corporate holding structure would ultimately be breached during
bankruptcy
 procedures and they would end up having to absorb some significant amount of
the debt in the end. In addition, they would most likely face a state
government
determined to use state powers of condemnation to enter the power business in
a major way.

Senator Burton's SB6X legislation will strengthen those powers dramatically
to make this point quite explicit. It would set up a "California Power and
Conservation
 Financing Authority," with the power to issue bonds and invoke eminent
domain. It would finance new power plants, and "consider the feasibility and
public
 interest of the state acquiring, operating, and maintaining transmission
facilities currently owned by investor-owned and municipal utilities."

As we write this, all sides are trying to construct a path back down from the
bankruptcy ledge to safe ground, and there is no question the tone has
shifted
in the last 24 hours from macho confrontation to "maybe we've run this thing
out as far as we can." But as we have noted, the chance for miscalculation is
 still quite high. There is no solution agreed to at this time, the stand-off
over how much debt the state government will absorb versus the utilities'
holding
company is continuing, and the technical fact of default still makes it
possible for some bank to trigger bankruptcy by demanding immediate
accelerated payment.

5. Default Update- Thursday

SoCal Edison- $215 million default to California Power Exchange.

After Edison failed to make a $215M electricity payment yesterday, the
California Power Authority began seizing long-term contacts and reselling
them to recoup some of the money owed to generators.  PG&E said it expects
its trading privileges at the Cal. Power Authority to be suspended today,
leaving them with only its generation from nuclear and hydroelectric sources.

While the ongoing wave of defaults has severely restricted PG&E's and SoCal's
ability to buy power, the Department of Water and Resources will be able to
pick up some of the slack, at least in the very short-term.

The state itself may be getting into risky credit territory.  The proposed
California Public Power Authority would borrow in the neighborhood of $1.3
billion from the state General Fund in advance of this year's expected fiscal
surplus, with the loan to be repaid by the authority from expected future
revenues.  With near-bankrupt utilities and a freeze on rate hikes, it is
unclear where the revenues would come from.  The amount borrowed and terms of
repayment will be no doubt examined very carefully by the bond rating
agencies.

5. Bush Policies

As we reported on Wednesday, the Bush Administration continues to demonstrate
little interest in getting involved in the California crisis.
President-Elect Bush surprised state leaders yesterday with his comments,
which essentially said that excessive environmental regulation was the root
of the current supply shortage.  Bush and his top officials appear to be
unanimously opposed to long-term price caps.

However, there is one issue of considerable importance to the administration,
according to a source close to a top Bush economic advisor.  There is
significant concern that PG&E's credit problems could cause gas suppliers to
stop shipments of gas through PG&E's pipeline.   The risk would be that the
pipeline could "go dry", causing significant and possibly dangerous
disruptions in California residences and businesses.  To prevent this
problem, Bush is working with Davis on a proposal to split PG&E into separate
gas and electric companies. The gas company would be solvent, but the
electric company would go immediately into Ch.11 following significant
defaults.


---------------------- Forwarded by Clarissa Garcia/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2000
10:45 AM ---------------------------

mstiles@columbiaenergygroup.com on 02/01/2000 08:45:35 AM
To: Phillip Villagomez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Clarissa Garcia/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: 2/2 volumes

No changes on my ldcs for tomorrow.   However I did try to anticipate the
weekend changes to give you some advance notice.   Also, please be aware that
if the customers' comsumption changes I have a firm obligation to adjust my
noms.

I hope this is helpful....

 - tn022000.xls


Pablo and Jose:
As  a follow-up to our discussion yesterday, would you consider either
weather derivatives or credit derivatives to be "securities".

Carol St. Clair
EB 3892
713-853-3989 (Phone)
713-646-3393 (Fax)
carol.st.clair@enron.com


There will be a Quarterly Legal Review for the Power Trading group with Mark
Haedicke on Thursday, June 7, 2001, from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m. in EB38C2.  Please
plan to attend.  Thank you.

Janette Elbertson
Enron Wholesale Services
Legal Department - EB3326
Telephone:  (713) 853-7906
Fax:  (713) 646-2600
janette.elbertson@enron.com


Ian,

Forget that last message. Apparently my e-mail just updated.

Thanx

Chris

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Cooke, Ian
Sent:	Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:42 AM
To:	Dorland, Chris
Subject:	Spreads Data

Hi Chris,

I think this is what you were wanting.  The spread graphs can be found in the "spread charts" worksheet.  The data for the charts can be found in the "spread << File: Spreads Data.xls >>  data" tab.

Regards,
Ian


i meant you were lying about me saying things.  and we aren't going.  that's not a good idea.  :)  you are a brat.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Maggi, Mike
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 12:04 PM
To:	Nelson, Michelle
Subject:	RE:

nope we are going

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Nelson, Michelle
Sent:	Monday, November 19, 2001 12:00 PM
To:	Maggi, Mike
Subject:

you're lying.


The Gas Daily basis issue should be worked out between your desk and the
monthly basis desk.  We are making markets on GD basis for every term and
index point.  This creates a nice market for term gd index.  Let us know how
you guys would like to cover the gd basis with us.  The real opportunity for
gd basis is at socal, where the monthly index is so unreliable.

Mike


Mark -- let's talk about this when you return to the office.  thx.   Lisa
----- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron on 04/05/2001 08:51 AM -----

	James D Steffes
	04/04/2001 06:51 PM

		 To: Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, John J
Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate
		 cc:
		 Subject: NYPSC Adopts Enron Online as Index

Not sure if you had seen this language from the NY PSC.  While great, this
clearly means that NY PSC commissioners will begin to think alot about how
EOL  and its relationships with other Enron companies.

Jim

---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 04/04/2001
06:49 PM ---------------------------
From: Howard Fromer on 04/02/2001 04:38 PM
To: Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Brown/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Dana
Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Dutta/HOU/ECT@ECT, John D Suarez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Doug
Sewell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Ring/HOU/EES@EES, Charles Decker/HOU/EES@EES,
Gary Keevill/ECP/Enron@Enron, John Llodra/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom
May/Corp/Enron@Enron, Pearce W Hammond/Enron@EnronXGate, Christi L
Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT,
W David Duran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Lydecker/Corp/Enron@Enron, Steve
Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janelle
Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, Rick Bachmeier/HOU/EES@EES, Lance
Hinrichs/HOU/EES@EES, Jim Meyn/NA/Enron@Enron, Berney C Aucoin/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Patricia Collins/HOU/EES@EES, Fatimata
Liamidi/HOU/EES@EES, Dag Joraholmen/HOU/EES@EES, Dwight Fruge/HOU/EES@EES,
John Campbell/HOU/EES@EES
cc:

Subject: NYPSC approves market-based backout credit for RG&E; Adopts Enron
Online as Index

Another big victory for Enron in New York! In an Order issued by the NYPSC on
March 29, the NYPSC has approved a proposal to modify the existing fixed
backout credit of 2.8 cents per kwh for energy and capacity and replace it
with a market-based backout credit. The additional retail adder of 0.4 cents
per kwh would remain.  Load-serving entities (LSEs) will have the option of
continuing to buy their energy and capacity from RG&E at the market based
backout credit which will be determined 15 days prior to the beginning of
each of the two six-month capability periods, and will be based on "a
forecast of energy prices derived from Enron Corporation's (Enron)
EnronOnline trading platform."  To my knowledge, this is the first occasion
that a regulatory body has agreed to use Enron Online as an index!  LSEs can
elect instead to procure their own commodity and get a market-based backout
credit (MBBC). Under this option, the LSEs will get a market based backout
credit. However, the Enron online prices for the six months determined as
above will be reconciled on a lag basis against actual market prices.  The
PSC has capped the amount of the reconciliation for any LSE to the product of
the LSE's total load for the calendar year and $0.065 per kwh (PSC staff's
estimate of RG&E's embedded power supply cost).  (The PSC Order actually says
$0.015 but this appears to be a mistake since the attached settlement states
$0.065.) A copy of the PSC's Order is available on its website:
www.dps.state.ny.us


<title>WineISIT.com - Member E-mail</title>

Store
Member:
Spec's Wines, Spirits & Finer Foods

Members > E-mail
<map name='weekly link'>
<area alt='' coords='25, 8, 328, 27' href='http://www.wineisit.com/ad/2001November/weekly/20011105/spec.html' shape='RECT'>
</map>

Hi ELIZABETH A.,

Spec's Wines, Spirits & Finer Foods and WineISIT.com have teamed up to offer you some great savings on your favorite wines and spirits.

We hope you enjoy these WineISIT.com specials.

5% discount is available for those not using credit cards. Use of debit cards
earns the 5% cash discount.

Both regular and cash discount prices are listed. Specials available at all
locations.

E-mail any questions or comments about these special offers to:

sales@specsonline.com

Spec's largest and most famous location is at 2400 Smith St. on the south edge of
downtown. 16 other locations are around Houston.

Spec's is famous for providing customers more wine, liquor, beer and specialty foods and at lower prices than anyone in Texas.

Store Hours:

All stores are open from

10AM to 9PM Monday
through Saturday.

Charge Cards Honored:

American Express, Mastercard, Visa, Discover cards.

To arrange delivery, call order department at 713-526-8787 OR TOLL FREE 888-526-8787

Spec's, for the good stuff.

Spec's is not responsible for mis-prints or typographical errors. All customers must be at least 21 years old.

Monthly Specials:
November, 2001
Valid 11/5 thru 12/1

J.W. Dundee's Honey Brown Lager 12 pack

America's first and finest honey lager, J.W. Dundee's Honey Brown Lager is brewed with pure Canadian clover honey. This delicious beer offers a smooth, full-bodied taste with just a touch of sweetness.

2000 World Beer Cup - Award Winner and 2001 American Tasting Competition - Award Winner.

"Wrap yourself around your Honey!"

Cash Price: $8.69     Regular Price: $9.15

Rancho Zabaco Sonoma Heritage Vines Zinfandel
750 ml.

One of the outstanding brands being produced at the Gallo of Sonoma winery, created to showcase the bold, intense varietals of the best Sonoma areas. They're best known for their Zinfandels, and this one captures the essence of the grape's character-lush berry fruit flavors and moderate tannins. It's great for everyday drinking.

Cash Price: $8.40     Regular Price: $8.85

Torresella Pinot Grigio 750 ml.

Aromas of fresh fruit, apple and melon; crisp and clean flavors; dry and beautifully balanced. An excellent complement to soups, antipasti, prosciutto, melon and light fish and pastas.

Cash Price: $6.10     Regular Price: $6.43

Turning Leaf Vineyards Chardonnay 750 ml.

As Turning Leaf wines are handcrafted for perfection, a majority of the grapes for Turning Leaf were selected from some of the finest vineyards in the Lodi region. A major winegrape-growing region since the 1850s, Lodi is increasingly looked to by leading California wineries for grapes of superior quality. The warm days and cool nights of its Mediterranean climate allow the grapes to develop excellent color and maintain crisp acid levels through to harvest. The end result is a well-balanced fruit-forward Chardonnay with excellent varietal character.

Cash Price: $5.97     Regular Price: $6.29

Tosti Asti 750 ml.

Tosti was founded in 1820 and is located in Canelli, Italy in the heart of the Asti region. Produced from the Moscato grape, it has a pale straw color with golden highlights. The sparkle is soft, lively with a delicate, aromatic nose and a trace of pear and fruit with a sweet flavor.

Enjoy Tosti Asti whenever you feel
like enjoying a great glass of wine.

Cash Price: $7.62     Regular Price: $8.03

Gallo of Sonoma Merlot 750ml.

A smooth, full-bodied wine with
pleasant berry aromas, and an
excellent balance between ripe fruit
flavors and structured tannins.

Cash Price: $9.55     Regular Price: $10.06

Alice White Chardonnay 750 ml.

Since its introduction in 1996, millions of Americans have embraced the bold yet approachable Australian wines of Alice White, consistent Wine Spectator "Best Buy" selections that reflect the courage of the young adventurer herself. Join Alice in her journeys-and explore the finest in New World winemaking.

Cash Price: $5.56     Regular Price: $5.86

Gallo of Sonoma Cabernet Sauvignon 750 ml.

This Cabernet is rich and complex with concentrated flavors of black cherries, currant, and spice. Exhibits excellent structure and appealing depth, accentuated by extended aging in American and French oak barrels. As a result, the wine has ample body and an abundance of fruit character.

Cash Price: $10.35     Regular Price: $10.90

Baron Herzog Cabernet Sauvignon 750 ml.

Baron Herzog wines are produced in Santa Maria, California by former J. Lohr winemaker Peter Stern in cooperation with Royal Wine Corporation, the leading distributor of kosher wines in the world. Baron Herzog Cabernet Sauvignon is a full-bodied rich wine of unmistakable depth and elegance.

Cash Price: $10.29     Regular Price: $10.84

Baron Herzog Chardonnay
750 ml.

Baron Herzog wines are produced in Santa Maria, California by former J. Lohr winemaker Peter Stern in cooperation with Royal Wine Corporation, the leading distributor of kosher wines in the world. Baron Herzog Chardonnay is a luscious wine with distinct flavors and noble character.

Cash Price: $10.29     Regular Price: $10.84

Lockwood 1998 Chardonnay 750 ml.

The Lockwood Vineyard 1998 chardonnay reflects meticulous care in the vineyards, innovation in the winery and a passion for excellence in handcrafted wines. Its tropical aromas are accented with French oak nuances. The flavors and textures are full but display balanced acidity. It's a perfect companion to a diversity of cuisines.

Cash Price: $9.15     Regular Price: $9.64

Baron Herzog Merlot 750 ml.

Baron Herzog wines are produced in Santa Maria, California by former J. Lohr winemaker Peter Stern in cooperation with Royal Wine Corporation, the leading distributor of kosher wines in the world. Their Merlot is charming and well balanced, with a bursting bouquet and full flavorful finish.

Cash Price: $10.29     Regular Price: $10.84

Turning Leaf Vineyards Merlot 750 ml.

Produced in the moderate climate of California's Central Valley, this wine was aged in oak for an average of six months to meld the ripe fruit flavors of Merlot into a soft-textured mouthfeel. Medium bodied, with rich, fruity aromas and flavors enhanced by subtle undertones of oak. Pleasing notes of ripe fruit and plum deliver a full, soft mouthfeel and a lingering finish.

Cash Price: $5.97     Regular Price: $6.29

Saint Brendan's Irish Cream Liqueur 34? 750 ml.

Saint Brendan's Irish Cream Liqueur is unique in that it is the only Irish Cream Liqueur made by a dairy company. Its delicious, smooth blend of premium, triple-distilled, aged Irish Whiskey and the company's own best dairy cream ensures the ultimate freshness and creamy texture. Saint Brendan's uses only top quality, all-natural ingredients for an exceptionally rich, smooth and creamy flavor.

Cash Price: $10.44     Regular Price: $10.99

Cavit Pinot Grigio 1.5L

It's all about taste. Start a tradition this summers with Cavit, America's #1 Pinot Grigio and #1 Imported Wine*. Crisp, light with appealing flavors, Cavit Pinot Grigio was awarded a 4-Star rating from the New York Times Wine Today website. A perfect companion to your favorite summer dishes. Enjoy chilled.

*Cavit Pinot Grigio ACNielsen 52 weeks 3/31/01 FDL"

Cash Price: $7.25     Regular Price: $7.64

E&J VSOP Brandy
80? 750 ml.

" . . . richly bodied and rewardingly flavored high impact blend that gives the dual pleasures of complex oak aged flavors and lingering body. Powerful bouquet of vanilla and old sherry are demonstrated here which can only be gained by long aging. Supple flavors of cedar and berries finish with a long and satisfying smoothness that defines this blend."
Gregory Hill, Brandymaster

Cash Price: $8.28     Regular Price: $8.72

Cricklewood Pinot Gris 750 ml.

This lovely, easy drinking red offers lots of red and black cherry with light earth and chocolate notes with a velvety texture and finish. The Cricklewood varietals are produced by Montinore Vineyards from its estate vineyards in the Northern Willamette Valley of Oregon.

Cash Price: $8.57     Regular Price: $9.03

Cricklewood Pinot Noir 750 ml.

With loads of apple and pear flavors, this crisp white is beautifully balanced with a spicy, refreshing finish. The Cricklewood varietals are produced by Montonore Vineyards from its estate vineyards in the Northern Willamette Valley of Oregon.

Cash Price: $8.57     Regular Price: $9.03

E & J Brandy 80? 1.75 L.

" . . . distilled and aged to demonstrate finesse and delicacy of California brandy . . . loads of fruit and varietal grape flavors dominate, with a light balance of butterscotch and vanilla notes recovered from carefully selected barrels used in aging . . . lightly bodied with a crisp clean finish."

Gregory Hill, Brandymaster

Cash Price: $15.44     Regular Price: $16.26

Moskovskaya Vodka
80? 1 L.

From Moscow's famous Cristall Distillery, makers of Stolichnaya and known worldwide for exceptional quality, this is the top-selling vodka in Russia. Virtually identical to Stoli (except the label is green, not red) at a bargain price!

Cash Price: $12.99     Regular Price: $13.68

WineISIT.com Member E-mail is a special service for WineISIT.com members. If you wish to unsubscribe to this E-mail, simply click here and update your preferences on our E-mail preferences page.  We'll remove you from our member E-mail list as quickly as possible.


thanks mark

regards

justin

	From:  Mark Taylor                           28/01/2000 21:34

To: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Recipient of Master User ID

We have asked the EnronOnline team to send the Master User ID and Password to
the person who signed the PA.  Our theory was that the signer presumably has
the authority to bind the counterparty and understands that any holder of the
password can also bind the counterparty.  If they want to give it to someone
else, so be it.  But we should not be taking it upon ourselves to send the
password to someone else unless we have conducted the same level of due
diligence on that name as we have on the PA signer.  I was told we were not
looking into the authority of the "nominated" Master Users inn any way but
that we were taking some steps to verify the authority of the PA signers.  It
just seemed safer to me to take this approach.


The report named: West VaR <http://trv.corp.enron.com/linkFromExcel.asp?report_cd=36&report_name=West+VaR&category_cd=2&category_name=WEST&toc_hide=1&sTV1=2&TV1Exp=Y&current_efct_date=11/26/2001>, published as of 11/26/2001 is now available for viewing on the website.


PX Chargeback Group,

For those of you who have not already seen this, attached is a copy of the 9th Circuit opinion issued yesterday holding Gov. Davis' seizure of the PX block forward market contracts illegal.

Kimberly A. Curry
Bracewell & Patterson, L.L.P
2000 K Street, N.W.
Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20006
(202) 828-7623 (phone)
(202) 857-2107 (fax)
kcurry@bracepatt.com

 - opinion.pdf


I have rolled # 143559 through July 2000 to cover the purchase from
Republic.  We sell this gas to Duke Energy Field Services (#143558 for Jan -
Apr,  CES-Duke Energy Field Services, Inc ).  The counterparty on this deal
has been suspeneded, so I created # 316727 under the counterparty of Duke
Energy Field Services Marketing, LLC.

Hillary - Please extend the CES-Duke counterparty or attach the correct Duke
counterparty to this deal.

If you have any questions, let me know.

D

	From:  Ami Chokshi @ ENRON                           06/28/2000 10:45 AM

To: Megan Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, O'Neal D Winfree/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Nelson Ferries/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Republic Royalty 5/00

This deal was terminated by Nelson Ferries.

Ami
---------------------- Forwarded by Ami Chokshi/Corp/Enron on 06/28/2000
10:42 AM ---------------------------

	From:  Megan Parker                           06/28/2000 10:28 AM

To: Ami Chokshi/Corp/Enron@ENRON, O'Neal D Winfree/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:

Subject: Republic Royalty 5/00

Republic Royalty is one of my CES deals.  They sent me an invoice for May
2000 production, but I do not see a deal for May.  Does either of you know if
this deal was extended under a new deal number?

Megan


---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Neal/HOU/ECT on 02/26/2001 04:06 PM
---------------------------

"Conrad Neal" <cneal@bluegate.com> on 02/26/2001 03:54:49 PM
Please respond to <cneal@bluegate.com>
To: "'Neal, Chris'" <chrisn@thisco.com>
cc: "'Neal, William'" <billnealmd@hotmail.com>, "'Neal, Eric'"
<ericn@thisco.com>, "'Neal, Scott'" <sneal@enron.com>, "'Neal, Todd'"
<todd.neal@chron.com>, "'Neal, John'" <muddywaters@hubserv.com>
Subject: Willis Tree Farm- Schedule E for 2000

Chris: I have the Schedule E ready to go. If you want it sent by fax as last
year, please confirm your fax number to me.
I will plan to mail copies to all others on 2/28, unless requested
otherwise.Thanks,

Conrad

 - winmail.dat


Hello All,

	We will begin our soccer season with the first practice
scheduled for this Wed (Aug 15) at 5:30 pm at the West U microsoccer
fields (adjacent to West U Elementary School).  This week we will
have one practice only.  Starting next week (Aug 20) there will be a
Monday practice with the West U trainers at 5:30 (same fields).  This
trainer practice is optional - however we found that the kids really
get a lot out of these trainer practices and they are probably better
for ball skills than what we will do in coaches practice.  We will
discuss other issues on Wed.

I'm looking forward to a fun season.

Thanks.

David Rowley

ps.  We are on Field South #5 for the Wed practices.


John,

New deal was done on the gas side.  Deal was with Vinatage petroleum in
Bolivia.  Michael Popkin can fill you in with the details.

The attached report is something that is being put together by Scott Mills
group.  It is what I look at to get a snapshot.  Is this what you are looking
for?  Please let me know/provide guidance as to what you want to see.  Do you
want to be copied on this or some variant?

Thanks,

Kish

John J Lavorato
06/28/2000 03:20 PM
To: Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject:

Joe

A couple of questions.

1.  Where did the Gas Trading P/L derive from this month.

2.  How are you coming on the position reports we discussed.

Talk to you soon.

John Lavorato


Horowitz never had a chance.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Denne, Karen
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 4:32 PM
To:	Shapiro, Richard; Kean, Steven J.; Kaufman, Paul; Dasovich, Jeff
Cc:	Mara, Susan
Subject:	FW: Sue Mara & VICA

Sue spoke on a panel today at the Valley Industry & Commerce Association (San Fernando Valley).  Marathon also attended and sent the following:

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sandra Yamane <SYamane@marathon-com.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 6:19 PM
To:	Denne, Karen
Cc:	Joan Kradin
Subject:	Sue Mara & VICA

Hi Karen:

Sue did a great job today at the VICA meeting.  I wish I could take Sue and
fellow speaker Fred Pickle up and down the State of California to talk to
business associations about energy.

The audience was very receptive to the presentation.  Now that the energy
crisis has moved off the front page and the legislature is out of session,
people seem better able to absorb the magnitude and long-term ramifications
of long term contracts, the end of direct access, etc.

David Horowitz spent more time talking about telco deregulation than
electricity.  He is clearly more comfortable talking about telco and was
completely unaware of current events at Enron.  David Freeman did not show
up and he didn't send anyone in his place.

Carolyn Casavan, VICA co-chair of the energy & environment committee told
Sue to call if there was anything that VICA could do to support efforts to
reinstate direct access to please call.

Hope you have a good weekend.

Talk to you soon

Sandra


Christie,

Look fwd to the trip.

Shirley is sending you my itinerary.
When are you flying back? What about a dinner on
Tuesday?

Vince

From: Christie Patrick on 02/16/2001 10:10 AM
To: stamer@wharton.upenn.edu, piazzet@wharton.upenn.edu
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Wharton Business Plan Competition

Hi Anne!

I'll be at Wharton on Tuesday the 20th--perhaps we can get  together to
discuss this sometime later in the afternoon.  What does your schedule look
like?

Thanks!

--Christie.
----- Forwarded by Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT on 02/16/2001 10:08 AM -----

	"Stamer, Anne" <stamer@wharton.upenn.edu>
	01/26/2001 03:47 PM

		 To: "'christie_patrick@enron.com'" <christie_patrick@enron.com>
		 cc:
		 Subject: Wharton Business Plan Competition

Dear Christie:

Thank you for your voice mail. Things  are moving along nicely with the
competition.   Phase II deadline was today, so we hope to have some
statistics in the next few weeks.  I have attached the statistics from Phase
I, for your files.  Listed below are ways that Enron could be involved, let
me know in which (or all) of these Enron would be interested in participating.

* We want to start listing our sponsors, so it would be really good if we
could get your logo.

* Also, does Enron wish to be a Judge in Phase III and the Venture Fair
(VF)?  For Phase III, we would mail each Judge about 3 full blown business
plans to be ranked. We anticipate this taking no more than 1 afternoon

*  For the VF, we would need a Judge to be present for the entire day.   The
VF is by invitation only and we anticipate about 350 students, venture
capitalists, business entrepreneurs and faculty.  The VF will be held in
Philadelphia on April 30th.

* At the VF we will provide an opportunity for our sponsors with a 6 foot
table for exhibits or materials to hand out.  We will need to know if you
wish to use the exhibit space.

*  We plan on providing our 25 semi-finalist teams with one-on-one
mentoring.  If Enron is interested, that would be about 1/2 or 1 day
commitment.

*  There might be an opportunity for a workshop to the University community.
Would Enron be interested in participating in something like this?

I look forward to working with you to make this year's BPC a success.  Thank
you.

Sincerely,

Anne Stamer

 <<Phase IOverview.doc>>

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Anne Stamer
Wharton Business Plan Competition
Wharton Entrepreneurial Programs
The Wharton School
419 Vance Hall, 3733 Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA  19104-6374
215-746-6460 (Direct)
215-898-4856 (Office)
215-898-1299 (fax)
stamer@wharton.upenn.edu
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

 - Phase IOverview.doc


Bankruptcy 101

In an effort to educate employees about the nuts and bolts of bankruptcy, Enron is sponsoring five Bankruptcy 101 sessions next week. These sessions will focus on the basics of the bankruptcy process in general (not Enron specific).

When:	 Monday, January 28th - Friday, February 1st  from noon until 1:00 daily
Where:  5C2 in Enron Center North

Each session is limited to 50 participants, so you must RSVP if you would like to attend. Simply select a button above to indicate the date you would like to attend. You will then be sent a confirmation email. Note: This does not automatically post your calendar.  The sessions will be filling up quickly--so don't delay in reserving your spot!


Today's Hottest Travel Deals from Bestfares.com!

This week, as we stated in our last email, many airfares took off. Many almost doubled. The good news is that we have been able to keep most of our lower fares in place. Many of the major airlines were charging $569 roundtrip to Hawaii earlier this week, but now the published fare is over $1,000 roundtrip. Our fares, however, are still under $600 roundtrip. Our free stopover in London plus two free nights' in a three-star hotel in London program has been extended for purchase through January 24, 2002. Our take a friend to a Mexican beach for 50 percent off through February 28, 2002 promotion is still available and our coast-to-coast for $178 roundtrip or less with the optional free stopover in Las Vegas or Phoenix promotion is still available. Plus, we have many last-minute goodies that will be posted in the next few days that we cannot promote at this time. Be sure to keep visiting <http://www.bestfares.com> for these great specials. We have also added a new feature this week, our Snooze You Lose Search. You can visit it at <http://quickfares.bestfares.com/quickfare/snoozefares.jsp> Now you have three new options including Quickfare Finder at http://quickfares.bestfares.com/quickfare/qfsearch.jsp and City Low Fare Search at <http://quickfares.bestfares.com/quickfare/lowfares.jsp>. All of these features are designed to give you the best option for the best fare. Coming in February of 2002, we will be adding Quickfare Finder Europe. Be sure to check out all of the specials listed below including our Florida specials and our reduced fares to Cairo, Tel Aviv and Johannesburg.

EXTENDED THROUGH JAN. 24, '02: FREE STOPOVER IN LONDON + 2 FREE HOTEL NIGHTS

Fly from New York City to Amsterdam or Paris for as low as $285 roundtrip and we will throw in a free stopover in London and two free nights in London at a three-star hotel. That's a WOW! You can depart from 21 U.S. cities to your choice of 45 European destinations. If you want more bang for your buck, check out our London for Free promotion at <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=50737>

30 EUROPEAN DESTINATIONS FOR $349 RT FOR APRIL OR MAY TRAVEL OR $449 RT FOR JUNE-AUGUST TRAVEL--WOW!

You are down the final two days to take advantage of some cheap European getaways. For example, Washington (DC) to Frankfurt departing May 16 is as high as $1,004 roundtrip, your cost is only $349 roundtrip. Los Angeles to Athens is $1,080 roundtrip, but you pay $449 roundtrip; Chicago to Rome is $987 roundtrip, but you pay $449 roundtrip; Boston to Madrid is $826 roundtrip, but your cost is $349 roundtrip. Now, you can wait until the major airlines cut the costs of these airfares by one or two hundred dollars, or you can save over $600 by buying now. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to figure out that this is one heck of a deal! Visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=50230>

A FREE STOPOVER IN LAS VEGAS OR PHOENIX THROUGH JUNE 7, '02 FOR $178 RT OR LESS COAST-TO-COAST

We are still able to offer our (most popular) free stopover in Las Vegas or Phoenix program for travel through June 7, 2002. From select U.S. markets, you can visit two cities for less than the price of one. For example, you can receive a free stopover in Las Vegas or Phoenix as you are flying from Austin to Seattle for $174 roundtrip; Baltimore to Los Angeles for $174 roundtrip; Chicago to Los Angeles for $174 roundtrip, New Orleans to San Diego for $174 roundtrip; Detroit to Oakland for $174 roundtrip or many, many more. Visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=50916>

COAST-TO-COAST FOR $178 RT OR LESS THROUGH JUNE 7, '02

This is a great week to check out Quickfare Finder. The top six major airlines have raised their fares between non-competitive markets. Quickfare Finder will help you save hundreds of dollars by choosing the right airports. For example, San Diego to Miami is over $398 roundtrip, but if you fly into Fort Lauderdale, which is only 20 miles away, we can reduce your fare to $174 roundtrip. Oakland or San Francisco to Washington (DC) is $448 roundtrip, but if you fly into Baltimore (30 miles away), you pay $174 roundtrip. That's a savings of $274 roundtrip. Check out Quickfare Finder at <http://quickfares.bestfares.com/quickfare/qfsearch.jsp> for your best fare option.

HOTEL RESERVATIONS NETWORK

Need a hotel room? Look no further because HotelDiscounts.com is the place to find great deals at great prices. HotelDiscounts.com provides up to 70 percent off on hotels in major cities worldwide with guaranteed lowest rates. Book online at <http://www.hoteldiscounts.com/cgi-bin/pickcity?SID=NW2&LKF=NW2>

$72-$108 RT TO SUNNY FLORIDA THROUGH FEB. 14, '02

Need to thaw out on a cheap buck? Think Florida. Fly from many southern and East Coast cities for only $72-$89 roundtrip to Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa, Fort Lauderdale or West Palm Beach. From other cities such as Boston, New York City, Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland, you pay only $108 roundtrip. All travel must be completed by February 14, 2002. Check out all of our super cheap airfares to sunny Florida at <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=50887>. You can also check out Quickfare Finder at <http://quickfares.bestfares.com/quickfare/qfsearch.jsp>

50% COMPANION FARES TO MEXICO BEACHES THROUGH FEB. 20, '02

Most major airlines are charging $520 roundtrip from Dallas to Los Cabos. Your cost will be $374 roundtrip for the first ticket and you can pay only $187 roundtrip for a companion. More examples of this special are: Los Angeles to Acapulco for $320 roundtrip and a companion for $160 roundtrip; Minneapolis to Puerto Vallarta for $348 roundtrip and a companion for $174 roundtrip; and Atlanta to Acapulco for $439 roundtrip and a companion for $219 roundtrip. Fly to a Mexican beach in the next six weeks and save hundreds of dollars. Visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=646>

HAWAII ON SALE: UP TO 50% OFF THROUGH JUNE 30, '02 FROM $338 RT

This week, the major airlines raised the leisure airfares to Honolulu up to $400 more per ticket. The good news is that we have actually lowered our airfares to Honolulu. Why pay $1,028 roundtrip from Dallas, Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis or Cincinnati when you can pay only $538 roundtrip? From New York City, Boston, Washington (DC), Philadelphia or Atlanta, the published fare is $1,119, but you pay only $569 roundtrip. Either way, you can save up to $500 off the published fares to Honolulu. If you want to fly to Maui, Kona or Kauai, consider Honolulu as an alternate airport. Visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=52038>

SAVE BIG TO COSTA RICA OR BELIZE THROUGH MARCH 21, '02

You can take a warm international vacation to one of the two hot spots in Central America, Costa Rica or Belize. From New York City to Costa Rica, the fare is only $309 roundtrip; from Atlanta to Belize, the fare is only $320 roundtrip and from San Francisco to Costa Rica, the fare is $368 roundtrip. Travel is valid through March 21, 2002. We also have specials to San Salvador and Guatemala City. Visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=646>

SPECIAL FARES TO CAIRO, TEL AVIV OR JOHANNESBURG + A FREE STOPOVER IN LONDON

Now you can save hundreds and hundreds of dollars off the lowest published fares to Cairo, Tel Aviv or Johannesburg and you can receive a free stopover in London with two free nights in a three-star hotel (in London). For example, the published fare from Dallas to Tel Aviv is $998 roundtrip. Your cost is only $738 roundtrip and you'll get a free stopover in London plus two free nights in a three-star hotel. Los Angeles to Johannesburg is $1,686 roundtrip, but your cost is only $1,028 with the London special. Chicago to Cairo sells for $1,110 roundtrip, but your cost (with the London special) is only $678 roundtrip. Now, you can pay more and get less, or visit <http://www.bestfares.com/travel/desks/story.asp?id=50737> and pay less and get more.

You are currently subscribed to hotdeals as ebass@enron.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-hotdeals-1324881S@hotdeals.bestfares.com <mailto:leave-hotdeals-1324881S@hotdeals.bestfares.com>

Copyright 2002 by Bestfares USA Inc. All rights reserved.


Hi, David!  Hope all is well.  Since the referenced swap has been documented
by ENA, I am now reviewing the Transaction.  I have a number of questions,
many the result of my unfamiliarity with your Australian Reference/Fallback
weather stations and a few other comments.  I thought I would mark this up
and fax it to you which I will do shortly.  Sara


Please review for credit approval.

Thanks!


Dear Fam.
The Feb 4 testimony is on the Hill, in the morning in
front of the Senate and afternoon in front of the
House. They will likely be played on CSPAN 3 which you
can either watch on the internet or I believe it is
somewhere on Warner cable.
Liz
--- "Linda P. Lay" <mrslinda@lplpi.com> wrote:
> Dear Fam,
>
> Sally informed me today that John Brindle, a former
> head of Enron security,
> is now involved and will be handling all airline
> reservations (through
> Gordon Bethune at Continental airlines), ground
> transportation and hotel
> reservations (Four Seasons or Park Hyatt) for us.
> He has suggested that we
> use "assumed" names for all reservations being made.
>  John feels strongly
> that there could be a risk and a small unit will
> attract less attention and
> be easier to maneuver,  also it will allow for less
> media coverage...which
> is a good thing. Apparently, he will be giving a
> detailed report to Rosalee
> on Friday of this week.
>
> I talked with Ken about it tonight and as much as we
> would love to have you
> there for moral support we do not want to do
> anything that would put you in
> harm's way or create a media spectacle for him.  So,
> unfortunately, the
> prudent thing to do is have you stay in Houston and
> pray for him in your
> safe environments.
>
> For your information, our plan is to go up to DC on
> Thursday, January 31 and
> back on Tuesday morning, February 5.  Ken gives his
> testimony at the SEC
> hearings on Monday morning, February 4, and I am
> told that it will go on
> until late in the day.  These hearings are on TV and
> transcripts can be read
> on the internet.  I will try and get all of that
> info to you prior to 2/4.
>
> The following is also from Sally:
>
> "John has asked if the kids would have an interest
> in meeting with him for
> 20-30 minutes to hear his suggestions for ways in
> which to best help the
> situation, and ideas on keeping their families safe
> on a daily basis?  I
> expect this would need to be done during the
> weekday.  I would also suggest
> it be held maybe at the ROCC 12th floor conference
> rm. or at the Huntingdon
> and for the kids and spouses only, no children as it
> would only distract
> from his limited time.  Then, if anyone feels the
> need to interact with him
> on a more detailed basis they could arrange it with
> him, at their expense.
> He did express concerns that due to KLL's high
> profile, kidnapping is not
> out of the realm of possibility but he has numerous
> suggestions for
> circumventing this."
>
> Let us know your thoughts.  Love, Mom/Linda
>
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/


- Daily Notice - 12_28_01 EPMI.doc


I am also meeting with Robert on your contract - so we should get that done today.

Thanks


Bernard,

Yes, I can  read a DVI file. You can also  cc
my home address: Vkaminski@aol.com. I shall
try to send you an answer to your question on weekend.

Vince

"Murphy, Bernard" <Bernard.Murphy@caminus.com> on 03/01/2001 09:18:58 AM
To: "'Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com'" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc:
Subject: RE: 1997 Risk paper on Pricing of Electricity Derivatives

Vince,

I can send you a Scientific Word DVI file (at the weekend) if you can read
SCientific Word files ?  The dissertation hasn't been reviewed by Les or the
External yet - although its been at FORC for 2 months. I think that the
Empirical Chapter is probably the one which would be of most relevance to
both our company's businesses - although I ultimately didn't have the time
to 'explicitly' price the jump risk-premium which I conjectured is possibly
implicit in the prices of exchange-traded electricity futures-options -
rather I developed an implicit estimation procedure which will enable a
rough assessment (with a little bit of further work, but not too much) be
made of the price of jump risk in wholesale power markets.

In other words, I assumed spot jump-risk to be undiversifiable, and
essentially devoted 2 Theoretical Chapters to :

1) proving that a jump-diffusion trading model is "incomplete" (synthesising
the securities markets framework with martingale representation theory) -
note that I did not assume that markets could be dynamically completed with
'term structure' securities as in the HJM w/ jumps papers of Shirakawa and
Das and;

2) deriving an explicit risk-adjustment process for 'implementing' the price
of jump-risk using a jump-diffusion marginal indirect utility of wealth
process (ie. a jump-augmented production economy approach in the spirit of
CIR, Bates, Ahn & Thompson).

Incidentally, I would be keen to find out if you or any of your team done
much work on real-asset valuations in a spark-spread option-valuation
framework ?  I'm about to start a project evaluation of embedded
optionality, and have a dilemna whether I should model the spot or forward
gas / power price processes.  With the former, I can model mean-reversion
and jumps explicitly (obviously, important for capturing the optionality of
out-of-the-money plant, which might otherwise be ignored in a pure-diffusion
framework) but am not maximising the informational content of the available
market data (that is, assuming there was a long-term market forward curve
for electricity); whereas in the latter the driftless forward supposition
means that I have to capture mean-reversion via the futures volatility
function, and jumps are less easy to calibrate.  Any suggestions ?

Regards

Bernard

-----Original Message-----
From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com [mailto:Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com]
Sent: 01 March 2001 14:54
To: Murphy, Bernard
Cc: Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com; Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com
Subject: Re: 1997 Risk paper on Pricing of Electricity Derivatives

Bernard,

I am forwarding your message to my assistant and she will mail you a
reprint.
I would be glad to take a look at your dissertation. Is it available as a
publication, working paper?

Vince

"Murphy, Bernard" <Bernard.Murphy@caminus.com> on 03/01/2001 02:17:39 AM

To:   "'Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com'" <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com>
cc:
Subject:  1997 Risk paper on Pricing of Electricity Derivatives

Hello Vince,

My name is Bernard Murphy - I received your e-mail address from Les
Clewlow,
who was my PhD supervisor at the Financia Options Research Centre at
Warwick
Business School.  I've just finished my PhD on Electricity Price Jump
Diffusions :  A Theoretical and Empirical Study in Incomplete Markets -
hence my interest in electricity price modelling and derivative pricing.  I
was looking to get hold of a copy of your 1997 paper, which has recently
come to my attention :

"The Challenge of Pricing & Risk-Managing Electricity Derivatives", The US
POwer Market, Risk Publications, pp. 149-171.

and Les suggested that I contact you directly (Les is travelling at present
and doesn't have an electronic copy available) to request an e-copy.

Incidentally, I am Lecturer in Finance / Financial Mathematics at
University
of Limerick (Ireland) and have taken a year out to work for Caminus UK,
where I am working on introducing and developing a markets-based approach
(spark-spread) to real asset valuations in the UK power industry.

Thanks in advancve

Bernard Murphy


Start Date: 4/12/01; HourAhead hour: 11;  No ancillary schedules awarded.  No
variances detected.

    LOG MESSAGES:

PARSING FILE -->> O:\Portland\WestDesk\California Scheduling\ISO Final
Schedules\2001041211.txt


----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 01/12/2001 02:08 PM -----

	Karen Denne
	01/12/2001 09:45 AM

		 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: California Power Failure

Please see attached editorial, which ran in yesterday's New York Times and is
in today's Houston Chronicle.  We are distributing to all key media who have
been covering California energy.

SF team -- Please distribute to all legislators, trade and industry
organizations,  etc.
Linda -- Please forward to Quinn Gillespie to distribute in Washington.
Maureen -- Please distribute to the internal GA team.

Thanks.
kd

Editorial Desk; Section A
Essay
California Power Failure
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

01/11/2001
The New York Times
Page 31, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company

LOS ANGELES -- In the past decade, California has become the most Democratic
state in the nation. It has a Democratic governor, two liberal Democratic
senators, and both houses of its legislature are firmly in Democratic hands.
Not for nothing is it called the Left Coast.
Then why, Californians now ask themselves, is their state the most troubled
in the nation? Bad enough that Hollywood's writers are preparing to strike;
worse that speculators in Silicon Valley start-ups are watching their stack
of chips dwindle; worst of all is the unforeseen electricity shock that is
making the state's hair stand on end.
The price of electricity is soaring, yet the big electric utilities are
threatened by bankruptcy. Who's to blame?
The chosen villain: deregulation. As soon as cruel market forces were allowed
to work, cry liberal voices, those heartless capitalists drove up prices.
Bring back the cool, calm days of inefficient monopolies under government
control.
But in fact, the first villain is botched deregulation -- not as bad as in
Russia, but 'tis enough, 'twill do.
California's politicians deregulated halfway, which is the worst way:
wholesale prices were freed from controls, but retail prices were not.
Consumers remained seemingly protected, but the utility companies -- which
foolishly thought wholesale prices would go down forever -- were enabled to
buy on the spot market. Legislators believing they were protecting consumers
forbade long-term contracts, which are hedges against sudden price
fluctuations.
This halfway dereg ran smack into the inexorable law of supply and demand.
The good times of the 90's sharply increased demand for electric power. But
all sorts of obstacles were put in the way of increasing the supply of that
power.
Result: upward pressure on prices, calls for rationing, utilities going
broke, government intervention that frightens off private investment, and the
danger of an economic Big One in the state responsible for 13 percent of the
nation's product.
The unspoken issue in this bastion of liberalism is ''nimby'' -- the real
villain in the current supply crisis, that says ''not in my backyard'' to
power plants. In San Jose, epicenter of the computer industry's drain on
electric power, New Economy voters recently rejected a new power facility
that offended their aesthetic sensibilities. Red tape and purple rhetoric are
the reasons no major power station has been built in California in 10 years.
Contrary to popular belief, electricity does not come from the socket in the
wall. The steady flow of low-cost power comes from factories that convert
energy from other sources into the stuff that makes toasters pop,
air-conditioners wheeze and computers beep. Unless energy is dug up and
produced in real places and transmitted through real lines, nothing comes out
of the wall.
Environmentalists recoil in horror at suggestions of nuclear power, now a
safe and clean source of electricity, or the use of cleaned-up coal to lower
the price of natural gas that generates it. Reducing pollution sensibly is
laudable, but clean-air extremists become local heroes without telling
constituents the danger of loss of Intel jobs and cheap electricity's
household convenience.
The answer is not re-regulation, nor more halfwayism, nor federal bailout.
When Gov. Gray Davis of California raced to Washington, D.C., to ask for
wholesale price controls, he found Bill Clinton too busy carving up Jerusalem
to mediate; Clinton-appointed federal energy bureaucrats offer only
palliatives, with photo op to follow.
Davis's panicked proposal to build state-owned plants (in Nevada? On the
moon?) and his threat to seize the assets of ''price gougers'' may please
some new breed of dot-communists. But such populist pap destroys private
incentive to invest and is hardly the path for a presidential hopeful
professing to be a centrist.
After short-term action to alleviate hardship caused by past and present
political-industrial blindness, our biggest state should avoid regressing
into more stultifying regulation and instead get out of the way of
stimulating supply.
Why do I sound like a reformed drunk on this? Because I wrote the Nixon
speech imposing wage and price controls. They never work in peacetime. Never.

Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Brian, please give me your thoughts via e -mail asap. I believe this will be
the most effective tool.  Please give me your expectations as well.

Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 01/05/2001
09:40 PM ---------------------------
From: Brian Bierbach@ENRON on 01/05/2001 01:40 PM MST
To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: End of year PRC/Bonus

Hi Dave,
I would like to have the opportunity to speak with you regarding the roles
that certain individuals played in closing the Project 20/20 transaction and
provide you with input on how to rationalize bonus amounts relative to
everyone's performance rankings and contributions to 20/20.  I am open to
your suggestion as to when and how best to convey my thoughts on this issue.

Hope you had a good holiday and look forward to talking with you soon.

Brian


It is because we are required to due certain corporate due diligence prior to
trading, which we don't do unless they really want to trade financial.  Most
of these counterparties are really interested in trading physical products,
so we don't bother to do the necessary due diligence.  If they really want to
trade financial, we could transact w/o a master, we'd just have to check
their corporate documents, file Consents to Service of Process, etc.  If
we're doing all that we tend to say let's just get the master in place while
we're at it.

	Justin Boyd
	01/25/2001 03:07 AM

		 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc:
		 Subject: Re: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.

Hi Tana

Many thanks for this, and in due course I'll let you have updates for Europe.

I have a question for Mexico, Argentina and Chile:  Why is their a necessity
to have Master Agreements in place for commodity derivatives? I would imagine
this is driven by the Credit Dept and their preference for netting?  I can't
think why there could be any legal objections - and I have read advice
obtained by Brent H. for Chile and Mexico and no such restrictions are
mentioned.

And also in relation to Mexico, could you find out what corporate due
diligence is required of Mexican companies, in particular of the entity
mentioned below, Femas Empaques SA de CV.

Many thanks

J

From: Tana Jones on 24/01/2001 15:35 CST
To: Francisco Pinto Leite/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT

Subject: Re: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.

FYI-attached is my list of notes on online approvals, which includes the
South American countries we currently trade with.

Justy-if you have any updates to the European countries, they would be most
appreciated.  I have had no updates since Edmund fell ill.

	Francisco Pinto Leite@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
	01/24/2001 03:18 PM

		 To: Justin Boyd@ECT
		 cc: Lara Fields@ECT, Tana Jones@ECT
		 Subject: Femsa Empaques, S.A. de C.V.

Justin:

 I am the "new" lawyer in charge of our financial trading operations in
Mexico.

I am told that we do not trade financial with any Mexican counterparty
without going through our normal due diligence process.  At the end of the
day we need a Master in place with any Mexican counterparty with whom we
trade (financial) online or otherwise.  I checked and we do not have a Master
in place with this counterparty.

FPL


This request has been pending your approval for  12 days.  Please click http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000067320&Page=Approval to review and act upon this request.

Request ID          : 000000000067320
Request Create Date : 10/11/01 10:24:53 AM
Requested For       : matt.smith@enron.com
Resource Name       : Risk Acceptance Forms Local Admin Rights - Permanent
Resource Type       : Applications


Are they working on it?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Postlethwaite, John
Sent:	Wednesday, February 06, 2002 12:33 PM
To:	White, Stacey W.
Subject:	RE: YOU HAVE 48 HOURS

Looks like everything went well. We do not have access to the Terminal Server right now.

John

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	White, Stacey W.
Sent:	Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:30 AM
To:	Dahlke, Andrea; Evans, Casey; Lewis,  Jon Paul; Vinson, Donald Wayne; Chang, Fran; Dunton, Heather; Postlethwaite, John
Subject:	FW: YOU HAVE 48 HOURS

Just making sure there are no problems with this migration.  John, did it work for Portland?

Stacey

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Kitchen, Louise
Sent:	Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:03 AM
To:	Milnthorp, Rob; Calger, Christopher F.; Furrow, Dale; Curry, Mike; Redmond, Brian; Vickers, Frank; Tycholiz, Barry; Kitchen, Louise; Forster, David; Lagrasta, Fred; Llodra, John; Bradford, William S.; Taylor, Mark E (Legal); Cook, Mary; Hodge, Jeffrey T.; Sager, Elizabeth; Hansen, Leslie; Thomas, Jake; Foster, Chris H.; Mcdonald, Michael; Davies, Derek; Le Dain, Eric; Belden, Tim; Swerzbin, Mike; Presto, Kevin M.; Davis, Mark Dana; Sturm, Fletcher J.; Zufferli, John; Allen, Phillip K.; Shively, Hunter S.; Lavorato, John; Grigsby, Mike; Martin, Thomas A.; Whalley, Greg; Gilbert-smith, Doug; Carson, Mike; Oxley, David; Haedicke, Mark E.; Colwell, Wes; Beck, Sally; Reeves, Leslie; White, Stacey W.; Gossett, Jeffrey C.; Superty, Robert; Andrews, Naveen; Gorny, Vladimir; Hayden, Frank; Walker, Jennifer; Rub, Jenny; Webb, Jay; Steffes, James D.; Furrow, Dale; Foster, Chris H.; Mcdonald, Michael; Davies, Derek; Le Dain, Eric; Ryan, David
Cc:	Piper, Greg; 'pat.odonnell@ubsw.com'
Subject:	YOU HAVE 48 HOURS

This is not a circular and you will not get another chance.  This deals with migration to new systems and you need to migrate your own information or applications in the next day.  Remember do not delete anything and data to be transferred must comply (see attachments below).

The policy must be complied by Thursday.  Please ensure that everyone in your group has moved everything which is in compliance with the policy.  We will not be delaying close or restart for people not having completed their own migrations.

Please make sure that those people who are not in the office are contacted and comply (eg Dana - please cover Kevin's migration requirements)

Thanks

Louise

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	UBSW Energy General Announcements
Sent:	Tuesday, February 05, 2002 6:12 PM
To:	DL-UBSW Energy Houston
Subject:	Data Migration Protocol

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

 << File: Protocol Regarding Data and Document Migration.doc >>

Certification Document

 << File: Certification.doc >>

Thank you for your assistance in making the transition to UBS a success.


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Lavorato, John
Sent:	Friday, July 06, 2001 5:37 PM
To:	Allen, Phillip K.; Arnold, John; Arora, Harry; Baughman, Edward D.; Belden, Tim; Black, Don; Blair, Greg; Breslau, Craig; Calger, Christopher F.; Clifford, Douglas; Collonges, Remi; Davies, Derek; Davis, Mark Dana; Dayao, Anthony; Deffner, Joseph; Devries, Paul; Duran, W. David; Dutt, Ranabir; Foster, Chris H.; Gomez, Julie A.; Gonzalez, Orlando; Grigsby, Mike; Herndon, Rogers; Josey, Scott; Keel, Allan; Kishkill, Joe; Kitagawa, Kyle; Lagrasta, Fred; Lewis, James; Luce, Laura; Martin, Thomas A.; McDonald, Michael; McMichael Jr., Ed; Miller, Don; Milnthorp, Rob; Mrha, Jean; Muhl, Gil; Neal, Scott; Parks, Michelle; Parquet, David; Presto, Kevin M.; Redmond, Brian; Schwieger, Jim; Shively, Hunter S.; Sturm, Fletcher J.; Swerzbin, Mike; Thomas, Jake; Thompson, C. John; Tricoli, Carl; Tycholiz, Barry; Vickers, Frank W.; Whitt, Mark; Wiggs, Brett; Wolfe, Greg; Zufferli, John
Subject:

Enron Americas will be holding an offsite from August 16th to 18th.  Please mark your calendars.  At this time we do not have specific details.

This event is mandatory.

Regards

John and Louise.


________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

 - goggles1.exe


No changes to any existing data, just adding Real Power Losses