This is the content of an email: Ellen, I believe these are the deals that needed the PTR language. The customer has been requesting a confirmation. Can you please get with Gerald to get them prepared as soon as possible? Thanks,

Subject: Confirmation on Riceland/Ralaco - 969604 & 939536

This is the content of an email: Maria: I think that 2 minor chnages need to be made to the Enron Guaranty and probably the PSE&G Guaranty: 1. Change in the first paragraph "Enron North America Corp., a Delaware corporation to Enron North America Corp., a Delaware corporation and its successors and assigns 2. In the definition of "Agreement" include language that would pick up amendments, supplements, replacements and restatements thereof so its reads :"such ISDA Master Agreement, together with each Confirmation exchanged between the parties thereto and together with any and all amendments, supplements, replacements and restatements thereof, hereinafter the "Agreement") Let me know if you have a problem with this.

Subject: Enron Guaranty

This is the content of an email: John, Further to the voice message that I left you, I have recalculated the amount of security that would be required if all of the modified direct sales contracts are acknowledged by noon January 4. The calculations are still a bit rough but I thought this spreadsheet would provide you with something to review. I have used a $35 Pool Price in the calculations. Note the additional tabs in the spreadsheet that detail the hourly generation that the Pool has received for SD3 and SD4 . In determining the actual security required, we will need to review the megawatts in the contracts registered in detail once we have the acknowledgements tomorrow. For simplicity I have assumed that everything is base load and I know this is not correct. Once we know exactly what contracts we are looking at, we can fine tune the calculation. <<December SD3 and SD4.xls>>

Subject: Enron Security

This is the content of an email: Dorothy: I am dropping you this e-mail at the request of Rod Hayslett and in response to your voice mail message to him concerning the status of the price redetermination under the LNG contract with Duke. The parties reached settlement on this issue about a week before arbitration. The new price beginning September 1 is 92.5% of the Equivalent MMBtu Price of No. 6 Fuel Oil less $0.25 per MMBtu. Of course, the other provisions of the contract, such as the ceiling price, the floor price and the bank provisions, remain. I trust that makes some semblance of sense. If you have additional questions, please call. Jeff
Subject: Duke