This is the content of an email: Steve - Bob asked me to forward the attached amendment to the Fee Agreement to your attention for review and comment. The amendment deals with the addition of North American Emissions to the suite of products that Amerex can access on Broker Client. As there is no fee being paid for this additional product, we are considering access to be on a "trial" basis. When the Fee Agreement is renewed, fees for all products can be further disussed. Please take a look at the attached and circulate as you deem appropriate. If you should have any questions or need anything further, please let me know.

Subject: Amendment to Fee Agreement

This is the content of an email: Hertzberg called. We very briefly discussed the scenarios that he asked us to build for him. I've attached the file. the supporting spreadsheets are not included. If folks would like them, let me know. Please keep the file confidential. Hertzberg wanted to see what happened to rates for large (noncore) customers if the small (core) customers' share of past utility debt is shifted to noncore customers. Our analsis shows that noncore rates approach Loretta's recent rate increases when approximately 50% of core's share of utility past debt is shifted to businesess (i.e., to noncore). (In fact, Edison's rate in this scenario is below the Lynch rate, while PG&E's is modestly above.) Increasing the cost shift above the 50% level would start to push rates significantly above the Lynch rates. Note, however, that in its recent submission to the PUC, DWR's asserts that it's revenue requirement is substantially higher than the revenues support by the Lynch rate increase, suggesting that Lynch will have to increase rates again soon. In addition, Loretta's rates also do not reflect past utility costs, which will require yet additional increases. I expect to have another conversation with the Speaker later this evening or tomorrow to discuss the scenarios in more detail (he would still like to put 100% of the IOUs past debts on noncore in exchange for getting a competitive market and out from under Loretta). I will report back after we've spoken. All ideas, suggestions, etc. regarding the attached spreadsheet are welcome and appreciated. Best,

Subject: Follow-up with Hertzberg on Core/Noncore

This is the content of an email: Tom, I received an e-mail from Linda Carter asking about certification. I assume you will get a schedule tonight at the meeting. She was asking about David, her son, being certified this year. The way I read the new rule, is that you have to be 19 to be certified. I told her I would ask you to ask about that new rule at the meeting tonight to be sure we understand it. It is posted on their website www.nwal.org . Lyne

Subject: NWAL Meeting

This is the content of an email: Attached is the list of PRC meetings that will cover operations for ENA, EIM and EGM. Location, times and attendees are listed for each meeting. There are five pre-review meetings that will take place starting today through December 5 in preparation for the Energy Operations PRC meeting that will be held on Friday, December 8. I invite you to sit in on any or all of these meetings if you would like to do so. The most meaningful meeting will be on December 8th. In that meeting, we will review the results from the pre-review meetings for Senior Specialists and below. I would anticipate that if at each pre-review meeting the preferred distribution is met as instructed, then this portion of the meeting will not take too long. We will then review in more detail the managers, who will have been pre-ranked in the pre-review meetings. We will also review and rank the directors and senior directors. I can also be prepared to review my suggested rankings for the three VP's who report to me, with you, Wes Colwell and David Oxley in attendance. Call me if you have any questions. --Sally
Subject: Energy Operations PRC Meetings