IN: This is an email
Energy Firms' Mixed Message Is Focus of Inquiry Deregulation: Senate panel will investigate whether suppliers were being misleading when they promised lower rates for consumers while they were also predicting bigger profits for investors. By ROBERT J. LOPEZ and RICH CONNELL, Times Staff Writers In the summer of 1999, a top official with a major player in California's power market testified during a congressional committee hearing in support of speeding up deregulation. Unleashing market forces, said the Dynegy Inc. executive, would ensure "maximum customer savings" and "low-cost power." That same month, the Houston-based firm made a far different pitch to Wall Street: Deregulation and major swings in electricity prices would boost revenue and stock value. "We know how to take advantage of volatility spikes across the gas and power market," Chief Executive Officer Charles Watson declared in a publication targeting large investors. "The energy marketplace," he predicted, "will simply get more volatile." Dynegy was not alone, a review of federal filings, company documents and public records shows. In the years since California's pioneering deregulation plan was approved, other major out-of-state energy suppliers were sending similar, seemingly contradictory signals to the public and stock buyers. Now, those divergent messages--electricity prices will fall but corporate

What is the subject?

OUT: More on CA Legislature Inquiry into Wholesale Prices

IN: This is an email
I have reviewed the above proposed confidentiality agreement and have made certain modifications which are in line with the confidentiality agreement presently in effect between ENA and Markwest. Since the new agreement is to cover Markwest for the period that they are letting Enron review Markwest's financials which are scheduled to be publicly released next week, the term references therein need to only cover the period from the date hereof until such financials are scheduled to be released, which I understand to be next week. The change to Enron Corp was made because the employees who will receive the information are now employees of Enron Corp. Please have your attorney contact me if there are any problems with the manner or substance of the changes noted in the document.

What is the subject?

OUT: Markwest Conf. Agreement

IN: This is an email
Stacy, Currently I have pending on my desk a GISB from you however, ENA's special provisions are not included. Also, a draft of a Master agreement was sent to Markwest this summer. Can you give me an update on the status of the purposed draft? With regards to the GISB, we can discuss ENA's special provisions at your convenience. Please let me have your thoughts. Best regards,

What is the subject?

OUT:
GISB / Master Agreement