Everyone, As we stated earlier, this particular virus that is on the internet is causing a lot of issues for Corporations. As a result, the companies who write anti-virus software are continuously updating their software. As of this morning, another update has been made available to us. This update does a better job of protecting your PC than the update we received last night. At this time, it is extremely important that you again go through one of the procedures listed below to get the latest update. 1. Logout of the network and log back in or 2. Click on START>PROGRAMS>ACCESSORIES>Norton AntiVirus Corporate Edition and then click the Live Update button. This will pop up a screen where you will have to click the "Next" button and then a "Finish" button. - If you are an EES user, this option is not available to you. Please use option 1. The proper version of the update pattern you need is: (9/18/2001, version 30918BL) - You may need to restart the Norton Anti-Virus client if you want to visually insure that you have the latest update. If you have questions or concerns, please direct them to your Resolution Center. Enron Global Technology
Answer: Update to Virus Protection Software #2
Lara: I have rather hastily put this list together. For that I apologize. Hope it is helpful. The things on the list are ones that you've likely already considered. Nevertheless, some of the issues we face in California include: 1. POWER PLANTS The utilities' subs are building power plants; competitors (like Enron) are also trying to develop plants to sell power into both wholesale and retail markets. The utilities control the interconnection of plants to the grid. The interconnection rules are currently so vague and ambiguous, that the utility could quite easily favor its generation sub over competitors. This would have an effect on prices at both the wholesale and retail level (i.e., how do we know we've gotten the best generation deal if the utility can favor its subs plants via interconnection?). 2. DISTRIBUTED GENERATION And the same goes for DG: in California many are pointing to DG as a viable solution to the price spikes. If the utility loses sales because a customer has installed DG on her premises as a hedge against price spikes, the utility will have an incentive to thwart interconnection of the DG unit. (Recall that in many places, recovery of distribution costs is derived from kwh sales; and if sales go down, so can recovery of the utilities' distribution-related costs). In addition, if someone attempts to install DG at the grid level (as opposed to on-site DG) and sell the DG power in wholesale and retail markets, the utility has the ability to frustrate the DG project via interconnection. This permits the utility to retain bundled service customers. Utility control of DG Interconnection can also permit the utility to favor its DG subs. 3. INTERCONNECTION/VOLTAGE BUY-UP And the same goes for the retail level---remember how SDG&E used
Answer: Rick's Panel on Wholesale/Retail Market Power Issues
Chuck - John Allario forwarded the comments you made to the NDA for my review and comment. I agree with all revisions, but the change to the business relationship provision in the introductory paragraph. I would propose that we state the "Project" to be "... each of Enron's and Amerada's affiliates are prepared to furnish each other with information in connection with a possible business transaction or relationship based upon use of the EnronOnline platform or software (the "Project")..." The statement made in your revision is a bit beyond what is actually intended to be discussed. Please consider this change and let me know your thoughts. If this is acceptable, I will incorporate it into final agreements, together with your other comments, and see that final agreements are forwarded for signature. Thanks.
Answer: NDA with Enron
ISDA PRESS REPORT - DECEMBER 26, 2001 CREDIT DERIVATIVES ISDA publishes credit survey - Risk ENERGY Enron's Success Story - The Wall Street Journal The International Swaps and Derivatives Association released its first survey of the global over-the-counter credit derivatives market last month, showing a total notional outstanding volume of credit derivative transactions of $631.5 billion as of the end of the first half of this year. ISDA, which compiled information from 83 firms, hopes the survey will provide a benchmark from which to chart future growth in the credit derivatives market. This survey, and the others that have been done by Risk, the British Bankers' Association (BBA), the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (0CC) and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) have all used different methodologies on different samples, and have generated varying results. Risk's survey last year showed significantly higher total notional volumes $810 billion. The BBA survey released in July 2000 also gave a higher figure, forecasting $893 billion for the end of 2000. The BJS plans to publish its triennial figures on the credit derivatives market later this year. Upward trend According to ISDA, while still modest in relation to interest rate products, the credit derivatives market is expected to remain on a strong upward trend compared to more mature derivatives product areas. Most major dealers say there has been a big increase in their credit derivatives volumes. Mike Brosnan, deputy comptroller of risk evaluation at the 0CC, pointed to a challenge in assembling these surveys: "When you conduct a survey, some people may or may not respond, hence the data could be incomplete. A problem with a survey is: who is the enforcer?' The OCC. which carries out its own quarterly review of the US derivatives market, showed a decline in the credit derivatives market, from $426 billion at the end of 2000 to $351 billion at the end of second-quarter 2001. Brosnan attributes the decline in the credit derivatives market to uncertainty among users, relating to restructuring issues sparked off by the US life insurer Conseco's debt restructuring last year. However, according to Tim Frost, head of JP Morgan's credit derivatives business in London, the decline evidenced in the OCC's figures really comes down to a change in reporting methods that occurred in 2000 from gross-to-net notional figures on outstanding credit derivatives contracts. Enron's Success Story The Wall Street Journal - December 26, 2001 The collapse of Enron was many things -- a gratifying slap in the face to
Answer:
ISDA PRESS REPORT - DECEMBER 26, 2001