Subject: "Weather Documents".

Body: I've attached the final copies of all confirms for our Weather products and the T &Cs. The attached include the new confirms for the Snowfall Collar, the CDD Midwest and CDD Northeast Basket Floors, as well as the most recent version of the Snowfall Option. These are all the weather products for the moment. Please let me know if we need any others. Ed X58939

Subject: "Docs".

Body: Suzanne: Could you please go into the following Shari Stack files and print out all of the docs that are in these files? WSPP Agt. Municipality Info Thanks.

Subject: "David Woodstrom".

Body: Hunter, As I mentioned this morning, since Zach McCarroll turned down the offer we = would like to explore the possibility of keeping David Woodstrom on the IT = team to fill the open position. The Fundamentals IT team has been cut to a= minimum support staff, and the addition of David would facilitate more dev= elopment of fundamentals content. David has been focusing on the operation= al capacity reporting (morning ops reports) by creating better ways to acce= ss the operational data (real time query tool vs. standard reports). David= also has been responsible for maintenance and development of the commodity= fundamentals website since he joined the group in early 2000. He built an= d maintains the current message board system used by gas trading and as wel= l as the critical notice alerts for pipelines. He has also worked closely = with the West desk and Portland on various real time load and outage report= s. David Dronet and I both feel that the addition of David Woodstrom will = allow the fundamentals team to continue producing innovative products inste= ad of providing only support for current operations. Let me know if you ha= ve any questions. Chris

Subject: "More base gas questions".

Body:
Tracy: Sorry to bother you with this one again - in 1999 and 2000, what were the revenues and costs associated with the base gas sales - the footnote disclosure indicates $53 million and $34 million in sales but not the cost. In addition, going forward, how much of the 2001 and 2002 TG&S expense is solely related to this transaction (i.e. expenses that would not be incurred but for this transaction)? My question may be a bit confusing - call me if I am totally off base!