IN: Attached is the current list of rotations for the Trading Track participants and future assigned rotations (as decided at the time of hiring). Can you please re-confirm you have these people in your group currently, as I appear to have conflicting information. I will re-send, if any changes occur. If there is any movement of these people between groups can you plese keep me in the loop. Kind regards,

Generate a subject line.

OUT: Existing Trading Track Rotations

IN: Jeff: This is just a quick "head's up" to advise you that I am no longer retired and am CEO of an energy information start-up, Genscape, Inc., based in Louisvllle. Two founders (32 year olds) left power trading positions to pursue the development of technology able to measure the electric and magnetic fields emanating from high-voltage lines connected to power plants. They were successful and can now translate those measurements into highly accurate estimates of transmission line load and direction and from that make a highly accurate estimate of a power plant's generating status. The information is delivered to customers via Internet on a real-time basis. Genscape will by year end have built a monitoring network capable of monitoring 250+ plants or startegic transmission points in the Continental U.S. Genscape's initial customers are energy trading companies and subsequent customers will be power generators, transmission and distribution operators, insurers, fuel suppliers and transporters, regulators and wholesale power consumers. The reason for the "head's up" at this time is that I'll be meeting with Scott Tholan of your staff on Tuesday, May 1, to review Genscape's product.

Generate a subject line.

OUT: David Doctor/Genscape, Inc.

IN: Sales Tax to Rise by a Quarter of a Cent Finance: A 1991 law triggers a reduction in good times and kicks it back up during slowdowns. The state deficit means a higher rate on Jan. 1. By JULIE TAMAKI TIMES STAFF WRITER November 1 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Gray Davis' administration is expected to confirm today

Generate a subject line.

OUT: FYI - LA Times story on sales tax increase

IN: I am trying to distinguish these two types of entities both practically (what are we able to negotiate) and legally (what do we really need in our Schedule). I am also interested in your experiences in dealing with these parties. ENA's form of "municipal" Schedule ("the ENA Schedule") was essentially taken from the 1992 ISDA U.S. Municipal Counterparty Schedule ("the ISDA Schedule"). In addition to other provisions, the ISDA Schedule (1) adds reps designed to avoid "an Orange County" type meltdown and (2) incorporates the concept of "Incipient Illegality" (which occurs before the Termination Event of Illegality). The "Incipient Illegality" concept is used in Section 2(a)(iii) (obligations) as well as the Section 3 (reps) of the ISDA Schedule: the concept is added to the Section 3(b) rep ("..absence of Event of Default, Potential Event of Default, Incipient Illegality...), and for purposes of notifying the other party of its occurrence. Interestingly enough, the ENA Schedule does not include the Section 3(b) rep change. I think we need to add this change to ENA's Schedule. With respect to IOUs, we need to clarify our position on "Regulatory Development" (which is actually a watered-down "Incipient Illegality" concept). If such an event occurs, ENA should be advised of the event (Notice). But, does ENA really want the ability to terminate trades at mid-market ("Additional Termination Event") or simply to have this event included as part of a Section 3(b) rep such that the occurrence of the event merely triggers an Event of Default at ENA's side of the curve (for breach of the Section 3(b) rep)? I have found that negotiating with IOUs for the "Notice" provision can be difficult. Extracting the Additional Termination Event is tough. Arguing for a Section 3(b) change may be easier (and would mirror the municipal format). I think ENA really needs the ability to decide when to halt trading with a counterparty experiencing a Regulatory Development (which we may only learn about through notice from the counterparty). Thus, I recommend that for IOUs, we add a notice provision and Section 3(b) rep change incorporating our latest definition of "Regulatory Development." But we really have to negotiate for this protection. Otherwise, why bother to include this additional language? What do you think?

Generate a subject line.

OUT:
Municipals (including municipal utilities and other regulated entities) vs. investor owned utilities ("IOUs")