IN: Hi Sally - Just wanted to let you know that I have recently begun collaborating with an ebusiness consultant from CGI - a large Canadian systems integrator with an energy practice - on a demand-generation piece that should be published in the trades in a few months. The slant is on the scaling systems - IT and people - and the reduction in costs brought about by mid and back office systems affected by a sharp increase in online trading in the energy sector. Eventually, will probably be looking for some quotes and input from you or your ops people. I'll keep you up to date. Thanks,

Generate a subject line.

OUT: FYI - Article in process

IN: market_relations@nyiso.com writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List: Dear Market Participants: On the November 1999 & December 1999 Transmission Customer Monthly Statements many customers have noted under the "Energy Settlement" section for "Forward Energy" a change in MW-Hrs with no associated change in dollar amounts. This is because of a correction in the sign convention for the MW-Hrs related to external generation transactions (transactions from a proxy bus to the NYISO reference bus). For all other types of transactions the NYISO charges customers the appropriate TUC or LBMP based on the MWs that flowed, but for external generation transactions, customers receive payments from the NYISO, and therefore these types of transactions have an opposite sign convention. The dollars associated with the external generation transactions have always had the proper sign convention, but the MW-Hrs have not. On 01/17/2000 this sign convention was corrected for all billing months going forward resulting in the correct MW-Hr values being reported from February 2000 to date. However, November 1999 - January 2000 did not have the proper MW-Hrs reported on the Transmission Customer Monthly Statements. With the latest settlement adjustments posted the MW-Hrs are being corrected with the proper sign convention. Transmission Customers will see similar changes in their forward energy MW-Hrs for January 2000's settlement adjustment.

Generate a subject line.

OUT: November & December 1999 Settlement Adjustments

IN: I have gotten a call from Roger Mock, CEO of American Public Energy Agency, regarding a series of transactions. In 1999 we (ENA through Enron Natural Gas Marketing Corp.) entered into a 12-year prepay. We got approximately $297MM in cash up front, with delivery obligations at various delivery points, including NNG-Demarc, Rockies, TW-SJ, NIT, Topock and Sumas over the life of the deal. Currently the end users are Clark Public Utility District (Washington State), City of Glendale (California), City of Pasadena Water and Power Department (California), and Sacramento Municipal Utility District (California). It is my understanding that ENGMC is not currently in bankruptcy. I am sending down to Mike's attention a CD with the project documents on it. I apologize in advance for the absence of a table of contents, but I felt lucky just to get the information. Teresa Bushman may have a hard copy of the documents.

Generate a subject line.

OUT: APEA Gas Prepay Transaction

IN: Dan, I wanted to let you know that we are working on the problem that we are having with the straddle deals being booked into Tagg. I also wanted to bring to your attention that these deals tested correctly in Tagg Stage, so we are trying to sort out what is happening in Production. I am working with Tagg IT to resolve the issue. I will keep you posted. Thanks TARA

Generate a subject line.

OUT:
Straddle Problem