Subject: "Vitro/Termination agreement".

Body: I haven't seen a signed copy of the termination agreement cross my desk. I just want to make sure that the fully executed document has been processed. Thanks,

Subject: "NGI Article: Kern River Shippers to See Rate Decrease Oct. 1, More in 2002".

Body: NGI's Daily Gas Price Index published : September 26, 2001 Kern River Shippers to See Rate Decrease Oct. 1, More in 2002 Finally, some good news: a unit of Williams said Tuesday that firm transportation rates will drop by as much as 36.5% for all original shippers on its Kern River natural gas transmission system beginning Monday (Oct. 1). The lower rates will be implemented under Kern River's previously approved extended-term rate program. Williams, which developed a strategy to lower rates in response to customer requests as part of its rate-reduction settlement in 1999, projects more rate reductions next May, when the costs and revenues of the 2002 expansion are reflected in rates. "The extended-term rate program was designed to provide long-term, firm shippers with an option to pay lower, more market-responsive rates today in return for extending their contract terms," said Kirk Morgan, director of business development. Bruce Warner, manager of rates and planning for Tulsa-based Williams, said the company had looked at its "financial situation and found that if customers could live with longer contracts, we could live with lower rates. The lower rates will be offset by lower depreciation expenses and will not negatively impact Kern River's financial performance." Williams' gas pipeline unit is one of the largest-volume transporters of natural gas in the United States. Its gas pipeline unit's Kern River Gas Transmission, based in Salt Lake City, operates a 922-mile system delivering Rocky Mountain and Canadian natural gas to markets in California, Nevada and Utah.

Subject: "CA rept requirements rehearing denied".

Body: Though the electronic copy is not yet available, we have faxed out a hard copy of FERC's "Order on Rehearing" issued today in RM01-9, "Reporting of Natural Gas Sales to the California Market." All requests for rehearing and clarification have been denied, as the requirement "is in the public interest...[and further] is necessary for the Commission to advise Congress as to whether it should change the existing regulatory framework..." Some major points are: (1) Arguments that FERC cannot require the info. from non-jurisdictional entities is disputed by citation to the NGA and FPA, allowing FERC to collect any information in order to advise Congress on a matter of urgent concern. The Commission also cites the FPA's authorization to investigate electricity issues, including the cost of generation (of which natural gas is a key factor). (2) In response to Enron's arguments, the order states the following: Enron argues that the data collection should be undertaken on an as-needed basis, not regularly; FERC simply denies this. Enron argues that the burden of reporting was underestimated; FERC says this may be true but is no reason to rescind the requirement. Enron argues that the reporting is not based on the business method utilized by the company and that it does not have the information on a daily pricing and volume basis (matched to physical volumes); FERC answers that data should be submitted "in a manner consistent with the way the particular gas seller does business." Examples are given in the text of the FERC order. If Enron is contending it should only file aggregate information, FERC finds this option unacceptable. Only Enron asked for an extension for the filing deadline, from 30 days to 45 days after the close of each month; FERC denies this request as unnecessary. (3) CPUC request for access to all information filed is denied. Sensitive price data will be exempt from public disclosure (with no exceptions) so that all parties must comply. The order also states, "Moreover, the purpose in seeking the information is to enable the Commission to understand the operation of the market for gas sales into California, not to investigate the conduct of particular participants in that market."

Subject: "PJM Load Forecast Model".

Body:
Lloyd, I would like Ricardo and I to sit down with Kevin and go over how our PJM load forecast model works. I want to use it, or a version of it, for day to day sensitivity analysis. I haven't met Kevin yet so if you could mention this to him I would appreciate it. I would also like to sit down with you some time this week to talk about PJM fundamentals and co-ordinating our analytical efforts. I want to get a feel for what we have done and set some goals as to what needs to be done. Let me know if one afternoon this week works for you. Thanx,