This is the content of an email: Jeff: At your request I am offering this memo to explain the status of the agenda items before the CPUC on the issue of suspension of the direct access program. There are two pending draft decisions at this time, the first is the proposed decision of ALJ Barnett (Item H-7 on the last agenda) which was modified by a changed version submitted by Pres. Lynch at 2:45 pm on 9-5-01, the day before the last meeting. This version indicated that direct access was suspended as of the date of the order (which would have been Sept. 6) and states in another ordering paragraph that the utilities are to advise their customers that the suspension is effective Sept. 6, 2001, specifically naming that date. This order would have been interpreted to suspend direct access as of Sept. 6 if it had been voted out that day. The other item, Agenda Item H-7A on the last agenda, is the Bilas alternate decision which calls for hearings to determine the impact of direct access on the issuance of bonds, and does not suspend direct access at this time. Please be advised that the suspension date contained in H-7 can and probably will be changed before the orders are considered at the CPUC meeting on Sept. 20. Either the Sept 6 date will be changed to the 20th of Sept., or some other specific date could be inserted at all the locations in the order dealing with the suspension date. All that is required to make this change is the distribution of a changed page on the Escutia table before the Commission meeting. Thus, it is important for all direct access supporters to continue to urge the Commission, especially Commissioner Brown, to support a suspension date later than Sept. 6, because it is so easy for the date to be altered under Commission procedures. Please let me know if you require any additional information on this subject. Mike Day Goodin, MacBride, Squeri, Ritchie & Day

Subject: Status of CPUC Proposed Decisions on Direct Access Suspension

This is the content of an email: During June, Coral transacted on EOL. However, they selected a July thru October deal by mistake. The marketer immediately called the desk and we agreed to let them out of the deal, which resulted in the creation of a second deal in EOL. Coral is not reporting anything on the deal, since it was unwound. But, since EOL deals are automatically processed and are firm transactions, we cannot kill the deal on our side, even though they net to zero volume and price. Logistics will be brokering the transactions in MOPS. Please be sure that Coral is not invoiced or paid on these deals. Again, they will not have a record of the deals. The Sitara deals are: 287946 and 288653. Let me know if you have any questions. D

Subject: EOL deals with Coral July-Oct 2000

This is the content of an email: I saved the file for us to send to Susan Trevino for all the book access requests. I added the control group and put goss, kam, valdes and his people in there. So make sure you add that group to your book requests. Please take a look at this file and let me know if we need to make any changes. I plan on sending this file to Susan Trevino by tomorrow afternoon. The file in located in the Netco directory under controls/desk matrix. Thanks. PL

Subject: risk matrix

This is the content of an email: At the request of Dan Diamond, I am attaching our proposed form of Broker Electronic Transaction Agreement and Fee Agreement. If the enclosed meets with your approval, please execute the agreements and return them to me via fax no. (713) 646-3490. I will then have them executed by Enron. If you have any comments or questions please call Mark Greenberg, Senior Counsel, at (713) 345-8897 or me at (713) 853-3399. We look forward to hearing from you.
Subject: BETA & Fee Agreement -TradeSpark, L.P.