This is the content of an email: The invoices for November 1999 settlement adjustments will be posted by 23:00 today, Monday, September 17, 2001. The NYISO apologizes for any inconvenience resulting in the delay in posting these invoices. Transmission Customers will observe adjustments to their settlements to: (1) recover costs related to adjustments made outside of the billing process; and (2) adjust the NYISO clearing account balance to zero for November 1999 settlements. With regard to the adjustments made outside of the billing process, these adjustments could not have been corrected by a billing code or determinant data fix. As a result, the mechanism of paying and funding the adjustments is done through adjustments outside of the billing process. The total adjustment of $14,178.39 was allocated across 5,059,790 MWh. Customers may validate their respective adjustments by computing their ratio shares of the $14,178.39 using 5,059,790 MWh as the denominator in their respective ratios of their November 1999 load. Customers will observe a difference in the denominators used in the ratio share allocation of this adjustment versus adjustment #2. This is due to the fact that the costs for adjustment #1 are not allocated to those that received payment through the adjustment, which would defeat the purpose of the adjustment. Prior to October 2000, the NYISO recovered or refunded differences in the revenue received from Schedule 1 charges, which were comprised of forecasted uplift & residual adjustments, and the costs actually incurred by adjusting subsequent month's Schedule 1 rates accordingly. In October 2000, the NYISO implemented a change in the tariffed Schedule 1 provisions that allowed the recovery and refund of these costs as they were incurred. In order to allow any changes in uplift and residual adjustments to be settled through the settlement adjustment process, the code implemented in October 2000 was used to report these costs to the market. This results in an over-collection which is being returned to Customers through an adjustment to their monthly balances. This billing treatment for the November 1999 settlement adjustments resulted in credits to the market totaling $5,583,559.78 allocated across 5,074,229 MWh. Customers where allocated their portion of this adjustment based upon their respective ratio shares of the 5,074,229 MWh of NYISO transmission service billed for the month. November 1999 settlement adjustment settlement dates have been changed to address the delay in invoicing. Payments due to the NYISO for November 1999 settlement adjustments are due to be received in the NYISO clearing account on Monday, September 24, 2001. Payments due to market participants will be made on Thursday, September 27, 2001. Please refer to the attachment below for banking instructions. The NYISO anticipates that the 2nd settlement adjustment for December 1999 settlements will be invoiced tomorrow, Tuesday, September 2001 by 23:00. Settlements dates will be adjusted to accomodate the invoice date changes. Given the aforementioned schedules, payments due to the NYISO for December 1999 settlement adjustments will be due to be received in the NYISO clearing account on Tuesday, September 25, 2001. Payments due to market participants will be made on Friday, September 28, 2001. The NYISO will confirm the invoicing schedule for December 1999 settlements tomorrow. Regards,

Subject: November 1999 Settlement Adjustment Invoices

This is the content of an email: Sandy Ragnetti is our newest administrative professional in West Power Trading. She is a temp from OfficeTeam and has been doing a phenomenal job for us the last few weeks. Sandy has been working with me, and she will be assisting the administrative team when we have absences. Sandy's last position was as an account manager at a market research firm, and she has a diverse background in advertising and marketing. Please make Sandy feel welcome!

Subject: Welcome Sandy Ragnetti to West Power Trading

This is the content of an email: NGI's Daily Gas Price Index published : October 29, 2001 ALJ Clears Transwestern of Market Power Charges A FERC administrative law judge has found no improprieties, nor evidence of the exercise of market power in negotiated rate contracts between Transwestern Pipeline and two shippers on its system, which resulted in the shippers being charged as much as $27/MMBtu last February, far in excess of the pipeline's allowed transportation rate of 38 cents/MMBtu (RP97-288-009). ALJ Jacob Leventhal had only one fault to find, and that was with Transwestern's method of posting capacity. The judge said, and Transwestern agreed, to modify its tariff "so that all posting, bidding and award procedures are set forth in a separate provision with an appropriate caption" on its Internet bulletin board. Shippers had said that reviewing capacity on the Transwestern web site was "a tortuous process." Indicated Shippers claimed Transwestern's inadequate capacity posting and award procedures did not provide all interested parties with an opportunity to bid for the capacity that was available. While "both Indicated Shippers and (FERC) Staff find it curious that SET (Sempra Energy Trading) and Richardson (Products Co.) were the sole bidders on the contracts awarded to each of them...curiosity does not translate into proof," the judge said. Witnesses in the expedited hearing testified no bids were considered in advance of the capacity posting. The judge subsequently found the capacity was awarded in a manner consistent with Transwestern's tariff. Similarly, Levanthal could find no evidence that Transwestern exercised market power in negotiating the rates with shippers or withholding or threatening to withhold capacity. The capacity was available at recourse rates, and the shippers knew those rates were available. "Staff's arguments really are criticisms of the posting and award procedures, but do not demonstrate the exercise of market power." The two shippers said they made a business decision to propose the "index-to-index" formula that produced the higher rates, rather than take the recourse rate "to minimize any risk on transportation options." The index-to-index formula refers to taking the difference between the daily published commodity prices at two different points and subtracting to get the transportation rate between them. In this case the two points were the San Juan Basin and the SoCal Needles delivery point. The case was set for expedited hearing last summer by the commissioners acting on staff recommendations.

Subject: NGI Article on TW Ruling

This is the content of an email: I just wanted to check for one of our British attorneys who is coming into town next month to confirm he is registered for a seminar. Do you have Mark Elliott registered for Derivatives I on August 8 and 9. Can you confirm this for me so I can confirm it for him. Thanks!
Subject: Development Center Class Reminder - Basics of Risk Management