Subject: Re: Capacity Generation Auction on EOL
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 05:12:00 -0800 (PST)

Leonardo -  Please be aware that the Wheatland IL peaking facility which was 
to support this EOL capacity product is being sold  -- therefore EPMI no 
longer seeks to roll out this exact product.  The Power Desk will consider 
whether they want to proceed with some  variant of the online capacity 
product, and if so, will advise us.  Please contact me with any questions, 
and thanks for your help.  --David

----- Forwarded by David Portz/HOU/ECT on 12/01/2000 10:32 AM -----

	David Portz
	08/15/2000 11:33 AM
		
		 To: Leonardo Pacheco/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Edward D Baughman/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: Re: Capacity Generation Auction on EOL

Leonardo

I understand and share the desire for a simple website, but have several 
times indicated that these are not GTC terms, but tailored to this product 
offering (and any subsequent capacity products to be offered), and it is 
therefore legal's belief that they should appear within the website itself.  
Please keep me updated as to the progress on the product, as it occurs.  
Thanks.  David

	Leonardo Pacheco@ENRON
	08/15/2000 10:55 AM
		
		 To: David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: Edward D Baughman/HOU/ECT@ECT 

		 Subject: Re: Capacity Generation Auction on EOL

David,

Sorry for not replying to your message before.  All of our resources are 
still focused on the next phase of EnronOnline, thus we have had to delay all 
new products and new  auctions  development. We should be ready to start 
working on your auction in a couple of weeks. 

I agree that we had discussed the "contract section" before however, when I 
passed it through David Forster he did not like the format (legal wording). 
The reason for this is that we like to keep a same format an all of 
EnronOnline's offerings. Would it be possible to move this section to the 
GTC? We can always refer the clauses to the contracts. We would like to keep 
the contract section a  easy-to-read as possible.  

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks again for your help!

Leonardo Pacheco
ext. 39938

David Portz@ECT
08/15/2000 10:35 AM
To: Leonardo Pacheco/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Edward D Baughman/HOU/ECT@ECT 

Subject: Re: Capacity Generation Auction on EOL

Leonardo -- I haven't heard from you since this exchange of e-mails and am 
merely confirming with you that progress is underway on this product 
offering.  --David Portz

__________________

Leonardo -- I had addressed this with you in a telephone conversation on 
7/18/00:  The provisions would be part of an individual confirmation for this 
transaction, and are customized from similar provisions in underlying 
documents, rather than being verbatim repetitions.  Three attorneys in the 
legal group had collaboratied to identitfy these provisions as those 
necessarily appearing in the website text.  Please call me with any further 
questions. --David

	Leonardo Pacheco@ENRON
	07/18/2000 01:42 PM
		 
		 To: David Portz/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Capacity Generation Auction on EOL

David,

Thanks for the text. I reviewed it and think that there is only one major 
issue outstanding:

Additional Contract Terms: The clauses of this section seem to be extracted 
directly from a contract. They look like they are verbatim from a legal 
document. As you all know, the idea of the website text is to inform and 
guide your customers through the whole process. We need to substitute the 
current clauses with easy to read highlights appropriate to the web page. We 
can always refer the clauses to the contracts. We would like to keep this 
section a  easy-to-read as possible. A good example of the "Contract Section" 
is the one used for the Emission Auctions.

Please review and let me know if you have any questions or comments.

Thank you very much for your help!

Leonardo Pacheco
ext.  39938