Thanks, John.  Couple of things.  

First, I was involved with the analysis in point number one (i.e., if 
California had bought at 5 cents.....), but would be happy to discuss with 
those who worked on it.

Second, we've just about go the numbers scrubbed for #2 (working with Comnes 
and Tribolet on that analysis). Key to the "back up" on point number two will 
be internal sign off on releasing information that uses our curves as the 
benchmark in the mark to market assessment.  I'm checking with Steve Kean on 
that and will get back to you ASAP.

Best,
Jeff





	John Shelk
	06/26/2001 09:14 AM
		 
		 To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate
		 cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Carin 
Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron, Pat Shortridge/Corp/Enron@Enron
		 Subject: Follow Up On California Information

Just following up on the Monday conference call discussion yesterday with 
Rick and others about nailing down the numbers and documentation so we can 
feed the Hill information on the mistakes Governor Davis made last year and 
this year on power supply contracts.

As I understand it, there are two aspects of this:

 1. The offer of Enron and others last year to sell power to California 
utilities for 5 cents per kw.  Failure to accept these offers resulted in 
higher power costs in the range of $15 billion, as I recall from yesterday's 
call.

 2. The long term contracts that California signed this year after taking 
actions and making statements that drove up the forward price curves are now 
under water to the tune of $20 billion.

On both counts we will be pressed for assumptions and documentation to pursue 
these arguments, which parallel the comments made by senior management in 
Capitol Hill meeting last week.  We will work on back up on this end, but we 
would greatly appreciate your assistance in this regard as well. 

With Congress out of session starting COB on Thursday, we will need 
information pulled together by tomorrow COB to get the final product in the 
hands of congressional types and others who can use it on a timely basis.  
Thanks.