Kate, please ask Sean Crandell if the following deals need the "special 
phrase" ..The Parties agree and acknowledge that this Transaction is 
connected with the transaction referenced in Deal No. 347356.1 entered into 
between the Parties on May 31, 2001.

Jack Wells of Conoco called and said that the phrase should be included in 
confirmations: 506549.01..506550.01..506551.01 and 507417.01 and 507430.01.  
Please ask trader if deals are related to the 347356.01.  Sharen has inquired 
once before and we were under the impression that the deals were separate and 
not included.  Please let us know.

Thanks
Stephanie 
---------------------- Forwarded by Stephanie Piwetz/HOU/ECT on 02/08/2001 
10:12 AM ---------------------------
   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  Sharen Cason                           02/08/2001 10:07 AM
	

To: Stephanie Piwetz/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Conoco deals


---------------------- Forwarded by Sharen Cason/HOU/ECT on 02/08/2001 10:06 
AM ---------------------------
   Kate Symes                01/29/2001 06:22 PM

To: Sharen Cason/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Deal 507430 and 507417  

Jack Wells is the contact for both - I've added his name to deal #507417. 
According to Sean Crandall, these deals are separate from 347356. That deal 
was a sale, and the deals entered today are all buys. Sean said we're just 
buying back the MW we originally sold them. But I think that's the only 
connection. Let me know if you need more of an explanation from the traders, 
but our take is that these deals are separate.

Thanks,
Kate


   
	
	
	From:  Sharen Cason                           01/29/2001 04:05 PM
	

To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:  

Subject: Deal 507430 and 507417

Are these two deals part of the original Conoco deal # 347356 that they are 
extending or something different?  We need to know because we have to add 
something in the confirmation if they are extensions of the original deal.  
Also, is Jack Wells the contact for both?

Thanks!