Re: FINAL RESPONSES TO COMMISSION HOECKER

See attached.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 12/01/2000 03:46 PM
---------------------------

Richard Shapiro@ENRON
12/01/2000 03:10 PM
To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: FINAL RESPONSES TO COMMISSION HOECKER

I would not convert footnotes to endnotes- quick review: looks very good. I
will review in more detail over weekend. Thanks.

From: Joe Hartsoe on 12/01/2000 05:03 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:

Subject: FINAL RESPONSES TO COMMISSION HOECKER

----- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 12/01/2000 05:02 PM -----

"Ronald Carroll" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com<
12/01/2000 04:53 PM

To: <jdwatkiss@aol.com<, "Jeffrey Watkiss" <dwatkiss@bracepatt.com<,
<gfergus@brobeck.com<, <acomnes@enron.com<, <jhartso@enron.com<,
<jsteffe@enron.com<, <mary.hain@enron.com<, <smara@enron.com<
cc:
Subject: FINAL RESPONSES TO COMMISSION HOECKER

Please let me know ASAP over the weekend or Monday morning by 11:00 eastern
of any final comments. In order to file this on Monday (as I strongly
recommend that we do), I must ask that you please limit your comments to
truly substantive considerations.

Mary: Unfortunately, because of the additional text that others proposed,
moving the Joskow and Kahn analysis to an Attachment and moving the cites to
footnotes did not serve to shorten the document, which is now 9 pages.
(However, both these changes should make the document more readible so I
think they were still good suggestions.) We could save about 2 pages if we
convert the footnotes to endnotes, but I would be reluctant to do that since
only truly motivated readers read endnotes.

A nice weekend to all. Ron

- 0134802.01
- 0134897.01
- HOECKERR.DOC
- ATTACHME.DOC