July 28, 2000
SMITH INTRODUCES BILL TO BAN MTBE IN REFORMULATED GASOLINE

Acknowledging the uphill battle that lies ahead, Senate Environment
Committee Chairman Bob Smith introduced on Thursday a bill to ban the
use of a key component in the Clean Air Act's reformulated gasoline
program.

As a sign of his intention to press ahead on the issue, Smith also
announced a full committee markup of the bill (S 2962) for Sept. 7.

Smith (R-N.H.) declared on the Senate floor: "We need to ban MTBE. ...
There will be no environmental backsliding."

Smith said he had hoped to introduce the bill a day earlier, but he was
still trying to solicit support from the main stakeholders on the issue.

Smith's bill would ban the use of methyl tertiary butyl ether, an
oxygenate used in 85 percent of reformulated gasoline, because of
groundwater contamination problems that have occurred in several states,
including New Hampshire.

While acknowledging that MTBE is effective in reducing air pollution,
Smith said it can migrate through the water table and has contaminated
drinking water supplies.

The ban of MTBE, a petroleum derivative used for years by the oil
industry, would boost dramatically the demand for ethanol, an
agriculture-based fuel that is the competing oxygenate in the
reformulated gasoline program.

Smith alluded to the tough negotiations he has had over the past six
months with the ethanol lobby and the petroleum industry. "There are
people who are dug in for various reasons," Smith said.

Smith has made the MTBE ban one of his top legislative priorities this
year. "It has to pass," Smith said. He also warned: "This is a tough,
tough issue. Everybody's not going to get what they want."

Smith promised that his bill "won't reduce the environmental benefits of
the Clean Air program."

In describing the main features of his bill, Smith said state governors
would have the option of waiving the 2 percent oxygenate requirement in
their state that is part of the reformulated gasoline program.

The Clean Air Act amendments of 1990, which established the reformulated
gasoline program for the nation's most polluted cities, require that 2
percent by weight of a gallon of gasoline must be oxygen.

MTBE was the oxygenate of choice for the petroleum industry, because of
its abundance and cheap cost of production.

Smith said his bill also would give states the authority to ban the use
of MTBE within their state. EPA also would have the authority to ban
MTBE immediately. The bill itself would phase out MTBE within four
years.

Smith's bill also would provide $200 million from the leaking
underground storage tank fund to clean up MTBE-contaminated sites.

The bill would authorize EPA to conduct a study of the environmental
consequences of the nation's transportation fuel supply.

Smith noted that while Midwestern senators strongly support a boost for
ethanol, the alternative fuel has its own environmental problems. The
main concern is that ethanol prompts faster evaporation of gasoline into
the atmosphere, which is a concern in New England and in California.

Smith said he also was interested in establishing a program to boost the
development of non-petroleum-based, alternative transportation fuels. He
then introduced his own amendment to his own bill, based on draft
legislation that he had been circulating among members.

Smith acknowledged that a ban on MTBE would increase the cost of
reformulated gasoline. He estimated his proposal would cost consumers
approximately 3 cents to 4 cents per gallon extra in areas where
reformulated gasolines were required.

A proposal put forth by the ethanol industry -- to ban MTBE but keep the
2 percent oxygenate requirement, which would be met by ethanol -- would
cost 8 cents per gallon and was unacceptable, Smith said.

Smith said he disagreed with the Clinton administration's proposal to
ban MTBE and establish an ethanol mandate. He estimated the cost at 6
cents per gallon. "Let the markets decide," Smith said.

Smith also noted that the oil industry "is not real thrilled about
this."


FYI

>  -----Original Message-----
> From:  Robert Rivera
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 2:04 PM
> To: Neal S. Manne
> Subject: Enron/Duke
>
> Below is the text of a letter I've used before to make sure that
> settlement meetings between business people remain as confidential as they
> can and outside of litigation.  Perhaps we could use something like this
> in Enron/Duke.
>
> Dear _________:
>
> Please allow this letter to serve as our agreement under Tex. R. Civ. P.
> 11 that with regard to the meeting to be conducted on [DATE] between
> various representatives of the parties to the above-captioned dispute:
>
> (1)  The meeting will be held without prejudice to any position the
> parties may take in litigation.
>
> (2)  No statement made by any representative of the respective parties
> during the meeting will be used in connection with litigation related to
> the above-captioned dispute.
>
> (3)  Statements made by any party representative during the course of the
> meeting will be treated by all parties, in present or future litigation,
> as having been made pursuant to Rule 408 of the Texas Rules of Evidence or
> its equivalent in other jurisdictions.
>
> If this letter describes our agreement accurately, please sign below
> before the scheduled meeting and return the letter to me.  Otherwise,
> please call me immediately.
>
> Robert Rivera, Jr.
> Susman Godfrey L.L.P.
> 1000 Louisiana St., Ste. 5100
> Houston, TX 77002
> (713) 653-7809
> rrivera@susmangodfrey.com
>


We will need to get your signature on a few docs. Should we email this to you or fax to your house?
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)


My name is Jim Little.  I am a forth year Enron employee and a third year student at South Texas College of Law.

I am writing in response to a posting with your group for a Sr. Legal Specialist.  The posting itself contains no information about the job other than the fact that it is in the Labor and Employment Department.  I realize the expectation may be that I contact the recruiter directly; however, I felt efficiency would be served in contacting you directly.  I would appreciate any information you may provide including both duties and necessary qualifications.

I would also appreciate you considering speaking with me in the near future concerning a paper I am writing about individuals with HIV and the protections they are afforded under the ADA.  I feel comfortable that Enron has addressed this issue and I am merely guessing that you would have been involved in such discussion or have familiarity through your various writings on the ADA.  I am still researching the topic, so it will be a few weeks before I would feel able to ask intelligent questions.  But I would appreciate knowing at this time if this is something you are able and willing to discuss.

Thank you for your time,

Jim Little
x37703


-----Original Message-----
From: 	Martin, Thomas A.
Sent:	Tuesday, October 30, 2001 12:26 PM
To:	Bass, Eric
Subject:	FW: Inside FERC monthly survey reminder with Excel form attached

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	"mhenergy" <mhenergy@yahoo.com>@ENRON
Sent:	Tuesday, October 30, 2001 10:14 AM
To:	kelley_doolan@platts.com; mhenergy@yahoo.com
Subject:	Inside FERC monthly survey reminder with Excel form attached

Hello from Inside FERC,

(Sorry for the double send.  This version has the price form attached)

Tomorrow (Wednesday) is the last business day of October, and it's the final
deadline for Inside FERC's Gas Market Report's November 2001 bidweek
spot-price survey.

Attached is an Excel workbook (IFMONTH2.XLS) to report your price data in.

Please take a moment to review the instructions at the top of the file. They
specify what kinds of deals to report and -- more importantly -- what deals
NOT to report.

Please note that a significant portion of our survey respondents are
reporting counterparties with their deals.  We want you to too. Please list
counterparties in the "comments" column. Counterparty information is held in
confidence and not shared with third parties.

Reported deals with counterparty information are treated as more reliable
than trades without.

Please make sure to add the name of a contact person for your company and a
telephone number to reach them with at the top of your price file.

When you are done, e-mail the price workbooks back to both
kelley_doolan@platts.com and MHENERGY@YAHOO.COM by 1:00 PM (Central), on
Wednesday, Oct. 31.

November monthly prices will be published on Thursday, Nov. 1.

As always, thanks for your help, and if you have any questions, please feel
free to call or e-mail me at the telephone number or address below.

Best regards, and I hope you and yours have a safe and happy Halloween,.

Kelley Doolan, chief editor
202-383-2145 kelley_doolan@platts.com

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE TAKEN OFF THIS REMINDER LIST please either call me
or send an e-mail, and I will take you off right away -- KD

 - ifmonth2.xls


..as Columbo would say.."..just one more thing"

p.20 last bullet:  Enron focusing on recruiting AND RETAINING talent

Thanks again!  Christie.
----- Forwarded by Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT on 02/07/2001 05:24 PM -----

	Christie Patrick
	02/07/2001 05:23 PM

		 To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, J_Martin@baylor.edu
		 Subject: The latest (last?)

Mark!

Please review the attached article and forward your comments/authorization
for its use to John Martin at Baylor, copying me and Vince.

John and Vince,

I have a few simple comments:

1. Please use "Enron Corp." [rather than "Enron Corporation"]

2.  page 3: as of yesterday, Fortune Magazine named Enron "most innovative"
for the SIXTH year in a row

3.  page 5:  2nd paragraph:  regarding the "gas bank" concept--I believe when
Jeff first introduced it, it fell flat. I think John pick's that up (and
Enron's subsequent recovery of a version of the concept on p.6), but it's
probably accurate to mention that at first, it didn't go over.

4.  page 13: re: Cindy Olson's comment on a possible 5 X difference between
a "satisfactory" and "superior" VP--the difference referred to is probably
the "bonus" rather than "compensation" (which , to me, is generally means
base salary); also, it varies for each review period, as comparative
performance might vary;   further, we might want to run that quote by Cindy
just to make sure she's OK with it's publication (she might have no problem
with it whatsoever, but I know for other articles, she's been more reluctant
to provide that kind of  statistic).

5.  page 17 (after Annual report quote): I suggest changing "Enron's
wholesale business... provides" to "...businesses..provide";  also, rather
than "Enron Wholesale" we might want to define this by the term Enron uses:
"Enron Wholesale Services"

6.  page 18: 2nd paragraph: the tense switching from past to present is
technically correct if read carefully , but seems awkward when reading it

7.  page 19: effective February, Jeff Skilling is "CEO".

...that's my 2-cents worth!!   I think the article is great...even
interesting (ha!)...even to non-MBA's like me!!

Thanks!

--Christie.

----- Forwarded by Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT on 02/07/2001 04:41 PM -----

	Vince J Kaminski
	02/02/2001 08:45 AM

		 To: Mark S Palmer/NA/Enron@Enron
		 cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 Subject: The latest (last?)

Mark,

I am sending you the final (?) draft of the paper by John Martin
on Enron's transformation. John Martin is a prof from Baylor who visited us
a few weeks ago.

Can you take a look at the paper and bless it. I haven't read this last
version
of the paper yet and I will go through it on weekend.

Vince

---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 02/02/2001
08:44 AM ---------------------------

"John D. Martin" <J_Martin@baylor.edu> on 02/01/2001 04:15:36 PM
To: vkamins@enron.com
cc:
Subject: The latest (last?)

Vince,

Attached is my latest attempt to wrap everything together.  Our timetable
is very short as we need an "approved by Enron" version of the paper to Don
by next Wednesday.  Don has already made editorial changes for us and may
make some additional "writing style" changes but he doesn't change the
content.

I'll give you a call later today to alert you to the e-mail.

take care,

john

p.s. i had a nice conversation with steve.  sounds like he's landed a
pretty good contract with Wiley.

 - Enron_Paper_2_1_01.doc

John D. Martin
Carr P. Collins Chair in Finance
Finance Department
Baylor University
PO Box 98004
Waco, TX 76798
254-710-4473 (Office)
254-710-1092 (Fax)
J_Martin@Baylor.edu
web:    http://hsb.baylor.edu/html/martinj/home.html


Bad.  Let's talk.