Jim:

I am confused.  LeBeouf wanted to represent ENA and EES and Reliant never 
came up in the conversations.  We picked Brobeck and it was painful for 
LeBoeuf.  I think there must be some additional facts relative to New Power.

Regards,

Mark



	James Derrick@ENRON
	12/15/2000 06:01 PM
		 
		 To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Reliant

FYI; should we have any discussions with LeBeouf re their representation?  Jim
---------------------- Forwarded by James Derrick/Corp/Enron on 12/15/2000 
02:11 PM ---------------------------


Marc Manly@EES
12/15/2000 08:40 AM
To: James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Reliant

Jim:  on the theory that it is better late than never, I attach a summary of 
the Reliant/Labeouf discussions concerning their potential representation of 
us in California.  It appears that Reliant did finally leave a crack open (it 
was not so absolute as I had been led to understand).  Marc
---------------------- Forwarded by Marc Manly/HOU/EES on 12/15/2000 09:37 AM 
---------------------------


Kathleen E Magruder
12/14/2000 09:35 PM
To: Marc Manly/HOU/EES@EES
cc:  
Subject: Reliant

You have asked that I recount the facts surrounding my failed attempt to hire 
LaBeouf Lamb to represent New Power in CA before the PUC.

In late July, I contacted Chris Hilen with LaBeouf's San Francisco office to 
ask if he would represent us in the Order Instituting Investigation which 
arose from the summer's price spikes in San Diego.  He said he would check 
with Reliant to ensure there were no conflicts.  When he returned my call, 
Reliant was unwilling to permit LaBeouf to proceed on our behalf.  Because I 
had been told earlier this year that Reliant would probably never be opposed 
to  us anywhere but Texas in the future, I called a contact at Reliant who 
referred me to Mike Jines in the general counsel's office.  Mr. Jines was 
unavailable, so I left him a voicemail message.  I told him that as I 
understood it, Reliant is only in the generation business in CA and not in 
the retail sales of electricity as we are.  We should both be interested in 
options that create better markets, lift rate caps and foment competition.  
Consequently, I felt there was no conflict here.  It took Mr. Jines some days 
to respond.  The intervention date was quickly approaching and needed legal 
assistance, I turned to Arter Hadden.  Some time after we had made that 
commitment (and after the intervention date), Mr. Jines called and suggested 
that perhaps something could be worked out.  Due to the press of other 
business, I did not return the call as the immediate situation had been 
resolved.

In October then, as we searched for a lobby firm in Sacramento, one person 
who was highly recommended told us Reliant would be "extremely uncomfortable" 
if she were to represent us, too.  She opted not to interview with us.  Since 
the message was similar to the original message to LaBeouf, I have moved on 
to find another lobbyist and have not followed up with Jines.

If you would like to discuss this more, please call.