Recall that we terminated all retainers with Mike at the end of April and 
have no RCR approval for Mike for work in May.  

I called Mike and yelled at him for assuming he can work on issues with 
Sandy's approval but without RCR approval.  I called Sandi and she will 
present a number of RCRs--see below.  

I don't think we need Mike's help on windfalls profits--our position is clear 
and the research is done.  
Today and tomorrow, he's participating in two meetings with the Direct Access 
Coalition at my request to support the language we (read "he") drafted.   We 
should get Leslie more integrated on this effort--but will not be able to 
completely reduce Mike's work.

I'm really not sure what to do on power plant siting.  

Also, I'm not sure what we should do about the Global Settlement stuff.  
Apparently, Steve has already requested that Mike do some work on an issue 
(how to insert a poison pill--if the Global Settlement is upset by litigation 
or an AG indictment??).  I am very concerned that we may lose control over 
the issues or the forum unless we centralize the assignments in Jeff or 
Steve.   

 -----Original Message-----
From:  MDay <MDay@GMSSR.com>@ENRON 
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-MDay+20+3CMDay+40GMSSR+2Ecom+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 4:27 PM
To: 'Sandi McCubbin Enron SF'
Cc: Kaufman, Paul
Subject: Proposal for Legal Services RCR

Here are my proposals for RCRs related to legal services in support of Enron
legislative activities for May 2001 and the remainder of the session.  These
estimates are for Enron budgetary purposes only, and do not represent a
commitment or a "not to exceed" figure for Goodin, MacBride.  The actual
fees incurred may exceed these estimates, and GMSRD will bill Enron on a
hourly fee basis, as opposed to the retainer mechanism used in the first
part of this year.

1.  Direct access legislation:   This involves working on a continuing
series of bills related to direct access.  I cannot estimate a specific
amount for the entire legislative project, it depends on how long it takes
for the legislature to enact significant direct access legislation.   My
best estimate is $8,000 per month, or $24,000 over three months.  The
estimate would increase if direct access is still at issue in the session's
last month--August.  As of May 11, 2001, we have recorded approximately
$3000 in billings related to direct access in this month.

2. Improved powerplant siting and increased emission offset
legislation:   $15,000 over three months, more if the final legislative
solution is delayed until August.  We have recorded approximately $1,000 in
billings related to this area this month (through May 11, 2001).

3. Windfall profits tax bill:  This project required additional upfront
legal research regarding the constitutionality of the proposed tax.  We have
billed legal fees for approximately $4000 in May, 2001, up through May 11.
My best estimate is $18,000 over three months of session, more if the bill
is still alive in August.

4. Global settlement/Edison MOU/Plan B legislation:   This project
covers the gamut of comprehensive legislative proposals to address the
energy crisis, including a proposal by the Governor, legislation to approve
the Edison MOU or an alternative plan which does not involve purchase of the
Edison transmission system, commonly referred to as "Plan B".  As explained
by Paul Kaufman, this work is expected to involve less work in the near
term, and more as the legislation actually moved forward in the future.
Trying to average this increasing level of work over time is difficult, but
I am estimating $15,000 over the next three months, more if the package is
still being enacted in August.  We have recorded approximately $2000 in
billings on this issue through May 11, 2001 this month.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of the above.  We
are pleased to have the opportunity to be of service to Enron, and look
forward to continuing this relationship.

Mike Day
Goodin, MacBride, Squeri, Ritchie & Day, LLP