Subject: "2012 Olympics".

Body: As a follow-up to our meeting yesterday, I thought you might be interested in the attached letter that John Kelley just received from the Stuttgart, Germany group that is also bidding for the 2012 Olympics. They were very impressed with the concept of converting the Astrodome to a track and field facility, and they evidently are considering a similar stadium as part of their bid for the 2012 Olympics. This seems to underscore the importance of Houston moving quickly to make the conversion of the Astrodome so that we do not lose our competitive advantage. - Stuttgart Letter .xif

Subject: "Valuation of GA Activities".

Body: John/Gia: You asked that we attempt to evaluate our activities. Working with TW, I've valued this one. The California Commission ruled that the "Hector Road" natural gas recent point in California ought to be made a primary receipt point. This would have had the effect of TW losing access right to 200 MMcf/d of capacity at SoCalGas' Needles receipt point. Best case scenario: Under SFV rates, loss to TW is commodity rates (wash) and the fuel margin. TW calculates the fuel margin to be $5.8MM/yr. Bad case: If shippers on TW try to make the case that TW is at fault for losing the primary access rights, then TW is at risk for the demand component of the contracts associated with the 200 MMcf/d. TW calculates the demand charges loss to be $16.5 MM/yr. Worse case: In addition to actual damages listed above, shippers face performance penalties and other contractual damages (from their customers) and they try to pass those costs on to TW. I discussions with TW, we concluded that the most likely case fell between "best" and "bad," somewhere in the $12-15MM/yr range. TW believes that without the assistance of CA Gov't Affairs in the case, the $12-15 MM/yr would have been lost. Be happy to discuss with you further. Best,

Subject: "Brokerage account audit memo to be distributed by Enron North America Corp. ("ENA")".

Body: Attached is a short letter advising subs/affiliates of ENA of existing brokerage and futures accounts. I thought these should be sent to the general counsel and CFO/Treasurer of each company. Please let me know your comments, frequency of review, whether any other group should monitor, etc. Each attached Exhibit will contain only a list of accounts. I have not included account numbers but we can do so and include any other information you consider relevant. Remember, the only other "brokerage account matrix" which we have produced is a quick view of brokerage firms and Enron companies. Thanks.

Subject: "MP Energy Partnership".

Body:
Susan: would you please contact this party to see if they have comments? Jennifer says they are ready to sign. We are having a guaranty problem and that's why this party has come up. Please let Souad know what the response is. Thanks. Sara