|
|
Enron Mail |
Here is the memo we discussed this morning, wherein I reiterated to the PSCo
project team the "must have" language that Lisa Bills said she needed for equipment orders into West LB. She has subsequently told us that E-Next requires the same approach. ---------------------- Forwarded by Alan Larsen/PDX/ECT on 12/20/2000 09:19 AM --------------------------- Alan Larsen 11/07/2000 03:04 PM To: Jeff G Slaughter/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Jake Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen Thome/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Bills/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roseann Engeldorf/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen E Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Leboe/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: FVP Purchase Orders The following is the "must have" language for the equipment purchase orders: 1) No reference to NEPCo. The deal will be between the vendor as seller, and ENA as agent for West LB as buyer. There will be no reference to an "Owner". 2) The buyer's obligations must be limited to payment of a set price. Cancellation rights are acceptable, but the payment exposure must be set out. 3) We require termination rights. Again, it is acceptable that such termination right be coupled with cancellation payments. 4) Assignment provision: must provide that buyer can assign to a "successor financing entity". This is the feed back we have been waiting for, and is the result of the conversations and e-mails we have been engaged in with Rose and Lisa recently. There is one additional point, as you are aware: NEPCo and EE&CC need to get the purchase orders and option attachment material to us (i.e. the deal team, and ENA legal) for scrubbing before it goes to Lisa and Rose. They can review the material for compatibility with West LB and TurboPark requirements, but not for commercial workability. I may miss your phone call this afternoon, if it comes off, as I am headed to the airport. This info should be imparted to NEPCo and EE&CC. Al
|