|
|
Enron Mail |
As far as I know the commissioning period we have in the current LM contrac=
ts=20 still works for the LMs. I haven't heard any differently. You just plug= =20 those things in, right Scott? From the owner/power seller standpoint, the predictability is more importan= t=20 than the time period (within reason, of course). No matte what we have on= =20 LDs with GE, the penalty for not moving megawatts will be more. As for standard of conduct, do we have language in the warranty section abo= ut=20 how the service techs have to work? Maybe something similiar would be=20 work? =20 The discussion shows that it is a good idea to get them committed to=20 performing the TD of I at the time we sign up to buy the turbines. ckm John G Rigby@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 05/24/2001 07:54 AM To: Bill Williams/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON cc: Scott Dieball/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Kay=20 Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: RE: Experience In commissioning GE 7FA's & Slow/Insufficient TDI = =20 Good point on the LM's- I will make that point, at this time I think the= =20 baseline is 7FAs- and the time should be shortened for LM's. Unfortunatel= y=20 I do not think that EECC has corporate history on the 7FA's commissioning= =20 time- I think NEPCO does. As to the EPC contractor wanting a similar cur= e=20 time, in effect the commissioning period will have to be built into his=20 Guaranteed Completion Date. This does not mean that GE gets all this time= =20 to commission, it de facto can be shorter or longer, what it does do is set= s=20 the mark in the sand for one of the criteria that must be met before GE is= =20 exposed to Takeover LD's because the GE equipment will not meet Specific=20 Performance Guarantees or operate reliabily thus causing the EPC Contractor= =20 to be late. (slightly run on sentence-whew) As such it is not a GE slowness LD. =20 As to there not being enough TDI of people or their being inept thus causin= g=20 a delay. A valid concern-and perhaps we can pin GE for. I am struggling= =20 with what to use as a quantitative standard against which we could assess= =20 Take Over LDs. It is almost like good/bad art, you know it when you see= =20 it. Scott and I can try making late, insufficient or inept TDI services as= =20 (iii) in Section 10.3.2 (3rd reason for trigging Take Over LD's)- but witho= ut=20 some standard it will be tought to reach an agreement with GE and tougher t= o=20 enforce. I welcome your creative thoughts. I would expect GE to rail=20 against this. Scott and Kay- Thoughts? =09Bill Williams/ENRON@enronXgate =0905/23/2001 06:13 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: John G Rigby/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: RE: Experience In commissioning GE 7FA's One thing for me - this contract will not just be for 7FA's. The LMs have= =20 much shorter fire and ready to go times (days to weeks at most), and to all= ow=20 a generic move to 45 days could put aeroderivative gas turbine projects in= =20 jeopardy with regards to schedule. I must confess I do not have the 7FA=20 experience. EE&CC should be able to back these numbers up. I suspect this may be a TDI issue as well. GE may be having fewer qualifie= d=20 Technical consultants to cover the onslaught of construction - contributing= =20 to the request to extend to 45 days.=20 Note, if we go to 45 days for the Seller, the EPC contractor will want the= =20 same time period to remedy. -----Original Message----- From: Rigby, John =20 Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 3:29 PM To: Williams, Bill; larson Gene@ENRON; haas Dan@ENRON Subject: Experience In commissioning GE 7FA's One of the provisions in the "Standard GE- World Hunger" deals with GE's=20 exposure to Take Over Liquidated Damages. The provisions reads as set oiut= =20 below.: (it is not final, we are struggling over (e) and (g). GE wants to change 30 days in (d) to 45 days - they say that their average= =20 time to go from first roll to complete Unit commissioning is 53 days- They= =20 will send some info on this to Bill W and me. Do any of you have recent experience in the first roll to completion of=20 commissioning 7FAs either in simple cycle or combined cycle that I can use= =20 to confirm or refute tha 45 days is reasonable? 10.3.2 Takeover Liquidated Damages . Purchaser may assess and Seller agrees to pay liquidated damages (the=20 =01&Takeover Liquidated Damages=018) as set forth in Exhibit B-6, Section B= .6.3,=20 for each day that the Facility fails to achieve Takeover by the Time for=20 Completion as a result of any or all of the following: (a) a the Unit is unable to be commissioned and/or operated reliably (such= =20 inability being within Seller=01,s sole responsibility as defined herein), = but=20 only after the expiration of the Commissioning Period; or (b) a the Unit demonstrating performance below the Specific Performance=20 Levels, Assessment of such Takeover Liquidated Damages is subject to the following: © Purchaser elects at its sole discretion not to place a the Unit in=20 Commercial Operation; (d) Purchaser allows [thirty (30) days] from first fired roll of the Units= =20 Unit to complete Unit commissioning check outs, any needed replacement,=20 adjustments or corrections to make the Units Unit ready for testing (the=20 =01&Commissioning Period=018); (e) [Purchaser makes reasonable efforts to provide the necessary time and= =20 operating loads for Seller and Purchaser to commission and check out the=20 Units Unit. Seller=01,s time and load requirement shall not be to the excl= usion=20 of the needs of other Facility equipment being commissioned. Purchaser sha= ll=20 coordinate the most advantageous utilization of time and assets whenever=20 conflicting requirements exist and such situations shall not be deemed dela= y=20 by Purchaser]; (f) Subject to (g) below, Purchaser may not assess Takeover Liquidated=20 Damages prior to the expiry of the Commissioning Period; (g) [In the event Seller fails to use its best efforts to minimize time to= =20 make corrections, adjustments or repairs to the deficiently performing Unit= =20 during the Commissioning Period, Purchaser shall have the right to void the= =20 Commissioning Period and assess Takeover Liquidated Damages without regard= =20 for the period afforded by the Commissioning Period]; (h) Purchaser provides prompt oral notice of delays affecting commissioning= ; (i) Purchaser provides Seller its commissioning schedule no less than forty= =20 five (45) days prior to commencement of commissioning on the first Unit and= =20 provides periodic updates thereto; (j) In the event Purchaser is not subject to similar delay liquidated damag= es=20 with Owner, then Seller will not be subject to Takeover Liquidated Damages;= =20 and (k) In the event that Purchaser is subject to similar delay liquidated=20 damages with Owner, then Seller shall pay Takeover Liquidated Damages in=20 accordance with this Section 10.3.2. In the event that the Purchaser is Owner, subsections (j) and (k) of this= =20 Section 10.3.2 shall not be applicable. However, to the extent that the=20 Purchaser is an entity subject to delay liquidated damages associated with= =20 the Facility, subsections (j) and (k) of this Section 10.3.2 shall be=20 applicable.
|