Enron Mail

From:jim.gilbert@enron.com
To:lisa.bills@enron.com
Subject:LV Cogen Turbine Contracts
Cc:roseann.engeldorf@enron.com, sheila.tweed@enron.com,catherine.clark@enron.com, brian.kerrigan@enron.com, kay.mann@enron.com, dale.rasmussen@enron.com, bill.williams@enron.com
Bcc:roseann.engeldorf@enron.com, sheila.tweed@enron.com,catherine.clark@enron.com, brian.kerrigan@enron.com, kay.mann@enron.com, dale.rasmussen@enron.com, bill.williams@enron.com
Date:Wed, 2 May 2001 08:05:00 -0700 (PDT)

Lisa:

I have been the lead originator for LVC since we purchased the asset in
August of 1999. Given all that we are trying to accomplish to achieve a
successful exit strategy with this asset, I have relied on people like Bill
Williams and his technical team to move this document and other similar
efforts forward. Having Bill's support on this document has allowed me to
focus my efforts on closing the negotiations on our tolling agreement
required to support the LVCII expansion.

After my review of this agreement, along with in put from Bill Williams and
Dale Rasmussen, I will confirm back to you that your comments are
appropriately reflected in the turbine contract to obtain signed off from ENA
Finance.

I'm currently in Denver, please contact me on my cell phone should you have
any questions.

Thank you,
Jim

Cell Ph: 503-464-1206



---------------------- Forwarded by Jim Gilbert/PDX/ECT on 05/02/2001 02:37
PM ---------------------------
From: Lisa Bills/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/02/2001 03:19 PM CDT
To:
Williams@/O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=NOTESADDR/CN=2C4A79E9-5692F67A-862565
4B-4F9C03@EX@enronXgate, Stephen Thome/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Gilbert/PDX/ECT@ECT,
pthompson@akllp.com@SMTP@enronXgate, Dale Rasmussen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ed
Clark/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc: Roseann Engeldorf/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheila Tweed/HOU/ECT@ECT, Catherine
Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, Brian Kerrigan/ENRON@enronXgate, Kay
Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: LV Cogen Turbine Contract

Rose and I have reviewed the contract Peter sent to us yesterday - the draft
distributed on April 24. Rose has already provided our comments to Peter on
the Override Letter which accompanies the contract. I have one big issue
which the lawyers can't answer as it is a business decision. No one seems
sure if Bill is the acting originator for this contract or not. I leave it
up to the LV Cogen Origination team to decide. However, until I receive word
back from the appropriate person and see my changes reflected in the turbine
contract, Finance has not signed off on this agreement so it cannot be
executed on E-Next's behalf.

What is the per UNIT turbine purchase amount? The Purchase Amount is a
remaining total balance outstanding. In 6.1.2 Payment Schedule, the payment
amount is a lump sum. However, in the 2nd para. of 5.4 Cancellation and in
6.1.3 Retention Letter(s) of Credit for example, each UNIT is discussed.
There needs to be an allocation of the Purchase Amount and Payment Amount on
a per turbine basis so Finance can track these costs as such in case a change
order is made to only one turbine or if a turbine is removed from E-Next
prior to all turbines being removed. Also, how does anyone know for 6.1.3
when the last $788,500 per Turbine is supposed to be paid so we can retain
it?

Also, I would appreciate receiving a clarification of why we don't define the
Purchase Amount as the total and not just the balance remaining. It could
create discrepancies in the document and for anybody reading the document
trying to understand how much each turbine costs. E-Next has already made
the approx $10mm payments made to-date. However, if someone were to pick up
the document to find out how much they could buy the turbines for, it would
appear to be $53.6mm not the Maximum Liability Amount of $63.1mm. 2nd para
of 5.4 refers to the portion of the Purchase Amount to be adjusted upon
cancellation. However, Exhibit I Cancellation refers to the Unit Liability
Amount as the basis for calculation - this seems inconsistent to me.


Now for the general comments:

Section 1.69 and 1.70 need to change places to be alphabetically correct.

6.1.2 calls for a payment to be made on April 21, 2001. Exhibit I
Cancellation also has a line for cancellation between March 21 and April 20,
2001. This will need to be amended as this payment wasn't made given no
contract execution yet. As everyone knows also, E-Next must be the party to
make this payment to insure the correct accounting treatment.

6.5 is another place where a per Unit price is discussed for increases or
decreases. How is this possible with an aggregate Purchase Amount?

In all Notice sections please delete "c/o Las Vegas Cogeneration II, L.L.C."
This project is not associated with the E-Next financing.

10.2.3.1 Please underline "Optional Delivery Point"

10.12.2 Please delete the " ' " in "it's" after the proviso.

10.15 The timing of 120 days for delivery of serial numbers herein is
inconsistent with the bracketed 5 months in 10.2.1 and Exhibit P. Please
conform all to the same time frame.

Has David Marshall reviewed all the insurance provisions of this document.
While a standard turbine contract, there have been some recent
modifications/views from our insurance providers.

I look forward to hearing back from the deal team and reviewing the next
round of documents.