|
|
Enron Mail |
Lined against 3 sounds good. Circulate to me, Bill, Dale, Lee, Kent
Shoemaker. Kay "Thompson, Peter J." <pthompson@akllp.com< on 04/24/2001 12:24:57 PM To: <Kay.Mann@enron.com< cc: Subject: RE: LV Cogen Turbine Agreement Once these changes are made (on Version 5) and the changes received from the contractor (currently in Version 4) are removed, do you want me to circulate a blackline against Version 3, which I believe was the last version seen by Lee Johnson? If so, who do you want to receive copies of Version 5 of the LV Cogen Agreement? -----Original Message----- From: Kay.Mann@enron.com [mailto:Kay.Mann@enron.com] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 6:41 PM To: Bill.Williams@enron.com Cc: Thompson, Peter J.; Dale.Rasmussen@enron.com Subject: Re: LV Cogen Turbine Agreement Pete, Finance has requested these changes: Notices to ENA as agent for E-Next. Signature block should be for E-Next Generation, acting through its agent, Enron North America. E Next will not be signing, as ENA will sign on its behalf. Or, ENA, as agent for... Thanks, Kay Bill Williams@ECT 04/23/2001 05:14 PM To: "Thompson, Peter J." <pthompson@akllp.com< @ ENRON cc: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Dale Rasmussen/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: LV Cogen Turbine Agreement (Document link: Kay Mann) Peter, from what I can see, the GE E NExt B/O rev 4 doc appears to be ok. (Scope, $$$, and LDs) Please get it signed and the final distributed to us before April 30th.
|