|
|
Enron Mail |
Chris,
=20 Why are they removing language that let's us "..confer with Gulf's project = management...and subcontractors..."? What's to hide? Remember, lack of su= ch information is what led us to this 11th hour problem to begin with.....r= eference the information I passed along yesterday. These folks do not appe= ar to be familiar with what it takes to manage a fast track project. They = don't monitor subcontractors performance on a real-time basis and/or in gre= at enough detail to understand what is really going on and in order to AVOI= D problems -- rather than find creative ways to manage them. It's a black b= ox mentality to construction management, and it's risky. As I recall, thei= r attorney said something like "We mange things differently than you might,= and that's just the way it is. Sorry if you (Enron) don't like our style.= " While he was referring to right-of-way acquisition at that moment, I can = assure you that their project managers (Howell, Sims, Powell) have the same= attitude. We need to audit construction progress in detail, because they = will not. Why don't they want to show us expediting costs? We're still liable for al= l incremental costs if someone other than Gulf gets supply jurisdiction, ri= ght. Seems to me we're still protecting our interests, which haven't been = protected very well to date. (See above!) How can we not be concerned wit= h our exposure to (potential) incremental costs? If we think it is highly = unlikely that anyone other than Gulf will prevail in the jurisdictional dis= pute, then maybe we could agree to this. In any case, without detailed cos= t tracking we are creating an "incremental cost time bomb". The only quest= ion is whether the regulatory / legal processes will set it off. (Pardon th= e insensitive analogy.) =20 We need access to the information (as requested) in order to protected our = interests, regardless of who is paying to get this project back on track. = If we can only get one of the items I listed, it needs to be direct access = to the subcontractors. We may not know the costs, but we will at least abl= e to make sure construction progress is acceptable, and have a feel for con= struction-related risks. If we need to give up something to get the agreem= ent signed, give up interaction with Gulf Power project team and/or all Gul= f Power project reporting. It is very difficult to get a meeting or confer= ence with them anyway. Their project tracking and reporting are practicall= y non-existent, and have no substantial value -- otherwise we wouldn't be i= n our current predicament. =20 =20 Not sure if this constitutes comments or a short speech, but I hope it help= s! =20 Dave =20 -----Original Message----- From: Hilgert, Chris=20 Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 5:38 AM To: Owen, David Subject: FW: Construction Expedition Letter Dave, =20 Comments please. =20 Thanks, Chris -----Original Message-----=20 From: Nemec, Gerald=20 Sent: Mon 11/26/2001 5:24 PM=20 To: 'bill@katzlaw.com'=20 Cc: Hilgert, Chris=20 Subject: FW: Construction Expedition Letter Per our discussion, please review and provide comments asap.=20 -----Original Message-----=20 From: "Jeffrey Stone" <jas@beggslane.com<@ENRON =20 Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 4:51 PM=20 To: Nemec, Gerald=20 Cc: Hilgert, Chris; mawhowel@southernco.com=20 Subject: Construction Expedition Letter=20 Here are Gulf's proposed changes to match the concept discussed earlier thi= s afternoon.=20 -----Original Message-----=20 From: Nemec, Gerald [SMTP:Gerald.Nemec@ENRON.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:38 AM=20 To: rab@beggslane.com; Howell, Marion W.=20 Cc: Hilgert, Chris; Owen, David; Alexander, James C.=20 Subject: Construction Expedition Letter=20 For your review is the draft Construction Expedition Letter per our=20 discussions Monday.=20 <<GulfExpediteLetter2.doc<<=20 **********************************************************************=20 This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate an= d may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the = intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by othe= rs is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or author= ized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to E= nron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copie= s of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended= to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding = and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and= the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by any= one as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. ********************************************************************** << F= ile: GulfExpediteLetter2.doc <<=20 - GulfExpediteLetter2.doc <<GulfExpediteLetter2.doc<<
|