|
|
Enron Mail |
Mike, I want to see the final costs before determining. My understanding is
that there is still significant expenses outstanding. Regards Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 07/06/2000 07:41 PM --------------------------- Mike J Miller 07/06/2000 04:29 PM To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Peaker Fee EE&CC has forwarded the peaker fee ($9.1 MM) invoice to ENA (see at bottom). I have sent a return e-mail to Gavin Gaul and John Normand explaining that final approval of this invoice will be from you. Amy and I are waiting for a better breakdown of overhead charges on acceleration change orders. Once we have the overhead issue framed out, I would then battle the fee, especially on Wilton Center, on a packaged basis with the overhead charges. As per the Wilton Center fee, I reviewed all of the e-mail rhetoric regarding who is to blame for the massive construction cost overruns. EECC/NEPCO's cupbability lies in their insistance from day one that Wilton Center could and would be built non-union. It was only after ENA forced the decision in late June 1999 to build the job union (to avoid air permit intervention) that EECC/NEPCO even began to deal with how to build the job in a union environment. Even at that point, EECC/NEPCO would not move off of building the job on a cost reimbursable basis and did not properly consider other alternatives such as fixed unit pricing (fixed price per unit quantity installed). EECC/NEPCO claimed that they did not have enough time to negotiate with the unionsor pursue other options. However, because of their insistance to go non-union, they precluded the ability to negotiate until the decision to go union was made. According to our labor experts, breaking off union site negotiations and building non-union is worse than just going non-union from the start. In any event, if you need more detail on this subject prior to discussing the fee with Larry Izzo, please let me know and I will summarize the key points. I will continue to work with Amy Spoede to tie down the remaining cost and overhead issues. If you need me to do anything else, please let me know. Regards, Mike Miller ---------------------- Forwarded by Mike J Miller/HOU/ECT on 07/06/2000 11:11 AM --------------------------- Gavin Gaul@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 07/05/2000 05:34 PM To: Amy Copeland@ECT cc: Robert Miesen/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, John Normand/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, nickv@nepco.com, DavidG@nepco.com, Mike J Miller/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Peaker Fee Amy, Attached is the invoice for the 2000 Peaker fee. All punchlist items should be completed next week, weather permitting. Gavin ---------------------- Forwarded by Gavin Gaul/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 07/05/2000 05:35 PM --------------------------- Robert Miesen 06/30/2000 11:59 AM To: Gavin Gaul cc: Cameron Best/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Peaker Fee Gavin, Attached below is Nepco's invoice for the 2000 Peakers fee. If you approve, please forward to Amy Spoede (formerly Copeland). Thanks, Rob ---------------------- Forwarded by Robert Miesen/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 06/30/2000 11:59 AM --------------------------- Rickg@nepco.com on 06/30/2000 10:29:38 AM To: Robert.Miesen@enron.com cc: NICKV@nepco.com, DavidG@nepco.com, Gavin.Gaul@enron.com Subject: Peaker Fee <<Peakers-Fee.PDF<< Rob Attached is the invoice for the Fee for the Peakers. - Peakers-Fee.PDF
|