Enron Mail |
Please see attached. Rob, perhaps while in London you could stop by Mark's
desk to discuss. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 11:22 AM ----- Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/07/2001 03:45 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Summary of $ at Risk for Customs Steve - the issue to which I believe Jane is referring in the first sentence ("confirmation of the issues which I have articulated") concern possible paymensts made to receive informal, and favourable, guidance, on customs issues (which informal opinions are now seemingly being reversed, formally). In some cases such payments may still be legal. But, subject to Jane confirming that I am explaining this correctly (given that the communication below is a bit cryptic), it now seems to me to be timely (as Rebecca and Jim have apparently been alerted in London on Monday, per her note below) to satisfy yourself that we are now clean on this issue under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The informal customs advice was obtained by Muktesh Tyagi (spelling?), one of two people known as Sanjay's "fixers" (that should make you fell comfortable!). You may wish to discuss with Jane further, but once you satisfy yourself that there is some smoke here, my thought was that you might want to simply confirm with Rebecca that we are running the facts to ground, so that we can satisfy ourselves that we are either clean, or need to come clean with USG. let me know if you need more. thanks mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 07/03/2001 09:42 --------------------------- Jane Wilson@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 07/03/2001 04:38 To: Mark Schroeder@ECT cc: Subject: Summary of $ at Risk for Customs Mark, I have confirmation of the issues on which I have articulated concern to you although such confirmation is verbal. Apparently, there are more areas that I will identify in due time. This information was conveyed to the Legal Team (which included Rebecca, Bruce, Sandeep Katwala and outside attorneys) in London on Monday. In addition, below is additional bad news. In addition, there is at issue now the fact that the flow diagrams and import lists do not match. I'll forward an additional e:mail from Seethayya, ---------------------- Forwarded by Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 03/07/2001 10:04 AM --------------------------- Heidi Hellmann 03/06/2001 01:39 AM To: Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Robert Mathis/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Chandran Bhaskar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Summary of $ at Risk for Customs I found out more info on some of these extraneous customs issues above and beyond the LNG stuff: PHASE I ISSUES 1. SPM (This equipment has already been imported at 22.38%, but customs is claiming merit duty rates of 67%.) This is currently being evaluated by the courts. Total Value at Risk = $7 MM 2. "D" - Stream Are Bechtel's design charges of $66 MM specific to our equipment or to the project as a whole? If the former, then duty of 22.38% should apply. Total Value at Risk = $13.5 MM ($66 MM x 22.38%) PHASE II ISSUES 1. Services Loading on Power Plant Equipment Same issue as for LNG Equipment. Currently we are paying a 10% loading on duty into a reserve deposit to cover this. Total Value at Risk = $22.38 MM ($100 MM x 22.38%) 2. LNG Equipment to be dutied at 53.8% or 22.38%? Think we all know this issue. Total Value at Risk = $56 MM (as per Risk Matrix) 3. Services Loading on LNG Equipment Think we all know this issue Total Value at Risk = $80 MM ($149 MM x 53.8%) TOTAL VALUE at RISK ~$180 MM - - This is WORST, WORST CASE! Note: There is still this issue of goods being imported under the wrong classification. Currently, this is preventing goods from being imported on time, which could lead to delay claims by the contractors. It will take me some time to hunt down what this could cost us if the problem isn't resolved soon. Pavan's estimate is that it will take a month for Site to generate accurate equipment lists and for the same to be reviewed and approved by MSEB. Heidi
|