Message-ID: <19317026.1075862305097.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 12:20:20 -0800 (PST) From: sally.beck@enron.com To: beth.apollo@enron.com Subject: FW: Meeting in Houston - October 29th -Forwarded Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Beck, Sally X-To: Apollo, Beth X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \SBECK (Non-Privileged)\Beck, Sally\Sent Items X-Origin: Beck-S X-FileName: SBECK (Non-Privileged).pst What are the plain facts around this Rexam deal? --Sally -----Original Message----- From: Leff, Dan Sent: Monday, November 5, 2001 1:42 PM To: Apollo, Beth; Hughes, Evan Cc: Beck, Sally Subject: FW: Meeting in Houston - October 29th -Forwarded Beth / Evan Making sure we are all on the same page re: the resolution, timing, responsibilities. thanks - Dan -----Original Message----- From: Gayle W Muench Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 5:22 PM To: David W Delainey; Jeremy Blachman; Dan Leff Cc: Evan Hughes; Ben Smith Subject: FW: Meeting in Houston - October 29th -Forwarded Dave, Dan and Jeremy: As you can see from the below "stacked" e-mails we continue to have significant issues in our attempt to bill the Rexam account. Service Management has had weekly meetings with Billing on this account and yet this problem still persists. While I am confident that Ben and Evan are aware of this issue we do not seem to have either the ability or the proper resources to bring it to a sucessful resolution. In addition to these issues on Rexam we have had a failure to follow through on a bill payment issue on a Tyco account that has caused us to not pay the utility bill for two months at the headquarters site. This has been raised to our counterpart's attention at Tyco and though we have taken steps to resolve this event it has provided another data point in Tyco's mind as to our competency. This is obviously happening at a important time in our negotiations. Evan has acknowledged his accountability for building the procedures and processes that will allow us to successfully live up to our obligations in our contracts. Gayle -----Original Message----- From: Childers, Craig Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 12:57 PM To: Muench, Gayle W.; Hughes, Evan; Denner, Mark Subject: FW: Meeting in Houston - October 29th -Forwarded Any suggestions. -----Original Message----- From: Joe SASSO [mailto:joe.sasso@rexambca.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:46 AM To: cchilde@enron.com Cc: jparker4@enron.com; Frank.Brown@rexam.com; dean.guzlas@rexambca.com; jack.bender@rexambca.com Subject: Meeting in Houston - October 29th -Forwarded Craig, This absolutely shocks me. We really focused upon making the process simple during the renegotiations and at last month's meeting we were lead to believe that you had your hands around this. For Jack to take this much time and have so many errors is a totally non-value activity. It certainly looks like the team from Enron needs more resources. I'd expect you to be prepared to explain at the monthly meeting in Winston-Salem on the 8th what issues remain and specific action items to resolve this problem in 2001. We can not accept this as a go forward process in 2002. Is this too much to ask? **********Below is the first e-mail.************* Becky, In retrospect, I wanted to comment on a few items from our meeting this past Monday at your offices. I feel it is necessary to document what I still perceive to be very poor performance on the invoice and account management received from Enron. While I had low expectations for this particular invoice - especially due to many of the new rules coming into play for the Second Amendment - we still spent almost 5 hours reviewing, changing and correcting this document. When you take into account that 2 of the 3 California plants did not have electric invoices for us to review - and this is not Enron's fault but PG&E's - the fact that this review took so long is not a good sign. Ten of the twenty-one individual plant statements had some type of error - and half of those were serious errors. I am looking to see vast improvements in the future. I do not see us stopping this monthly review process in the near future, and days like Monday reinforce that thinking. On another note, we spent close to an hour on the Natural Gas slip-up with our Olive Branch Plant - which was inexcusable. I credit Enron for doing the firefighting drill to reestablish nominations in time for the November cutoff; however, the situation should have never been allowed to spin out of control in the first place. I had to intercede with the Energy Management representative to keep the nomination open beyond noon to accommodate this oversight. I am looking to have Barry or Evan provide me with an action plant to prevent his in the future. Unfortunately, this allowed us little time to review open issues. I will recap those we did review on future e-mails. Sometime today or tomorrow, I will coordinate a time that we can then "resume our meeting" via phone. Regards, Jack Bender