Message-ID: <8652238.1075845779461.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: scott.healy@enron.com
To: michael.nanny@enron.com, stephen.plauche@enron.com
Subject: Fuel Cells
Cc: kay.mann@enron.com, heather.kroll@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: kay.mann@enron.com, heather.kroll@enron.com
X-From: Scott Healy
X-To: Michael D Nanny, Stephen Plauche
X-cc: Kay Mann, Heather Kroll
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Kay_Mann_June2001_2\Notes Folders\Discussion threads
X-Origin: MANN-K
X-FileName: kmann.nsf

I wanted to clarify our game plan for the next couple of weeks.

1.  Tomorrow a meeting is taking place with FuelCells to resolve some major 
outstanding business issues.  At this meeting, the point is going to be made 
that in order to maintain the desired schedule, FCE is going to have to 
increase its technical effort.  Presently, we are concerned that the 
technical aspects of the purchase order are not in sufficient order to 
finalize a purchase order by next week (we want to make certain that our deal 
with FuelCells is largely defined before we make a state filing).  We are 
going to emphasize to FCE that both sides need to devote their technical 
resources to this goal.  One of our priorities is to bring the technical 
portions of the purchase order up to the level necessary to finalize an 
order.  I need the Tony Leo list today so I can show FuelCells all the 
information that they owe us before this meeting.

2.  We have redrafted the purchase order.  However, the P.O. needs refinement 
to reflect the resolution of the outstanding business terms and to make 
certain that the technical information and procedures are clearly defined 
(much of the information that I sent you).  Given 1) the proposed payment 
mechanics and 2) FCE's lack of mature documents, we are concerned that FCE 
will try to get by with loose technical language to avoid acceptance and 
ultimately payment issues.  Also, we are concerned that once we make our 
state filing that our negotiating leverage with FCE will go down. One of our 
major focuses jobs between now and 11/3/00 is to make certain that the 
technical sections of the P.O. are properly defined.

3.  With regard to the BOP cost estimates, I would like to get the revised 
estimates no later than tomorrow.  Our current plan is to make a state filing 
(CRRA will make the filing and the filing will be the source of the funding)  
which clearly defines our basic assumptions in coming up with these estimates 
(we will not show the complete estimates) and to show conservative ranges.  
You will be given the opportunity to review and comment on the cost and 
technical information provided in the filing.  A draft of the filing is to be 
sent to CRRA by 11/3.  Given this approach, it is less important that we go 
to the sites next week.  Our focus should be on getting the purchase order 
into shape (from a technical point of view) and making sure that the state 
filing is accurate as to our base technical assumptions.

4.  The state filing is expected to be made by CRRA in the subsequent week.

Please give me a call if you have any questions.