I don't know...
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Pearson, Michael 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 9:12 AM
To: 'Tim Blackwell'
Cc: Jack Branson; Dieball, Scott; Rigby, John; Stovall, Darrell; Coneybeer, Tom; scofer@llgm.com; Williams III, Bill; McPhail, Ray
Subject: RE: Proposal for Basis of Payments to Engineering Subcontractor


The compensation issue is still under review by our management.  The T&M rates AMEC has provided for the Pre-NTP PSA are all we have from AMEC at this point.  We do not have the NTP rates worked out for Exhibits yet. The current document is still in draft form and we are considering your wording, however our management is adamant at achieving an all-in rate per hour for the NTP PSA, so we consider this to be an open issue until we see your lump sum price estimate.  I assumed your position is that 60% is "deemed" to be what I refer to as the Variable Rate in the attached document.  Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Blackwell [mailto:tim.blackwell@amec.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:07 AM
To: Pearson, Michael; Tim Blackwell
Cc: Jack Branson; Dieball, Scott; Rigby, John; Stovall, Darrell; Coneybeer, Tom; scofer@llgm.com; Williams III, Bill
Subject: RE: Proposal for Basis of Payments to Engineering Subcontractor



Mike ,as we have discussed several times Amec will perform the work based on trhe rate schedules provided ton date with a lump sum based on the estimated hours times these rates.This does not mean we will provide the profit/overhead /bare wage breakdowns as described herein.We also said we would execute work in overrun at 60% of the scedule rates.This is what was discussed and written into the latest documents we reviewed last Friday.I am available in Toronto for awhile this a.m. at 905-8295400 ext.2489 if we need to discuss again.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Pearson, Michael [ <mailto:Michael.Pearson@ENRON.com>] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:56 AM 
To: tim.blackwell@amec.com 
Cc: jack.branson@amec.com; Dieball, Scott; Rigby, John; Stovall, 
Darrell; Coneybeer, Tom; scofer@llgm.com; Williams III, Bill 
Subject: FW: Proposal for Basis of Payments to Engineering Subcontractor 


In order to further clarify our understanding of how the payment 
mechanism would work in the exhibits of the PSA, I am attaching a 
summary of the preferred method for compensation under the Pre-NTP and 
NTP phases of the PSA's.  In particular, on the NTP Lump Sum price 
determination, we would prefer to see the breakdown of manhours in the 
format previously transmitted (by task by month), and by Engineering 
Discipline.  The Canadian rate structure you provided had about 15 or 
more categories of Engineering Disciplines, and this should be used to 
reflect the all-in hourly rates times the manhours in each category 
which will equate to the estimated Lump Sum price noted in the 
attachment.  

Your organization chart reflects all personnel in Vancouver being 
assigned to the project team, except the Customer Sponsor.  We would not 
expect to have to pay for the sponsor's cost, nor any travel time for 
personnel to/from Atlanta. 

We are getting clarification from LED if the actual driving of the test 
piles will be included in your deliverables or will be done directly by 
LED during the Oct 1-31 period.  Will advise. 

Mike    

>  -----Original Message----- 
> From:         Cabrera, Louise L.  
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 9:35 AM 
> To:   Pearson, Michael 
> Subject:      Proposal for Basis of Payments to Engineering 
> Subcontractor 
> 
>  <<Proposal for Basis of Payments to Engineering Subcontractor.doc>> 


********************************************************************** 
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copies 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 anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. 

**********************************************************************