In light of all the events - do we want to pursue trying to charge ENW for the remaining $'s and have them deal with AEP or should ETS just absorb the $'s?   cvb

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sullivan, Michael  
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 12:03 PM
To:	Barnes, Caroline
Cc:	Hotte, Steve
Subject:	FW: ETS Reimbursement For PGAS Project Cost

Your direction is needed.  ENA/ENW does not want to address the remaining PGAS project cost owed ETS until the asset is sold to AEP which probably won't happen this year.  They still owe us about $194,000 of project cost.  As I see it, they can either accept their amortization which will begin when we close the workorder or accept a final debit for the balance owed.   I prefer the latter and have suggested that to Tommy, but he needs to know why this would be necessary.  What are ETS requirements for this reimbursement.  

Sections in red below are related to this question.

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sullivan, Michael  
Sent:	Friday, October 26, 2001 11:49 AM
To:	Yanowski, Tommy J.
Subject:	RE: ETS Reimbursement For PGAS Project Cost

Let me check into it.  Your point about it being capitalized cost is a good one.  I have been instructed to close the workorder on 12/31.  We may be able to just begin amortization to ENA for the remaining balance in Jan if that is preferred or we may be able to wait until a decision is reached on the sale of the system to AEP.  I'll get back to you.

Thanks again.  

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Yanowski, Tommy J.  
Sent:	Thursday, October 25, 2001 2:21 PM
To:	Sullivan, Michael
Subject:	RE: ETS Reimbursement For PGAS Project Cost

Mike:  AEP is currently implementing their version of SCADA and probably won't be live until the end of November.  We will probably be delivering POPS to them sometime in November.  I suspect that given these two items they may not want to take on PGAS until 1Q 2002 but I will try to confirm their plans.  

Can you help me to understand the urgency of ETS being fully paid in 2001.  Was the application capitalized and hasn't ENA already paid in excess of $300K for something that was capitalized or am I missing something?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Sullivan, Michael  
Sent:	Thursday, October 25, 2001 2:09 PM
To:	Yanowski, Tommy J.
Subject:	ETS Reimbursement For PGAS Project Cost

Tommy, could I get an update on the sale of the PGAS asset to AEP.  Your last mention of this when I saw you at A&M indicated that it had become a lower priority.  I think my management is going to want ETS to be reimbursed for remaining cost owed it in 2001 one way or the other.  I would like to take them some current information.  I still think it would be most appropriate for ENA to reimburse us now since work is complete and since they own the asset. 

We had a conversation with the new AEP support person, Kevin Duffy, about support and transition today.  We were able to answer all his questions about architecture and support.  He was not aware of any transition plans or where they are with regard to any purchase.

Thanks