Norma, It seems that there is a bug in the system. I made an error mixing equity and merit raises in one column. The system does not allow me to correct the mistake by moving the entries from one column to another. I can enter the changes, but after I save them the system reverts to original designations. As a result, the columns contain mixed entries related to merit and equity raises. The column totals are misleading.
Answer: Merit increases
I reviewed the latest draft of AA's management rep. letter and caught a few innaccuracies in the way AA described the deal. I attach a revised draft of the letter, with a redline version to highlight for you the changes I think we need to make to keep it accurate. First, AA only listed two of the four agreements that comprise the deal. They apparently forgot that we had created a second SBA. Additionally, at Transcanada's request, we put the transaction fee into a separate letter agreement this year. You will recall that last year, Sempra wanted the transaction fee put right in the SBA. Second, AA's bullet no. 4, as originally drafted, states that Northern does not intend to enter into an option to purchase any base gas during the term of the agreement. That statement is confusing given that Article VI.B of the Monthly Pack Agreement includes an account balance cash out mechanism that is a form of purchase option. That cash out mechanism was in Kent's bullets describing the deal and has been in every draft of the documents that AA looked at, so I assume they are OK with the mechanism and were just inartful in drafting bullet no. 4. My simple fix was to leave AA's language alone but to add an "except for" reference at the beginning of bullet no. 4. Third, AA's draft of bullet nos. 5 and 6 includes the somewhat ambiguous references to "other agreements" and "additional agreements" respectively. Since AA's list of the agreements in the intro paragraph was incomplete, these references in bullet nos. 5 and 6 were also innacurate. Now that I have made the list of agreements in the intro paragraph complete, I've clarified the bullets by adding the "other than those agreements referenced above" language to both bullets. The couple of other changes in bullet 5 simply clarify the meaning. Finally, I've modified the signature blocks per conversation with Bill to delete MKM and myself. I am certainly willing and able to sign this letter, but MKM is not up to speed on the deal and has not reviewed the agreements. Getting her up to speed enough to sign the letter would take some time. Additionally, Bill's thought was that MKM and I are his direct reports anyway, so it doesn't serve much purpose to have the subordinates sign if the top guy has signed. Please give me a call if you have any questions or want to discuss these matters.
Answer: Mgt. Rep. Letter
On behalf of EOTT, an environmental records review was completed for a block of Koch crude oil pipeline assets located in south Texas. There were no issues or environmental deficiencies identified during the review. A due diligence was recommended to verify confirmation of the housekeeping activities presented in the records review. The air permit modification for the La Plata C/S was received from the state of Colorado. This modification allows for additional emissions and fuel use as a result of a change in gas quality supplies in the San Juan basin.
Answer: Weekly Report, Roswell Area
Had a conversation with Dan Walker, V.P. of Development for the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation concerning Enron's future as a partner. Dan will be meeting with the CEO of the Foundation to pursue actions towards an Agreement or MOU between Enron and the RMEF. Interest has been surprisingly high for employees within and without GPG expressing a desire to be involved with the Foundation. Assisted C/S No. 8, Corona with the development and submittal of the facility's Title V semi annual report and annual compliance certification report submittals. Presented annual pollution prevention training for the Kingman and Flagstaff teams as required by the State of Arizona for large quantity generators of hazardous waste. Received a Compliance Order from the State of New Mexico, Air Quality Bureau, for an outstanding turbine replacement activity at the P-1 C/S which occurred in 1996. Transwestern had met with the AQB over this issue in 1996 and assumed that the issue had been resolved. The issue in question was Transwestern's replacement of internal components from a smaller turbine to a larger turbine, with the internal components of the larger turbine components (inlet guide vane adjustment and removal of the regenerator) mechanically adjusted to simulate conditions of the smaller turbine. When Transwestern received permit approval from the AQB to operate at the larger turbine capacity, Transwestern made the upgrade adjustments operable. Apparently, EPA has mandated that the AQB act on all issues considered to be outstanding as determined by the EPA. Dave Nutt has been sent the Compliance Order to review. Under the conditions of the Order, Transwestern has 30 days to request another hearing.
Answer:
Weekly Environmental Activity Report-Roswell Area