OF INTENT.
(A) IN PARA 3A OF THE DRAFT LIPPITT LETTER THE DEPARTMENT UNDERTAKES TO QUOTE MAINTAIN CONTINUING INTEREST IN THE PROJECT UNQUOTE. THIS SEEMS TO PLACE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FLAVOUR ON OUR FUTURE INVOLVEMENT FROM THAT IN PARA 1(VI) OF THE 15 DECEMBER 1977 LETTER.
(B) PARA 5 OF THE DRAFT LIPPITT LETTER REQUESTS KESCO TO QUOTE ISSUE A LETTER OF INTENT..... SUBSTANTIALLY IN FORM AND SUBSTANCE TO THE ENCLOSED DRAFT DATED.... UNQUOTE. IF THE WORDS AFTER SUBSTANTIALLY ARE NECESSARY (AND I UNDERSTAND WHY CLP WANT.. THEM) THEY SHOULD SURELY READ QUOTE.... SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR.... UNQUOTE OR SOME SUCH.
(C) PARA 8 OF LETTER OF INTENT ASKS GEC TO SIGN AND RETURN IF SATISFACTORY. PREVIOUSLY RETURN OF THREE SIGNED COPIES WAS REQUESTED AND I IMAGINE THIS WILL BE THE CASE ON THIS OCCASION ALSO.
NNNN