Message-ID: <18985598.1075855917220.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:57:00 -0700 (PDT) From: sally.beck@enron.com To: mike.jordan@enron.com Subject: Re: a note being sent out under John Sherriff's name - your thoughts on the cover note ? Cc: fernley.dyson@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: fernley.dyson@enron.com X-From: Sally Beck X-To: Mike Jordan X-cc: Fernley Dyson X-bcc: X-Folder: \Sally_Beck_Dec2000\Notes Folders\'sent mail X-Origin: Beck-S X-FileName: sbeck.nsf I think that it is a great idea to get some press regarding our fundamental operating standards, but I wonder about the most appropriate timing, enough of a global message and the means of delivery. On the means of delivery, I am not sure from your note whether or not I fully understand the intent. Is there an article to be included in an Enron publication and in addition a letter to be sent under John's name (if so, to whom will the letter be sent)? Or is the letter from John an introduction to be included as a lead in to the article? With regard to a global message, I think that one of the key points around fundamental operating standards are that they are intended to be global in nature, applied to every commodity and every location where we engage in trading activities. With these operating standards implemented worldwide, we will know as operations professionals that risk is being mitigated and we will be able to ensure Enron top management that there is consistency in operating standards worldwide. These global standards also should enable Enron to expand its business reach more quickly, with well defined requirements with regard to trading operations. I am not sure from the article as written that the global nature of this effort comes across. Finally, a question regarding timing. The last I knew after you and Brent drafted this starting point for fundamental operating standards was that this was being circulated (Shona took this to do after Brent's return to Houston) for comments to all business controllers. I don't believe that we are quite at the point that we can say that all business controllers worldwide have reviewed, understand and have implemented these standards. And not to belittle the process of creating the standards, the tough part (and the real meat behind this) will be an effective exception report on a global basis against these standards. My commitment to Rick Causey is that I will have that global report in production by the end of the year. There is much work to do in defining the content and regularity of the report and even more work to do to identify reliable sources of data for compiling the report. Shona has commissioned Mike Moscoso to work on this, and I believe that Mike has already been working with James New. So I question whether or not you want to publish info about fundamental standards that we can not yet report against. Would a more appropriate time be after the Global Operations Controller meeting in October when we should have worldwide buy-in and commitment to these standards and (hopefully) our first draft of a meaningful exception report? Sorry that this response looks so long. I have been interrupted 20 times while responding, so I hope that it makes sense. Thanks for sharing this with me. Since you asked for input, I hope that you don't mind that I gave you some. --Sally Mike Jordan 09/26/2000 08:14 AM To: Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT, Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: a note being sent out under John Sherriff's name - your thoughts on the cover note ? Fernley / Sally Off and on ( with Jackie Gentle's help ) I have pulled together a one page communication note on our fundamental operating standards ( itself a one page summary ). We are in the final stages of this process - where we draft a cover letter for John which will introduce this for inclusion within Globalflash ( the Enron Europe newsletter ) Have you any thoughts on draft or cover note ? Mike