Message-ID: <9972253.1075855892594.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 08:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: brent.price@enron.com
To: sally.beck@enron.com
Subject: Re: Revised Operating Standards
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Brent A Price
X-To: Sally Beck
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Sally_Beck_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Price, brent
X-Origin: Beck-S
X-FileName: sbeck.nsf

More detail than you probably want on the document I gave you at the 
Doubletree....  Mike was responding to an email that Steve Young had sent 
him.  Just wanted you to know that this is moving forward and that I will 
coordinate the Houston side of this for now (I will coordinate London going 
forward if that responsibility is given to me).  Let me know if you have 
questions.

---------------------- Forwarded by Brent A Price/HOU/ECT on 06/28/2000 03:01 
PM ---------------------------


Mike Jordan
06/28/2000 07:26 PM
To: Steve W Young/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim 
Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/Market Risk/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fernley 
Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT 
Subject: Re: Revised Operating Standards  

Steve

My assessment of the next steps are as follows :-

We finalise the intial draft of the one page summary  - Action Mike/Brent to 
consolidate feedback to date - to be delivered tomorrow
The one pager to be sent to all business heads commenting on John's belief ( 
which I think we all share ) that the Business unit head has ultimate 
responsibility to ensure operating standards are met and that we aim to 
provide them with a joint summary of 'status' from Commercial Support and 
RAC. This summary could be reviewed by AA, but I believe the process would be 
more beneficial if it is 
a self assessment process
escalates judgement on material issues 
capable of being monitored and repeated on an agreed frequency
complimentary to the BRM process
The timeline for thie intial feedback could be within one week - I have an 
assessment from David Port to match to ours already!

As to your other questions

I will be adding two additional detail points within the required structure 
definition - ie the structure must have :-

Full functionality and interfaces for market risk, credit risk and Corporate 
reporting, and/or a systems roadmap for that development
Appropriate involvement in business for specialist services ( Legal, Tax and 
HR )

The Operating Standards MUST only cover one page to retain the ease of 
communication for them - the above definitions identify that businesses must 
consider all Legal and RAC issues - and there will significant detail 
involved in that - which will be defined elsewhere ( see David's separate 
comments on risk reporting )

In summary I think it is best to move to publish the intial draft to 
stimulate communication  - would welcome your thoughts

Mike

 - some changes  -awaiting possible additions from Brent  - if none - to be 
published tomorrow






Steve W Young
27/06/2000 20:03
To: Mike Jordan/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Brent A Price/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim 
Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, David Port/Market Risk/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fernley 
Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT 

Subject: Re: Revised Operating Standards  

Mike: 

Is this the most current version of the proposed Operating Standards?  Since 
I've been out of the office since we last discussed, I wanted to get an 
update on the status.  A couple of questions: 

What are the next steps? 
How will this be communicated and to whom?
How do you see this being implemented to best assure it is respected?
Legal Standards are absent?  I suspect this is still in draft form and they 
are to follow in the next version; however, let me know how you see legal 
Standards playing into this as I believe they should be on this list as well.

As discussed, I strongly believe that a brief and clear list of "absolutes" 
similar to the attachment will be most useful if first agreed by all that 
need to be involved and then effectively communicated and respected by all in 
EEL.  Let me know if this list is now considered representative of the views 
of all that need to have input.  I suggest we meet again with a broader group 
to assure this list is complete and to discuss next steps.  I have some 
suggested adjustments but will get back to you by end of week with comments 
or questions from RAC after we discuss this in our weekly RAC manager's 
meeting.   

Thanks,

Steve



Brent A Price
15/06/2000 13:28
To: Mike Jordan/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Steve W Young/LON/ECT@ECT 

Subject: Revised Operating Standards