Subject: Re: Northern EOL
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 07:20:00 -0700 (PDT)

Steve,

I am most disheartened to hear that Dale Neuner regards my previous 
conversation with he and Mark Taylor as the justification for why EOL cannot 
accomodate  GPG pipeline capacity transactions.    

During the discussion in Mark's office, Dale explained that currently all EOL 
users can run reports and see all the details of transactions.  As currently 
structured this would mean that any EOL user, including ENA, would be able to 
run a report to see detail behind bids on pipeline capacity.  Obviously this 
would be a problem under the marketing affiliate rules.  We discussed three 
possible ways to address this:

Add security such that ENA/EES users cannot run reports on pipeline bid 
data.  I understood leaving the meeting that this might be technically 
difficult or expensive.
Exclude pipeline data from the reporting feature altogether.  Here the story 
was that while this was not necessarily difficult, EOL could not make any 
changes before version 2 was ready.  The impression was that this would be 
possible after version 2.
Erect procedural firewalls.  Mark Taylor suggested that perhaps we could 
inform all ENA and EES personnel that the company has a policy that prevents 
them from running reports on GPG data.  This probably isn't a good long-run 
solution, but we all agreed that it might serve as a bridge measure.  This 
approach is supported by the fact that Enron Networks has already entered 
into a confidentiality agreement with GPG.

I left the meeting thinking that one or all of these options was feasible and 
have not had any correspondence to the contrary since the meeting.