Andy,

Below are a number of the e-mail's that I've exchanged with TrueQuote.  I 
can't say that they make for interesting reading but if you note any 
potential issues please let me know.  Most of the notes relate to product 
mapping issues but you will notice highlighted in red a note regarding the 
ordering of a leased line which in my mind is "acceptance of responsibility 
by action."  I'll be crafting a note regarding testing soon and will 
coordinate this with Jay and yourself.  I'll also be forwarding e-mails with 
Houston Street.  Let me know if there is anything else I can do to further 
clarify our status.

-David


---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'Neill@enform.com> on 10/19/2000 10:04:36 PM
To: david.fisher@enron.com
cc: "Wayne Crane (E-mail)" <wayne@crane.net> 

Subject: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


David,

I appreciate the phone call from you this morning.  Attached is our most
current list of technical questions that we would like to discuss with Jay
and you during our conference call next week.  If any of the questions need
further clarification, please do not hesitate to call me or send me an
Email.

Please let me know when you would like to schedule the call next week.  We
are looking forward to working with Jay and you on this exciting project.

Regards,

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046

 <<EnronTechnicalQuestions101900.doc>>

 - EnronTechnicalQuestions101900.doc
---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'Neill@enform.com> on 10/26/2000 01:50:34 PM
To: David.Fisher@enron.com
cc:  

Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


Hi David,

Thanks for sending the answers to our technical questions. After carefully
reviewing your answers, we have a few follow-up questions.  These appear in
"green".  Please let me know if anything needs further clarification.

We are looking forward to meeting with you next week. Tentatively, we are
planning to have 5 or 6 people attend.  These include three really technical
people, a couple of leads (including myself), a user from the True Quote
business side who understands the products that are traded on True Quote,
and the new True Quote CIO (who's mainly interested in hearing what is said
more so than actively participating in the discussion).

By next Tuesday, I plan to send you our proposed agenda for the meeting.  If
you have a different agenda in mind for the meeting, let's discuss it over
the phone on Wednesday and jointly priortize the items for discussion. We
are very flexible in terms of the agenda.

Thanks in advance for any additional information you can send us.  It's nice
to have a contact to be able to correspond with.  Have a great day!

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 4:32 PM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

It was good to hear from you this morning.  I have attached your document
with answers to your questions included.  In addition, I've provided the
finalized DTD and our schedule of release dates for specific functionality.

I raised your desire to meet to discuss the project and everyone agrees
that getting together is a good idea.  That said, we believe it would be
best to wait until we have a firm agenda to discuss.  For instance, we will
need to get together in the near term to discuss data mapping issues.  Feel
free to call or drop a note if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

David

The following are the dates that we will release functionality.

1 December 2000:  Login, Attempt Transaction, Post Price, Request Price and
Request Order Status.
15 December 2000: Request Transaction History, Request Credit Matrix, Post
Product Set Data and Post Credit Matrix.

(See attached file: EnronTechnicalQuestions101900 & Answers.doc)(See
attached file: exchange.dtd)


 - ClarificationsFromEnronAnswers2.doc
---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/08/2000 10:52:06 AM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


David,

I really appreciate your efforts in adding another hour to our meeting this
afternoon and in making Jay available for the discussion.  The following is
a list of technical questions that we would like to discuss in this
afternoon's meeting:

1) This one is probably going to be discussed in the first two hours - We
will need to have the data to populate our tables with in order to map PID,
CPID, RID, PSETID, CATGID, CTYID, CMDTYID.  The non-technical people know
all of the information about the products, deal types, etc.  However, do
they know that for example, PID "123" maps back to Product "ABC"?  I would
think the technical people are the ones that know how this codes map back to
specific product information on your system.

2) Could you provide us a little background on why Credit term changed from
"Required" to "Implied" during the last version of the DTD that we received
from you?

3) We sent this question a few days ago, but have not received a response:
There are several different parameter names specified for the XML that is
passed between systems.
The following is a list of those specified in the External Interface
Document:

Post Prices:  prices (Page 12, Notes, Decision 1, Parameters)
Request Prices:  prices (Page 14, Notes, Decision 1, Parameters)
Attempt Transaction: txn (Page 16, Notes, Decision 1, Parameters)
Post Product Set Data: xml (Page 26, Notes, Decision 1, Parameters)
Post Credit Matrix: xml (Page 28, Notes, Decision 1, Parameters)

Should all of the parameter names be "xml" or should the parameter names for
Post Product Set Data and Post Credit Matrix be changed to reflect the
naming convention of the other use cases?

Using "xml" as the parameter name for all use cases will reduce the
redundancy of the code we'll need to write to route the data to our internal
interfaces.

4) We still have some concerns over having to maintain Enron's calendar on
our system since term is sent as part of the key.  We would like to discuss
alternatives for dealing with date interpretation.

5) We had asked a question earlier regarding business responses being sent
back within the same HTTP session.   We are going to assume that
confirmation comes back in the HTTP response since there has been no
interface defined for business responses.  We would like to confirm this
assumption in this meeting.

6) Is there going to be some capability of cancelling a transaction attempt
if for some reason we do not receive a response back from Enron on a
transaction attempt and a subsequent transaction search?

7) Would Enron consider posting all of their requests to a .asp file as
opposed to a file with no extension (ext_nrt.asp instead of ext_nrt)?  It is
a generally accepted practice to include file extensions when transporting
files.

Thanks again for everything David.  We will look forward to talking to you
later today!

Regards,
Maria

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 8:30 AM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

I understand your concern and while I want to ensure we address product
mapping as the primary focus of the meetings, I asked if Jay Webb and/or
Mike Guadarrama could spend some time discussing your technical questions.
Jay and/or Mike will be available from 3-4 today to do just this.  I know
you've asked some technical questions already and are also interested in
credit mapping nevertheless, would you please provide a brief rundown of
the technical issues you want to discuss so that Jay/Mike can be prepared
in advance to make the best use of the hour?  Thanks.

The meetings will be attended by our Product Control Group who are
responsible for creating and maintaining all of Enron's product types and
products.  They are the experts when it comes knowing all the various ways
Enron represents and implements products on EnronOnline.  Other than
myself, the four attendees will be Sheri Thomas, who heads the Product
Control group, Jennifer deBoisblanc-Denny, who heads the products area of
the group and two experts in gas and power products.

Look forward to hearing from you soon so I can inform Jay and Mike.

Regards
-David





"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/07/2000 04:42:06 PM

Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>

To:   <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


There will be people there that understand the products in non-technical
detail.

When were you thinking we could involve your "technical" people?  I agree
with the agenda and strongly agree that we need to understand each other
products before we can attempt an integration.  However, my team's
reponsibility is to figure out how to "technically" send/receive and map
information from your system.  If this is not going to be addressed the
first day, than perhaps some of them don't need to come.  I guess I'm now
concerned that the second two hour meeting isn't going to be long enough to
provide my team the information they need proceed with their technical
implementation.  I understand that the documents you've sent me should
address most of our questions, but each revision has left my team with more
questions and confusion about how this is all going to work.

Will Jay Webb be in either meeting?  Could you send us a list of the
attendees on your side and their roles/functions as well.   We want very
much to make these meetings as productive as possible, understanding that
your team as well as mine are very very busy.

I appreciate your help,

Maria

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 1:27 PM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

Thanks for the finalized list.  I assume that one or more of the people
below will be able to speak in detail about gas and power products outside
of the technical domain?  The people from Enron that will attend the
meeting are non-technical.  Their area of expertise lies in the arena of
products and their management.  I just want to make sure that we have
people that will be speaking the same language.

Attached is the agenda for the meetings.

Regards,
David

(See attached file: TQ Exchange Mapping Agenda.doc)





"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/07/2000 12:11:55 PM

Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>

To:   <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


David, here is a final list of the attendees for tomorrow's meeting and
their company/function.  We'll work to trim the number down for Thursday's
meeting.  Thanks for accommodating us.  BTW, for future meetings, if space
is problem, we can always hold the meetings in our office at 3 Greenway
Plaza - if you guys don't mind coming to our office.

* Stewart Clark - EnFORM, Project Manager for initial True Quote On-line
trading system application and is still the project manager over the Phase
2
Enhancements
* Richard Toubia - True Quote, VP Product Development
* Richard Stallings - Enform, Lead Developer for the initial True Quote
On-line trading system application, Phase 2 Enhancements, and changes to
the
True Quote system to accomodate the Enron/True Quote Integration
* Brett Glass - Enform, Team Lead over the Enron/True Quote Integration's
Credit and Price Interfaces
* Chris Paxton - EnFORM, Lead Development in charge of the Enron/True Quote
Integration's Transaction Interfaces
* Maria O'Neill - EnFORM, Project Manager for the Enron/True Quote
Integration Project
* Sean Barlow - Gap Gemini/Ernst & Young, Developer - Not sure his role
yet,
we've just been asked by True Quote to add him to the Enron/True Quote
Integration Team.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Regards,
Maria

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 11:08 AM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

Though I'm not sure of everyone's function on the list below, we can
accomodate the extra people on Wednesday; however, on Thursday we will be
in a smaller conference room.

Just let me know what everyone's function is prior to tomorrow. (I know
Richard Toubia is VP, Product Development.)

I'll be forwarding an agenda shortly.

Thanks,
David






"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/06/2000 08:37:35 AM

Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>

To:   <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


The following people will be in attendance at our meeting on Wednesday:
- Richard Toubia
- Richard Stallings
- Chris Paxton
- Matt Sample
- Maria O'Neill

If we can accommodate a couple more, the following will also attend:
- Brett Glass
- Wayne Crane

I will be in and out of the office today and Tuesday, so the best way to
communicate with me is via Email.

Regards,
Maria O'Neill

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 4:40 PM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

I've scheduled meetings with our product control group for the following
dates and times.  I'll give you a call on Monday to make sure you know
where your going and such.  In the meantime, feel free to give me a call or
drop me a note if you have any questions.

-David

Product Mapping Meetings
November 8th:  1:00-3:00 PM
November 9th: 10:00-12:00 AM






"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'Neill@enform.com> on 10/31/2000 11:41:44 AM

To:   David.Fisher@enron.com
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


Oh, I see, my misunderstanding.  We are in 3 Greenway Plaza.  Two 2-hour
meetings is fine with us. No problem in us driving downtown.  However,
could
we schedule from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 on the 8th, and from 10:00 to 12:00 on
the 9th?  I have a conflict on the 8th.

The agenda looks fine.  If there are any additional XML-type questions left
to answer by the time we have the meeting, we may want to allow some time
to
discuss them.

Thanks again David, looking forward to meeting in person.

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 8:50 AM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

Actually, I was suggesting 2 hours on both the 8th and the 9th of November
for getting together to discuss mapping issues.  If November 8th and 9th
isn't good for you, we can try November 9th and 10th.  I would say let's
just get together for one, four hour meeting but it is difficult to get the
Product Control people together for that length of time since they are
integral to the day to day operations of EnronOnline.  (I am assuming you
are in downtown Houston.  If getting here is difficult then we can try to
arrange a one day meeting.) Any thoughts on the suggested dates/times?

As far as the number of meetings required, from our point of view we just
need to accomplish product and counterparty mappings.  The agenda below
addresses products and a follow-up would address counterparties.  Beyond
that, the External Interface Document and DTD should address all the
technical issues that enable you to design and construct your part of the
system.  I'll send you the most recent External Interface Document and DTD
shortly.

Please let me know you thoughts on the proposed agenda.  I'm sure we can
work out an agreeable schedule.

Regards,
David

Agenda
11/8/2000 10:00-12:00  Clarification of product representation and product
creation
process.

It is important to understand each other's methods for representing
products and the process by which we create new products prior to jumping
in to the mapping problem.

11/9/2000 10:00-12:00  Map schedule A products.

It is important to not only know which products of ours map to yours but
what process can be applied to make mapping easily repeatable.






"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'Neill@enform.com> on 10/31/2000 07:45:57 AM

To:   David.Fisher@enron.com
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


Hi David,

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.  I was out of the office
yesterday.  November 9th looks better for me.  I am concerned though, that
2
hours is not going to be enough. Do you expect this to be the first of
several meetings?

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 5:01 PM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

I've passed along your questions to the development team, which is
currently looking at them.  I'll get back to you regarding these as soon as
I get their feedback.

Regarding a meeting next week, I think we're going to have to postpone
until the following week.  How does November 8 & 9 look for you?  I've
tentatively scheduled our product people for 10 AM till 12 PM for product
mapping discussions.  Let me know what you think.

Below is the agenda I think we should start with for our first meeting.

11/8/2000
10:00 - 12:00  Clarification of product representation and product creation
process.
It is important to understand each other's methods for representing
products and the process by which we create new products prior to jumping
in to the mapping problem.

11/9/2000
10:00 - 12:00  Map schedule A products.
It is important to not only know which products of ours map to yours but
what process can be applied to make mapping easily repeatable.

Let's talk next week.  Enjoy your weekend.

-David





"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'Neill@enform.com> on 10/26/2000 01:50:34 PM

To:   David.Fisher@enron.com
cc:

Subject:  RE: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions


Hi David,

Thanks for sending the answers to our technical questions. After carefully
reviewing your answers, we have a few follow-up questions.  These appear in
"green".  Please let me know if anything needs further clarification.

We are looking forward to meeting with you next week. Tentatively, we are
planning to have 5 or 6 people attend.  These include three really
technical
people, a couple of leads (including myself), a user from the True Quote
business side who understands the products that are traded on True Quote,
and the new True Quote CIO (who's mainly interested in hearing what is said
more so than actively participating in the discussion).

By next Tuesday, I plan to send you our proposed agenda for the meeting.
If
you have a different agenda in mind for the meeting, let's discuss it over
the phone on Wednesday and jointly priortize the items for discussion. We
are very flexible in terms of the agenda.

Thanks in advance for any additional information you can send us.  It's
nice
to have a contact to be able to correspond with.  Have a great day!

-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 4:32 PM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: Enron-TrueQuote Integration Technical Questions



Maria,

It was good to hear from you this morning.  I have attached your document
with answers to your questions included.  In addition, I've provided the
finalized DTD and our schedule of release dates for specific functionality.

I raised your desire to meet to discuss the project and everyone agrees
that getting together is a good idea.  That said, we believe it would be
best to wait until we have a firm agenda to discuss.  For instance, we will
need to get together in the near term to discuss data mapping issues.  Feel
free to call or drop a note if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

David

The following are the dates that we will release functionality.

1 December 2000:  Login, Attempt Transaction, Post Price, Request Price and
Request Order Status.
15 December 2000: Request Transaction History, Request Credit Matrix, Post
Product Set Data and Post Credit Matrix.

(See attached file: EnronTechnicalQuestions101900 & Answers.doc)(See
attached file: exchange.dtd)


(See attached file: ClarificationsFromEnronAnswers2.doc)










---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/09/2000 02:38:44 PM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: FW: Address


David,

Could you please read the attached note and send the information to Wayne
Crane?  Thanks.

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Crane [mailto:wayne@crane.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 2:26 PM
To: Maria.O'neill@enform.com
Cc: jody.clark@truequote.com
Subject: Address


I need to get the physical address for the location where the T-1 will be
added for Enron.  Can you pass this request onto the proper person at Enron
ASAP (We're trying to get the circuit ordered).
Thanks

---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


Anchi Zhang@ECT
11/09/2000 04:24 PM
To: Maria.O'neill@enform.com, jody.clark@truequote.com, wayne@crane.net
cc: David Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Enron Network Security 

Subject: T-1 line for TrueQuote

Enron Corp.
Room 3440
1400 Smith Street
Houston, TX 77002

Anchi Zhang
713-853-5464

---------------------- Forwarded by Anchi Zhang/HOU/ECT on 11/09/2000 04:21 
PM ---------------------------
   
	Enron North America Corp.
	
	From:  David Fisher @ ENRON                           11/09/2000 03:07 PM
	

To: Anchi Zhang/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: T-1 line for TrueQuote

Anchi,

Below is a note I just received from the TrueQuote Project Manager.  I want 
to make sure you remain the focal point for the network portion of the 
project so please respond to Wayne Crane (wayne@crane.net) at your earliest 
opportunity.  Please carbon copy me on the notes so I can keep track of 
issues that could affect the schedule.

Thanks,
David

---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 11/09/2000 02:53 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/09/2000 02:38:44 PM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: FW: Address


David,

Could you please read the attached note and send the information to Wayne
Crane?  Thanks.

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Crane [mailto:wayne@crane.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 2:26 PM
To: Maria.O'neill@enform.com
Cc: jody.clark@truequote.com
Subject: Address


I need to get the physical address for the location where the T-1 will be
added for Enron.  Can you pass this request onto the proper person at Enron
ASAP (We're trying to get the circuit ordered).
Thanks





---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/10/2000 07:25:20 AM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: RE: T-1 Installation


Absolutely.  I let you know as soon as I hear.

Have a great weekend!

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 5:06 PM
To: O'Neill, Maria
Subject: T-1 Installation



Maria,

When you have an estimated installation date for you T-1 line, will you let
me know so that I can update our schedule?

Thanks,

David
---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 11/14/2000 04:04:35 PM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: RE: Tokenized Reference Period Treatments


Hi David,

Hope you're having a good day. Thanks for the latest information.  Let us
take a look at the documents and call you back tomorrow to discuss or set up
another meeting time.

Regards,

Maria


Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 2:01 PM
To: Richard Toubia; maria.o'neill@enform.com
Subject: Tokenized Reference Period Treatments



Richard/Maria,

Attached please find the 'treatments' for the various Tokenized reference
periods currently in use for US Nat Gas and US Power.  I believe you will
find these spreadsheets easier to translate than the previous.  Let me know
what you think.  As you've pointed out it is critical that we are both on
the same page when it comes to our treatments of these reference periods;
however, I do believe this is an issue that we can work through together.
I would suggest that we get together again for another couple hours once
you've had the chance to review not only the info I've provided to date but
also the list of Schedule A products that I plan to provide on Wednesday.
As always, feel free to drop me a note or give me a call anytime.

Regards,
David

P.S.  Please keep in mind that the present structure of the TRP's do not
contemplate weekends that breach a calendar month, and holidays.  For
example, a US Nat Gas Day Ahead product (Number XXXX)  being offered after
11:00 a.m. on a Thursday the 27th will provide a TRP Product for Saturday
the 29th, Sunday the 30th, and Monday the 1st. Since our trading areas
would not want to breach the current calendar month, they would create two
date-specific products; Number YYYY for Saturday the 29th through Sunday
the 30th, and Product Number ZZZZ for Monday the 1st.

(See attached file: US Nat Gas TRP Treatment.xls)(See attached file: East
Power TRP Treatment.xls)(See attached file: West Power TRP Treatment.xls)


---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/01/2000 02:16:36 PM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: 


A question has come up that may have serious implications for our system.
Please forward to the right person, we would really appreciate it if we
could have a response as soon as possible.

The question is "How many transaction attempts can be sent by Enron to True
Quote at one time(will Enron be sending more than transaction in a batch)?"
Your documentation seems to read that you may be sending more than one
transaction at a time.  If that is true, then we may have a problem if you
plan to send transaction searches that would force us to cancel all of the
previous transaction attempts that were sent over together, since our system
processes items in sequential order.

Please call me if the question seems confusing.

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308

---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/04/2000 08:11:06 AM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: FW: Fill or Kill - Buy or Sell from Enron Traders


Good morning David,

Here's another clarifying question.  I have in my notes documentation that
says that Enron will do partial fills of transactions sent to EOL. The
question that being asked in the attached note has to do with transactions
sent by EOL to TrueQuote.  Does Enron want (or will Enron accept) partial
fills by the True Quote system? If so, how should we identify (if at all)
that this was a partial fill?

Thanks David.

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Glass, Brett [mailto:Brett.Glass@enform.com]
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 4:12 PM
To: Maria O'Neill (E-mail)
Subject: Fill or Kill - Buy or Sell from Enron Traders


Maria,

Matt raised a question regarding transaction attempts made by Enron Traders
directly against the True Quote system (not going through EOL).  This is a
two scenario question:

1)  If an Enron trader is initiating a buy in the True Quote system against
a counterparty's position to sell at a specified price and volume (ie:
15,000 @ 2.40 - which is currently a valid market in True Quote), at the
point the transaction is being executed in the system, the volume drops to
10,000, would our Enron want to fill whatever quantity they can at the given
price.  Currently we are interpreting all transactions made directly from
Enron into the True Quote system will be entered as a Fill or Kill.
Will Enron allow partial fills of transaction attempts?
Also, should the successful transaction attempt consist of several parties,
will Enron accept this (3 parties of 5,000 each)?
Do we send back a response identifying a FILL for the partial volume and
FAIL for the remaining volume?

2)  Reverse the statement for an attempt of Enron to Sell a volume against a
counterparty's position to buy.  Is Enron willing to sell partial volumes
should the market not be there to fill Enron's order completely?

Brett Glass
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
Phone: (713) 350-1862

---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/04/2000 11:14:09 AM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: FW: Enron Teleconference Questions/Answers


David,

I am forwarding you minutes taken from the conference call with Enron of
Sept 26th.  This was before you joined the project, but as you can see, we
were told that partial fills would be possible.  The answers appear in blue.

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308

 -----Original Message-----
From:  O'Neill, Maria
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 11:33 AM
To: 'chris.edmonds@truequote.com'
Cc: Wayne Crane (E-mail); Haddix, Scott
Subject: FW: Enron Teleconference Questions/Answers

Chris,

Wayne and I have reviewed this transcript from the conversation with Enron.
During that conversation, several items were to be worked offline.  These
are detailed and are listed as "To be worked offline" in Exhibit B, C, D,
and E.

Would you like to have EnFORM participate in your discussion with Enron, or
do you feel that these items are strategically sensitive enough that you
should have this conversation without EnFORM's involvement?

These "To be worked offline" issues are very important, but we do have
additional technical questions that would best be addressed by a technical
Enron contact.  If we could begin the process of a establishing a technical
"relationship" with an individual at Enron as soon as possible, it would
speed development and lower costs of this project.

P.S.  Wayne was next to me as I typed this note.

Regards,
Maria

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------


The following questions were discussed in the telephone conference call with
Enron on September 26th.  We have inserted Enron's answers in Blue and have
highlighted follow-ups and offline discussions in Red.


Questions for Enron to answer regarding True Quote's interface:

High Priority Questions (need to be addressed):
(From Exhibit A) Will the product ID that Enron is transmitting specifically
identify a product offering including commodity, deal type, region /
location, and tradable term (fully qualified begin and end dates)?

Product ID is a fully transactable item - Product, Location, Dates
Product ID is a fully qualified instrument - excluding price, volume and
counterparty
Product ID can be for next day and balance of month.  However, on next to
last day of month, the Product ID will offer either next day or BOM, not
both (there is no reason for redundancy)
Product ID that is for anything, except for the rolling Tokenized
products/dates (example: For a spot month, the Product ID will expire on the
first day of that spot month)
Currency and Unit of measure is implied as part of Product ID, but it is not
an attribute


(From Exhibit B) Can we confirm a transaction attempt against Enron for an
Enron product id is a "Fill or Kill" transaction, meaning, a transaction
attempt submitted to Enron would not stay in their system if it was not
immediately filled.  If the deal is not confirmed by Enron, the order will
be immediately removed from Enron's system and could not be filled later if
market conditions made the order viable.

A transaction attempt by TrueQuote will be "Fill or Kill" (It will not in
stay in EOL's system)

If the deal is not confirmed by Enron due to non-availability of volume,
these volumes need to be expired in the True Quote system

If a transaction attempt fails for ANY reason, Enron will immediately
rebroadcast that Product to the True Quote system

Does True Quote need to design functionality for partial fill of a deal
transaction for an outside entity?

Enron will do partial fills.  The True Quote system needs to design
functionality to accept partial fills from an outside entity.

What is the time threshold for waiting on an Enron response to a transaction
attempt?

Enron will accept whatever True Quote determines is an acceptable threshold
for waiting.

What is the estimated delivery date for Enron's DTDs?

The EnronOnline Exchanges External Interface Document was received on
Monday, October 2, 2000.

Exhibit A (Enron Price Interface-what Enron sends to TQ):

Concerning the Enron price interface, Enron has stated that EOL currently
handles prices/volume updates at the rate of 100 updates per second, growing
potentially to 500 per second (across all EOL product offerings).  Given
this level of update activity, how will the transmission of these updates be
accomplished?  Below are some questions which should clarify these concerns:

What is the expected rate of updates for the sub-set of EOL products that
will be transmitted to the True Quote platform?  Is it expected that these
products will also endure update activity at the rate of 100-500 updates per
second?

Although it was not communicated how often an XML document will be sent, it
was clarified that the XML documents will be sent at certain time
intervals.Each update will contain all information since last time polled
(includes all changes (only changes) since last transmission)
Need to clarify if True Quote will be polling EOL for Updates, or if EOL
will send them automatically at certain time intervals.

Will there be one XML document interface transmission for each Enron product
update, or will one XML document interface contain updates for multiple
Enron products?  The implications of this are as follows:  Will True Quote
need to handle 100-500 XML documents per second, or will True Quote receive
one XML document at a determined interval that has updates for all Enron
products?  If the XML document contains updates for all Enron products, how
often will Enron send us the document?   If it's one XML document per Enron
product, will True Quote be expected to handle 100-500 XML document
submissions per second?

The XML document will contain updates for multiple Product IDs.  If only one
Product ID has changed in EOL since the last transmission, then only one
Product ID will be sent to True Quote in the updates.

Can we confirm that Enron will only submit one price/volume offering per
Enron product id; meaning, Enron will never have multiple price and quantity
offerings for the same Enron product ID on the True Quote platform.

Enron will never send Market Depth for any Product ID.  What you see on EOL
is exactly what is transmitted to True Quote (one offering per Enron Product
ID).  However, each Product ID update will contain both the Bid and the
Offer.

The interface currently does not have a field to define the duration of the
order.  Given this, can we assume that when the price interface submits a
product price/volume update to the True Quote platform, the order will be
loaded with a duration of "Good Until Canceled".  True Quote will mark the
order as 'GTC' until Enron submits a new XML document for that Enron product
that changes the status to "Suspended".  In this case True Quote would
cancel the order on the True Quote system.

All orders will remain on the True Quote system until the EOL traders pull
the deals.  At this time, EOL would send "Suspended Status" for the Product
ID.

How are terms related to Enron Product IDs?  Example:  For a given Enron
commodity, deal type, and location that is traded in October, would a new
product id be created for that same product offering when the month rolls to
November?
 Yes

If product ids do not include a direct relationship to a specific tradable
term, when a Price Interface XML document is submitted to the True Quote
platform, how will True Quote know which trade term the product id is
associated with?
Product IDs do have a direct relationship to a specific tradable term

We are currently assuming that an Enron product id specifically identifies a
product offering including commodity, deal type, region/location, and
tradable term.
This assumption is correct

Can we confirm that all Enron orders transmitted to the True Quote platform
will be cancelled at the end of the day and that all products will be
re-loaded into the True Quote system the following morning?  If not,  will
the assumed 'Good Until Canceled' duration for each product id remain active
until the status has been changed to "Suspended"?

All EOL orders should be removed by the traders at the end of the day.  For
those that are not removed, True Quote should run a nightly batch job that
removes all EOL orders left in the system.  Each morning, True Quote will
authenticate with EOL, and at this time, all orders on EOL will be
transmitted to True Quote.

Exhibit B (Transaction Interface with Enron):

For each field (across all interfaces), we will need clearly defined data
types (precision, range of length, space/bytes it takes).

This information still needs to be provided.

Can we assume the Bid/Ask flag is an integer? Perhaps a bit?  If it's a
character, what is the character indicator?  B/A?

This information still needs to be provided.

Can we confirm the data type for volume is integer?

This information still needs to be provided.

Across all interfaces, there is not a defined unit of measure for price and
volume by Enron product id.   Should part of the XML DTD specify the unit of
measure for both price and volume, or are we to assume that Enron product
ids for Power are in US dollars and megawatt/hr, and Enron product ids for
natural gas are US dollars and MMBTU?

Currency and Unit of measure is implied as part of Product ID, but it is not
an attribute

Price - how many decimal places? (precision of the number)

This information still needs to be provided.

Volume and Price - Does Enron have an min / max / default increment value
established for price and volume increment ranges by Enron product id?  (For
example, within True Quote the default volume increment for natural gas is
5000, and the price increment is $0.0025.  Both the price and volume
increments, min/max ranges can vary by region or location).

On EOL, the traders determine the minimal tradable increments and the
minimal tradable amounts (this minimums could be as low as 1).

To be worked Offline:
How to handle increments <> 5000 increment on the Enron side (will we only
display the 5000 increment below the volume submitted by Enron, if trader
has a minimum greater than entities are willing to participate, how do we
display this and how does the minimum increment come across in the order)


Can we confirm a transaction attempt against Enron for an Enron product id
is a "Fill or Kill" transaction, meaning, a transaction attempt submitted to
Enron would not stay in their system if it was not immediately filled.  If
the deal is not confirmed by Enron, the order will be immediately removed
from Enron's system and could not be filled later if market conditions made
the order viable.  If the deal is not confirmed by Enron due to
non-availability of volume, these volumes need to be expired in the True
Quote system.

Already answered above.

Will Enron allow partial fill of transactions?   For example, if the Enron
price interface submits an offer with 20,000 mmbtu available, can True Quote
submit a transaction bid attempt to take only 10,000 mmbtu of the Enron
offer?   If not, is it a valid assumption that we can only submit a
transaction attempt to lift the entire Enron offer of 20,000 mmbtu?

Enron will allow partial fills.

Exhibit C (True Quote Price Interface-what TQ sends to Enron):
Does Enron expect True Quote to submit a single price point offering for an
Enron product id that is the aggregate total volume of all orders available
for that product id on the True Quote platform at the best available price?
This would allow Enron to submit a transaction attempt against the True
Quote platform, submitting a volume request that would potentially sweep
multiple counter parties creating deals with all entities necessary to
satisfy transaction attempt.
Alternative 2:  Does Enron expect True Quote to submit only the best
individual order (the best price and volume for an Enron product id from
only one counterparty) identified by its True Quote order id (True Quote
would not transmit the counter party id; however, before sending the XML
interface to Enron, the counterparty would have to pass the credit rules
maintained in the counterparty credit matrix on the True Quote platform).
Alternative 3:  Would Enron expect True Quote to submit multiple price
offerings per Enron product id (a market depth of various price and volume
offerings).  In this scenario, the volume associated with each price point
should be an aggregate of multiple True Quote orders (as shown in the True
Quote market screen).  The XML interface could potentially transmit
individual True Quote orders and their associated volumes (not an aggregate
volume of multiple orders); however, giving Enron the ability to 'pick and
choose' individual orders could potentially violate True Quote customer
service agreements that require deals to be executed in the chronological
sequence that the order request was received by the True Quote platform.

Enron wants to see the granularity of each True Quote Product ID order.
Enron expects True Quote to submit multiple price offerings per Enron
Product ID.  (Example:  If  True Quote has an order in the system for
100,000 MMbtu's at $3.00, which is comprised of 10 individual orders of
10,000, Enron wants True Quote to send all of the individual orders).

To be worked Offline:
Fair and equitable treatment with prices sent to Enron (proper processing of
orders without bias)
Need to discuss in more detail how to handle EOL price interface
transactions and Enron Trader transactions
Need to clarify with Enron whether they want to receive the best price in
the market for a given Product ID, or if they want to see all of a given
Product ID's market depth.

Our concern is that if True Quote transmits individual True Quote orders and
their associated volumes (not an aggregate volume of multiple orders),
giving Enron the ability to 'pick and choose' individual orders, this could
potentially violate True Quote customer service agreements that require
deals to be executed in the chronological sequence that the order request
was received by the True Quote platform.


Exhibit D (Sponsor Transaction Interface):
Are we correct in assuming that transactions posted by Enron traders against
True Quote deals will be executed on the True Quote system?  Will the
duration of the order attempts being sent to True Quote be "Fill or Kill" or
some other duration?

To be worked Offline:
The traders will want to transact against True Quote directly without
adjusting the market position through EOL, but how this is accomplished will
be to be discussed.

Exhibit E (Counterparty Interface):
In general, we need more details about what Enron will be sending as part of
their daily counterparty credit / term interface, as well as the intra-day
counterparty credit/term interface:
Currently, exhibit E does not specific any fields or data types within an
XML DTD.
What are the "terms" under which participants can trade with Enron?  For
example, will the level of restriction include volumetric limits, financial
limits, tradable date range limits (number days or months into the future)
by Enron product id (assuming a product id specifically defines a commodity,
deal-type, region/location, and tradable term).  Will Enron send us a 'yes /
no' flag to turn off/on a counterparty's ability to trade with Enron by the
Enron product id?

To be worked Offline:
Credit terms and counterparty interface details were not addressed in the
teleconference.  The details of granularity will need to addressed to better
understand the responsibilities that True Quote will have in handling
Enron's credit structure.


Questions for True Quote to Answer:

Exhibit D:  Does the Sponsor Transaction interface (Enron proposing
transactions on the True Quote platform) still invoke the Enron Transaction
Interface?  There was some discussion that if internal Enron traders
proposed transactions against the True Quote platform, the point of
transaction would be the True Quote platform, and True Quote would not have
to invoke the transaction on the EOL platform.  True Quote would simply
confirm whether the Enron transaction attempt succeeded or failed.  If it
succeeded, True Quote would send a confirmation XML interface to confirm the
deal had been executed and transmit the True Quote Deal ID to Enron.
What is the time threshold for waiting on Enron's response to a transaction
attempt?  For example, after 'n' seconds the True Quote platform should
alert a system operator that an Enron transaction attempt has failed to
return either a confirmation or failure.

Please respond to the questions above.

Thank you.



Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "O'Neill, Maria"
Cc: "Glass, Brett"
Subject: Teleconference Highlights
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:21:11 -0600
Message-ID: <F150C1D2E6C3374AA8A7A1A9B93E91BB30DF3D@mailbert.enform.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700

* Product ID
* Product ID is a fully transactable item  and fully qualified instrument -
Includes: Product, Location, Dates; Excludes: Price, Volume and Couterparty
* Tokenized Dates:  Product ID for next day and balance of month are
tokenized dates which means that the product ID will remain the same for
designated date range (next day, next 2 days, BOM, etc).  The dates will
role, but the product ID will remain the same
* Product IDs for anything but the rolling Tokenized products/dates (i.e. -
spot month), expire after date has been reached.
* There will be no redundancy of product IDs that encompass the same date
ranges (i.e.:  there are usually two separate product IDs for next day and
balance of month, but when the next to the last day of the month is reached,
both will reference the same day.  At this point, Enron will only have one
product ID associated with the given date range)
* Enron has set up product IDs to adequately reflect Weekend trading on
Friday (deals entered for Saturday will encompass Sat - Mon (and include
extra days when Holidays are involved))
* Once a strip term has been reached, trades within the month then change to
the tokenized product IDs.
* Enron will Fill or Kill all transaction attempts - they will execute or
cancel the trade immediately
* Enron will Partial fills transaction attempts
* When True Quote sends a request for a transaction, the threshold for
waiting on a response from Enron will be defined by True Quote.
* Trade failure will re-broadcast product (failure for any reason)
* If for any reason there is a concern about a product, True Quote can
request (HTTP) validation of the product in question
* Frequency of updates:  Enron will send True Quote a document that contains
all information since last time polled (includes all changes (only changes)
since last transmission)
* Every product sent will have only one bid and offer price associated with
it at time of transmission.  What you see on EOL is what is sent to True
Quote.
* There will be no market depth transmitted to True Quote from Enron
* Duration of orders
* Orders will be displayed on True Quote until suspended by traders
* All orders will remain on system until traders pull deals
* True Quote session is finite (7 -7).  At the end of every day all deals
will be removed from True Quote (either by Enron traders removing them, or
TRUE QUOTE will run a batch job to clear Enron deals).  In the morning, TRUE
QUOTE will authenticate and all products will be loaded from Enron to TRUE
QUOTE.
* The Currency and Unit of measure are implied as part of Product ID, it's
not an attribute.
* Granularity of orders transmitted from True Quote to Enron will show each
order associated with each price and volume of a Product ID (i.e. 100,000
mmbtu @ $5 is made up of 10 separate orders of 10,000, Enron would like to
see all 10 orders of 10,000 - including counterparty information)
* Transaction attempts made from True Quote to EOL - Point of execution will
be on EOL
* Transaction attempts made by Enron Traders against True Quote price
postings will be executed on True Quote

Offline:
* Will we know if a transaction has failed due to volume not available,
credit failure, or Enron has not heard of the transaction
* How to handle increments <> 5000 increment on the Enron side (will we only
display the 5000 increment below the volume submitted by Enron; if trader
has a minimum tradable volume greater than entities are willing to
participate (i.e. Enron minimum tradable amount is 10,000 or 15,000) how do
we display this and how does the minimum increment come across in the order)
* If we transmit to Enron the granularity of all orders (including
counterparty information), how will True Quote / Enron ensure the fair and
equitable treatment with prices sent to Enron (proper processing of orders
without bias)
* Business question: how much do we want to send Enron (they are ok with
sending each order for all price points in an instrument), do we show top 1
or top 5?
* Need to discuss in more detail how to handle EOL price interface
transactions and Enron Trader transactions


Brett Glass
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
Phone: (713) 350-1862


---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/07/2000 02:17:12 PM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...


David,

Can you confirm the answer to Stewart's question.  We just want to make
absolutely sure we know what you mean when you say "fill or kill".  Thanks!

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 9:58 AM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com; brett.glass@enform.com;
kimberly.hahn@enform.com; richard.stallings@enform.com
Subject: RE: One other item about Enron...


Maria,

Please confirm with David that NO partial fills refers *only* to transaction
attempts.  We fully expect that Enron will send us (potentially) large
volumes via. the price posting interface; then, we may execute multiple
transaction attempts for that EOL product ID to Enron via. the transaction
attempt interface.  These individual transaction attempts could be much
smaller (in volume) than the volume posted via. the price posting interface.

Basically, the way we understand it is... the individual transaction
attempts will be 'all or nothing'; however, we can break the large price
post down and transmit multiple (smaller) transaction attempts against that
large price post volume.

I believe we are all in agreement on this, but it never hurts to be
absolutely sure concerning something of this magnitude and importance.

Thanks,

-Stewart


-----Original Message-----
From: O'Neill, Maria [mailto:Maria.O'neill@Enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:52 AM
To: brett.glass@enform.com; stewart.clark@enform.com;
kimberly.hahn@enform.com; richard.stallings@enform.com
Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...


I've spoken the David Fisher at Enron this morning.  The conference call
will Andy Zipper and Jay Webb cannot be arranged until next Thursday (Dec.
14). David will send details later.

David has asked us to assume that there will be NO partial fills on either
side. He believes that even if they agree to do this it will likely be a
"day 2" enhancement and not a functionality that is part of the January 5th
deliverables. He is also requesting that we focus on completing the
functionality that will allow Enron to post prices on True Quote and will
allow True Quote to execute transactions on EOL.  In addition, another
priority needs to be to have the credit functionality completed.  These are
going to be the requirements that need to be tested by December 18th and
need to be in production by January 5th.

True Quote's ability to send prices to Enron and accept transaction attempts
from EOL is secondary at this point and not likely to be a requirement that
needs to be met by January 5th.

Please let me know if there is any reason why the execution engine will not
be ready to accept price posts from EOL and send transaction requests
(assuming only full orders will be filled) by December 18th.  If there is
any concern about getting credit functioning within that timeframe, please
let me know this as soon as possible, as well.  Thanks for all of your help.
You all are key contributors to this project and without your awesome
knowledge and skills, we would never be able to complete this project in the
timeframe that we're being asked to complete it in.  I really appreciate
your efforts.

Regards,

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Glass, Brett [mailto:Brett.Glass@enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:21 AM
To: Maria O'Neill (E-mail)
Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...




Brett Glass
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
Phone: (713) 350-1862

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 10:56 PM
To: Kimberly.Hahn@enform.com; 'Richard H. Stallings (E-mail)'
Cc: 'Brett Glass (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: One other item about Enron...

I believe we're having a conf. call with Andy Zipper and Jay Web tomorrow
with Chris and Dennis.

I'll bring this up as an alternative (adding the min and increment
attributes to the XML DTDs).  Duration would be another one to add...

-Stewart


 -----Original Message-----
From:  Hahn, Kimberly [mailto:Kimberly.Hahn@enform.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 8:49 AM
To: Stewart.Clark@enform.com; 'Richard H. Stallings (E-mail)'
Cc: 'Brett Glass (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: One other item about Enron...

Stew & Richard,

I would be surprised if Enron was willing to store the minimum qty, but what
about sending it in the transaction request as an additional attribute?
Might they be talked into that?  This would be better for us since we should
not have to worry about maintaining our system information on the Enron
platform.

How about proposing that both platforms send the min & increment volume
requirements?  This would be more complex for us now, but might be better in
the long run for both platforms.  We would be more flexible and better able
to integrate with outside systems if we were able to accept this type of
information.  It get complicated because you could only fill where the two
requirements (our and the outside system) were compatible, but it is
do-able.  Thoughts?

Kim
 -----Original Message-----
From:  Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 12:44 AM
To: Brett Glass (E-mail); Richard H. Stallings (E-mail); Kimberly A. Hahn
(E-mail)
Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...

FYI

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 12:43 AM
To: Dennis Crum (E-mail); Chris Edmonds (E-mail)
Cc: Maria O'Neill (E-mail)
Subject: One other item about Enron...

Dennis &  Chris...

One other EOL scenario we forgot to talk about this evening was the scenario
where:

1)  EOL post 20,000 / day to our platform via. the price post interface...
2)  A True Quote customer submits a request to do 15,000 / day...
3) TQ submits a transaction attempt to EOL for 15,000 day...
4)  EOL only has 14,000 remaining, so they deny the entire transaction
attempt...

However, if Enron's system was aware that we would take partially filled Gas
orders in minimum increments of 5,000, EOL could have partially filled the
transaction request for 10,000.

Any news on that scenario?  I'll talk to Maria first thing in the morning...
perhaps this one is already resolved?   I would think it would be in EOL's
best business interest to store our minimum volumes, so EOL could always
fill us at least partially rather than deny the entire transaction.
However, it really doesn't matter to us (technically) we'll just cancel the
entire EOL transaction attempt and continue our sweep and fill the volume
with the next available counterparty.   Whereas if they partially filled us,
we would probably cancel the original transaction attempt, and rebuild a new
transaction deal ID for the 10,000 / day deal.... then continue the sweep
for the final 5,000 from the next available counterparty.

I haven't reviewed this scenario with the deal execution team yet, but if
EOL *did* partially fill us with *at least* our minimum, it would probably
be no more or less complex for us because even in a scenario where EOL
denies a transaction attempt, we ALREADY must have the logic to cancel the
EOL deal transaction attempt, and create a new order with the next available
counterparty (to fill the volume request).   So, if EOL did partially filled
us, we would simply cancel the original transaction request that was for the
full volume amount, and create a new deal with EOL for the partial volume
they confirmed, as opposed to creating a new deal with a different
counterparty.  Only one additional deal would have to be created with the
next available counterparty to fill the last 5,000 of the original request.
Seems simply enough... and it would be in EOL's best interest to fill our
transaction attempts partially so they would complete our transaction
attempts more often....   if they don't fill us partially, EOL will probably
end-up denying many of our transaction attempts if the exact volume is not
available.  hmm.... what do ya'll think?

-Stewart

Stewart D. Clark
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Stewart.Clark@enform.com
(713) 350-1000  Main
(713) 350-1012  Direct
(713) 818-0632  Mobile

---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


Anchi Zhang@ECT
12/07/2000 06:42 PM
To: David Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:  

Subject: your call

David,

I am in Seattle until Sunday.

No, I have not heard anything from Truequote since they and I had our first 
phone contact two weeks ago.

Anchi
---------------------- Forwarded by David Fisher/NA/Enron on 12/11/2000 01:58 
PM ---------------------------


"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/08/2000 07:47:26 AM
Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>
To: <David.Fisher@enron.com>
cc:  

Subject: RE: FW: One other item about Enron...


Thanks for the clarification David.

I appreciate all of your efforts in helping us get answers to our questions.
Have a great weekend!

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: David.Fisher@enron.com [mailto:David.Fisher@enron.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 5:02 PM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com
Subject: Re: FW: One other item about Enron...



Maria,

Stewart is correct in his understanding of no parital fills.  I will
reiterate his statements through the following examples:

If Enron posts a gas product with 50,000 MMBTU available and TrueQuote
attempts a transaction on 30,000 MMBTU, the attempt will be successfull if
the following 3 criteria are met:

1.  30,000 MMBTU is still available when the transaction hits EOL.
2.  30,000 MMBTU meets the minimum volume for the product as set by the
trader.
3.  30,000 MMBTU meets the increment volume for the product as set by the
trader.

Examples of how the 3 criteria above come into play:

1.  If when TrueQuote attempts to transact on 30,000 MMBTU, the volume
available for the product drops to below 30,000 MMBTU, the transaction will
fail.
2.  If TrueQuote attempts to transact on 30,000 MMBTU but the EOL trader
has set the minimum volume for the product to 40,000 MMBTU, the transaction
will fail.
3.  If TrueQuote attempts to transact on 32,500 MMBTU but the EOL trader
has set 5,000 MMBTU increments, the transaction will fail.

I set-up a meeting with Jay Webb and Andy Zipper for next Friday.  That is
the earliest we all could meet.  Once we talk, I'll coordinate a conference
call with you.  For the time being let's stay the course.

Regards,
David







"O'Neill, Maria" <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com> on 12/07/2000 02:17:12 PM

Please respond to <Maria.O'neill@Enform.com>

To:   "David Fisher \(E-mail\)" <david.fisher@enron.com>
cc:

Subject:  FW: One other item about Enron...


David,

Can you confirm the answer to Stewart's question.  We just want to make
absolutely sure we know what you mean when you say "fill or kill".  Thanks!

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 9:58 AM
To: Maria.O'neill@Enform.com; brett.glass@enform.com;
kimberly.hahn@enform.com; richard.stallings@enform.com
Subject: RE: One other item about Enron...


Maria,

Please confirm with David that NO partial fills refers *only* to
transaction
attempts.  We fully expect that Enron will send us (potentially) large
volumes via. the price posting interface; then, we may execute multiple
transaction attempts for that EOL product ID to Enron via. the transaction
attempt interface.  These individual transaction attempts could be much
smaller (in volume) than the volume posted via. the price posting
interface.

Basically, the way we understand it is... the individual transaction
attempts will be 'all or nothing'; however, we can break the large price
post down and transmit multiple (smaller) transaction attempts against that
large price post volume.

I believe we are all in agreement on this, but it never hurts to be
absolutely sure concerning something of this magnitude and importance.

Thanks,

-Stewart


-----Original Message-----
From: O'Neill, Maria [mailto:Maria.O'neill@Enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:52 AM
To: brett.glass@enform.com; stewart.clark@enform.com;
kimberly.hahn@enform.com; richard.stallings@enform.com
Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...


I've spoken the David Fisher at Enron this morning.  The conference call
will Andy Zipper and Jay Webb cannot be arranged until next Thursday (Dec.
14). David will send details later.

David has asked us to assume that there will be NO partial fills on either
side. He believes that even if they agree to do this it will likely be a
"day 2" enhancement and not a functionality that is part of the January 5th
deliverables. He is also requesting that we focus on completing the
functionality that will allow Enron to post prices on True Quote and will
allow True Quote to execute transactions on EOL.  In addition, another
priority needs to be to have the credit functionality completed.  These are
going to be the requirements that need to be tested by December 18th and
need to be in production by January 5th.

True Quote's ability to send prices to Enron and accept transaction
attempts
from EOL is secondary at this point and not likely to be a requirement that
needs to be met by January 5th.

Please let me know if there is any reason why the execution engine will not
be ready to accept price posts from EOL and send transaction requests
(assuming only full orders will be filled) by December 18th.  If there is
any concern about getting credit functioning within that timeframe, please
let me know this as soon as possible, as well.  Thanks for all of your
help.
You all are key contributors to this project and without your awesome
knowledge and skills, we would never be able to complete this project in
the
timeframe that we're being asked to complete it in.  I really appreciate
your efforts.

Regards,

Maria F. O'Neill
Senior Manager, EnFORM Technology
> Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
3 Greenway Plaza, Suite 800
Houston, TX  77046
office (713)350-1891
cell (713)416-3308


-----Original Message-----
From: Glass, Brett [mailto:Brett.Glass@enform.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:21 AM
To: Maria O'Neill (E-mail)
Subject: FW: One other item about Enron...




Brett Glass
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Enterprise TransFORMation Through Technology
Phone: (713) 350-1862

 -----Original Message-----
From:     Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent:     Wednesday, December 06, 2000 10:56 PM
To:  Kimberly.Hahn@enform.com; 'Richard H. Stallings (E-mail)'
Cc:  'Brett Glass (E-mail)'
Subject:  RE: One other item about Enron...

I believe we're having a conf. call with Andy Zipper and Jay Web tomorrow
with Chris and Dennis.

I'll bring this up as an alternative (adding the min and increment
attributes to the XML DTDs).  Duration would be another one to add...

-Stewart


 -----Original Message-----
From:     Hahn, Kimberly [mailto:Kimberly.Hahn@enform.com]
Sent:     Wednesday, December 06, 2000 8:49 AM
To:  Stewart.Clark@enform.com; 'Richard H. Stallings (E-mail)'
Cc:  'Brett Glass (E-mail)'
Subject:  RE: One other item about Enron...

Stew & Richard,

I would be surprised if Enron was willing to store the minimum qty, but
what
about sending it in the transaction request as an additional attribute?
Might they be talked into that?  This would be better for us since we
should
not have to worry about maintaining our system information on the Enron
platform.

How about proposing that both platforms send the min & increment volume
requirements?  This would be more complex for us now, but might be better
in
the long run for both platforms.  We would be more flexible and better able
to integrate with outside systems if we were able to accept this type of
information.  It get complicated because you could only fill where the two
requirements (our and the outside system) were compatible, but it is
do-able.  Thoughts?

Kim
 -----Original Message-----
From:     Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent:     Wednesday, December 06, 2000 12:44 AM
To:  Brett Glass (E-mail); Richard H. Stallings (E-mail); Kimberly A. Hahn
(E-mail)
Subject:  FW: One other item about Enron...

FYI

 -----Original Message-----
From:     Stewart D. Clark [mailto:Stewart.Clark@enform.com]
Sent:     Wednesday, December 06, 2000 12:43 AM
To:  Dennis Crum (E-mail); Chris Edmonds (E-mail)
Cc:  Maria O'Neill (E-mail)
Subject:  One other item about Enron...

Dennis &  Chris...

One other EOL scenario we forgot to talk about this evening was the
scenario
where:

1)  EOL post 20,000 / day to our platform via. the price post interface...
2)  A True Quote customer submits a request to do 15,000 / day...
3) TQ submits a transaction attempt to EOL for 15,000 day...
4)  EOL only has 14,000 remaining, so they deny the entire transaction
attempt...

However, if Enron's system was aware that we would take partially filled
Gas
orders in minimum increments of 5,000, EOL could have partially filled the
transaction request for 10,000.

Any news on that scenario?  I'll talk to Maria first thing in the
morning...
perhaps this one is already resolved?   I would think it would be in EOL's
best business interest to store our minimum volumes, so EOL could always
fill us at least partially rather than deny the entire transaction.
However, it really doesn't matter to us (technically) we'll just cancel the
entire EOL transaction attempt and continue our sweep and fill the volume
with the next available counterparty.   Whereas if they partially filled
us,
we would probably cancel the original transaction attempt, and rebuild a
new
transaction deal ID for the 10,000 / day deal.... then continue the sweep
for the final 5,000 from the next available counterparty.

I haven't reviewed this scenario with the deal execution team yet, but if
EOL *did* partially fill us with *at least* our minimum, it would probably
be no more or less complex for us because even in a scenario where EOL
denies a transaction attempt, we ALREADY must have the logic to cancel the
EOL deal transaction attempt, and create a new order with the next
available
counterparty (to fill the volume request).   So, if EOL did partially
filled
us, we would simply cancel the original transaction request that was for
the
full volume amount, and create a new deal with EOL for the partial volume
they confirmed, as opposed to creating a new deal with a different
counterparty.  Only one additional deal would have to be created with the
next available counterparty to fill the last 5,000 of the original request.
Seems simply enough... and it would be in EOL's best interest to fill our
transaction attempts partially so they would complete our transaction
attempts more often....   if they don't fill us partially, EOL will
probably
end-up denying many of our transaction attempts if the exact volume is not
available.  hmm.... what do ya'll think?

-Stewart

Stewart D. Clark
EnFORM Technology, LLC
Stewart.Clark@enform.com
(713) 350-1000  Main
(713) 350-1012  Direct
(713) 818-0632  Mobile