Spreadsheet: sally_beck__35044__london_doorstep
Sheet: Sheet1

Project Doorstep - London
Items to be addressed | Action Step | Target Date | Sponsor | Primary Responsibility
No formal procedures exist to ensure that deals maintained outside of the main deal database systems and that manual adjustments made to the face of the DPR are captured in the Credit Aggregation System on a timely basis for Credit risk monitoring purposes. | Completion of analysis which will identify incomplete data in CAS and then implementation of solutions to capture this data in order to ensure CAS is populated with complete credit exposure information. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME]              S. Young | [NAME]
Global Products Logistics uses spreadsheets to schedule and monitor deliveries which are not always reconciled on a timely basis to Right Angle which Credit relies on to update exposures. | Ensure the Coordination Group (recently implemented) has responsibility for maintaining Right Angle information on an accurate and timely basis, and that they serve as an interface for Credit. | May 31, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Lack of effective controls to ensure Global Product deliveries are not made in excess of contracted amounts. | Implement real-time system controls ([NAME]) which do not allow scheduling of volumes unless contract capacity is available. | Sept. 30, 2000 | [NAME] | K. Sweeney
 | Independent reconciliation of deliveries to contracted volumes to be performed by the Coordination Group in a timely manner. | May 31, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
EnPower for Continental Power does not satisfy power scheduling needs resulting in the use of stand-alone spreadsheets for scheduling purposes. | Enhance EnPower to meet the scheduling requirements of Continental Power. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | TBD                                  P. Pissanetzky
Prioritsation of system projects has resulted in a lack of certain control functionality and a reliance on manual processes within the support infrastructure. | Implement an IT project management process which will specify and document project timelines, IT and business resources required, and accountability for project completion. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME]              M. Pickering | [NAME]
Stand-alone models have not been independently reviewed and formally approved, the largest being the Eastern spread option deals. | Finalise and implement Socrates system to value Eastern Spread Options in a more controlled and centralised environment (linking to other systems).  For other positions valued outside the Risk system, establish formal procedures for the review, approval and maintenance of models utilized for valuation and create links from those models to the Credit system. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
No standard Documentation system exists for all products.  The multi-system approach results in a time-consuming and resource intensive Documentation process.  Specifically the Continental Power Documentation process is predominantly manual due to systems limitations and differing laws, regulations and contracts in place for different countries. | Enhancement of Autoconfirms for Continental Power to reduce the risk of manual errors and enhance the efficiency of the Documentation process. | June 30, 2000 | J. New                     M. Pickering | [NAME]
Timeliness of deal capture. | Ensure trades are entered into the system by Trading or Risk Management on the same day as transacted.  Exceptions should be reported to [NAME] for the applicable product via a DPR attachment. | May 31, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Inconsistent use of Enron legal entity names between deal tickets and confirms. | Perform a periodic assessment of the effectiveness of the legal entity determination process as it relates to operational risk. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Trades are conducted on mobile phones on a limited basis. | Implement technology and/or procedures to ensure no trades are conducted without adequate recorded evidence. | June 30, 2000 | B. Price | [NAME]
No front-end deal capture process for UK & Continental Gas Trading: - Documentation inputs deals into system via Gas Trading written log; - No subsequent review of system deal ticket or confirm by trader. | Require UK & Continental Gas traders to input deals directly into the Trade Blotter from which Documentation will validate and confirm deals. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
No front-end deal capture system for Global Products trading: - Risk Management inputs deals into system via manually completed deal tickets. | Implement the trade capture functionality of Project Thunderball which will allow Global Products traders to input deals directly into the system.  Documentation will then validate and confirm deals within the system. | Sept. 30, 2000 | [NAME] | K. Sweeney
Unauthorised traders transacting deals with counterparties. | Formalise procedures for creating and updating authorised trader listing to ensure trades are conducted by approved personnel and that the SFA audit requirements are satisfied. | July 31, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Global Product letters of credit received from counterparties are not always applied to the appropriate contract. | Request for letters of credit should require that the letter reference the specific contract number.  The receipt of such letter should be documented to facilitate release of contract volumes. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
 | Coordination between Global Products Support and Credit will also be required – update meetings are taking place on a daily basis between the groups. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Inaccurate credit information in respect of settled deals between operational systems and SAP is not clear as a result of unallocated cash within the system. | Completion of unallocated cash clean-up efforts and maintaining current status on a go-forward basis. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Currently unregulated exchanges such as Nordpool & the APX are assumed not to carry credit risk. | Complete recently initiated review of the Nordpool and APX for creditworthiness. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | T. Davies
Confirmation process is slowed by Credit and Legal review process. | Expedite the review of documentation by Legal & Credit to ensure confirms are sent to counterparties in a timely manner. | June 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
No established procedures in place for legal review of applicable laws & terms for confirmations. | Formalise and document procedures and requirements for legal review of transaction documentation. | June 30, 2000 | J. New                     M. Brown | [NAME]
No confirmations generated for EnBank OnLine trades. | Ensure confirmations are generated for all OnLine trades and sent to counterparties according to Legal policy. | May 31, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
No formal procedure in place for periodic reviews of remote location offices by departmental heads (Risk Management, Documentation, Settlements etc). | Formalise and document London Office Review procedures for remote offices including periodic visitation plans and regular update meetings. | June 30, 2000 | B. Price | [NAME]
Deal entry fields in EnPower are completely manual and can be overwritten subsequent to initial deal input. | Develop functionality within EnPower to automate validation aspects of deal capture (i.e trader names defaulted and not changeable, Enron entity defaults for appropriate deal type) and restrict overwrite capabilities to authorised personnel. | Nov. 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]
Lack of Master Agreements in place for a large number of counterparties. | Continue Commercial and Legal efforts to execute Master [NAME] with targeted counterparties and develop a reporting tool so that Commercial, Legal and RAC can review progress on a regular basis. | June 30, 2000 | J. New                   M. Brown | [NAME]
Manual process exists to input deals from Nordpool Exchange into EnPower / Power’99 and calculate margin requirements. | Develop automated link to download deals from Nordpool Exchange to EnPower / Power’99 and create automated algorithm to calculate margin requirements. | Nov. 30, 2000 | [NAME] | [NAME]