|
|
Enron Mail |
I was on a MAIN Planning Committee conference call this morning concerning Electric System Security. This a technical group so I was probably overlooked as being a marketer. Naturally the discussion revolved around potential targets and how to protect them from terrorist attacks. The part that was disturbing was their desire to severely limit information that is currently in the public domain. I relayed that I understood the need to protect critical grid components but limiting all information was equally damaging economically. Some comments made implied that "you can't tell who has the information with marketers because they change jobs so much" and "you need to keep info from people with loose lips" There was no direct comment linking marketers and loose lips, but the whole undertone was that information might not be as safe with marketers. I have asked Andy to work with on a response to MAIN MIC and NERC.
ds Doug Sewell Enron Midwest Origination Work: 713-853-6337 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Rodriquez, Andy Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 12:29 PM To: Yeung, Charles; Steffes, James D.; Shapiro, Richard; Bestard, Jose Cc: Sewell, Doug; Nicolay, Christi L. Subject: NERC and Security NERC is apparently moving forward aggressively on their initiative to restrict access to market information. Doug Sewell, who participates on the MAIN Planning Committee, was on a call this morning in which members of MAIN and NERC's Virginia Sulzberger discussed ways to limit access to information. A new disturbing angle was that apparently, some members indirectly alleged that marketers have "higher turnover" and "loose lips," and were using this as a scare tactic to indicate why the information should be restricted (potentially even from legitimate consumers like us). If I remember correctly, we were going to contact NERC to let them know our opinions on this issue. It sounds like perhaps they are not being addressed sufficiently. Doug has suggested we should being it up at the MAIN MIC meeting; do we want to begin a campaign to protect our access to this data? I think that without getting more involved, this will be yet another industry "de facto" standard that is created under the assumption that silence is consent (even if we're not told about the changes). We should probably talk about this all today on our conference call. Andy Rodriquez Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp. andy.rodriquez@enron.com 713-345-3771
|