|
|
Enron Mail |
I agree that an electronic system of tracking these things is a good idea.
Either the electronic or manual system will be admissable, but the electronic system strikes me as more reliable. I'm more concerned witht he effectiveness of the notification - it's still not clear to me that adding a line on the ticker will be satisfactory. In fact, it clearly is not satisfactory for changes in the ETA or a GTC. Those documents will have to be clicked on again if any changes are made, the only remaining question being how do you highlight the changes. The significant gray area is still changes to the Long Descriptions. David Forster@ENRON 05/10/2000 03:26 AM To: Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Dilworth/LON/ECT@ECT, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amita Gosalia/LON/ECT@ECT, Dale Neuner/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Tracking Legal Text Changes It is important that we track when we have given notification to parties about changes to the Long Descriptions or GTC/ETA wording. Although the standard form of ETA does not contain any notice requirements, it has been modified for some parties to say that we will "give notice". Regardless of whether or not we are obligated in the ETA to give notice, it is important that we do - and can prove that we have done so. Therefore, we should ensure that we keep an internal log of the change notifications (dates and text). Jay/Mark: Until we have a more developed notification process, can we have an electronic log of when a particular ticker item appeared and was then removed from the website? I assume this would have to be some sort of built text field, to account for possible multiple addtions and removals. Is this simple or hard to do? This would be more reliable than a manual log, and if generated manually, would hopefully be more admissable in court (Mark, can you comment?) Sheri/Amita/Dale: Until we have a system solution, can you ensure you coordinate on some sort of manually maintained notice log? Thanks, Dave
|