Datasets:

neelblabla

/

enron_labeled_email-llama2-7b_finetuning

like 0

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jordan Mintz 3-7897 Bob Foster 818 302 9210 Kevin Beasley 3-7807 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Per Geoff Roberts [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: CalPX Told To Release Confidential Trade Data To State 09/22/2000 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones&Company Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California's Electricity Oversight Board has ordered the state's Power Exchange to hand over confidential information to the board regarding the trading activities of utilities generation companies and other market participants who traded power at the exchange since June according to a copy of a subpoena obtained by Dow Jones Newswires. The subpoena marks the first time the state will gain access and learn how each company traded power in the day-of day-ahead and block forward markets. Moreover the EOB subpoena requests the CalPX release the names of the participants who traded power at the exchange since June to better understand how and why the participants conduct business in the various markets at the exchange. The CalPX has until Wednesday to hand over aggregate supply and demand curves individual firm bid dates final schedules for each firm by generating unit injection point and take out point from June 1 through September and continue supplying trading data through Nov. 1. In addition the subpoena requests block forward trade positions by firm for June July August and September and that this information continue to be supplied through October and November. The subpoena is part of the state's ongoing investigation into California's troubled deregulated electricity market which has resulted in high wholesale power prices in San Diego landmark legislative action and accusations of collusion price gouging and market power. Gov. Gray Davis ordered an investigation in June when power prices soared to near record levels and rolling blackouts wreaked havoc in the Bay Area. The CalPX said it will comply with the EOB request and that a subpoena to access the confidential information is required according to the rules of the exchange. But the EOB will be required to protect the confidentiality of each trade it gains insight into as well as the identities of the participants who traded. If the trading activities of a company or other participant is leaked or becomes public it could have a devastating affect on the company and the EOB would be held liable according to the CalPX. The CalPX said it must notify each and every participant who traded power in its various markets to alert them of the EOB subpoena. -By Jason Leopold Dow Jones Newswires 323-658-3874 jason.leopold@dowjones.com Folder Name: Utilities Electric: Retail Wheeling Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 53 To review or revise your folder visit Dow Jones CustomClips or contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at custom.news@bis.dowjones.com or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.) Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company Inc. All Rights Reserved [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Per Bobbie Moody x35955 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: How important is this fight to us now (see attached article on ExIm)? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government in this case deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday October 5 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director Energy Resources and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday October 4 2000 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: More info. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think we should let people in the legislature know about this and see if one or more of them can get their hands on it. From: Richard B Sanders@ECT on 05/06/2001 10:40 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Hendricks Any thoughts? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: That all depends on your definition of the wordjob. It was actually anticlimactic---Mark told Bob he needed to stick around on some of the old EI litigation a fact we already knew. Are you at the Sempra deposition. how is it going? Gail Brownfeld/ENRON@enronXgate 03/07/2001 03:06 PM To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: RE: IHI Arbitration: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION He keeps saying that he needs the $15 million. Maybe it's a budget thing. I think he really just wants to renegotiate the deal. I don't think he thinks that IHI has the money to pay us back. What happened at the meeting on Monday with Mark? Do I still have a job? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Mike Richard and Gary: What I was suggesting was that we would produce the limited items that we are proposing under the terms of the existing protective order (which are inadequate but we are not giving up any of the crown jewels at this point) while conditioning our production on two points first that we reserve the right to seek stronger protection in the order (a la Williams' motion) for any subsequent materials we do agree to produce or which are compelled to be produced and two that the materials we are currently producing which are entitled to confidentiality (the trading data at a minimum) shall be subject to the most stringent protective order which the Commission issues in this proceeding i.e. we get the benefit of any additional protections Williams can secure. I only suggest this so we can stay out of the limelight by not being one of the bad guy generators who are actively taking on the protective order when we know that at least four generators are producing nothing until their motion is resolved and one marketer (Coral/Shell Energy) has refused to produce transactional data and has objected to most of the document request. I have also recently learned that Calpine has gotten an extension until Oct. 13 and will try to delay and hold off producing much data. I will get getting a copy of Coral's objections to the commission shortly. Mike Day [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks. Confirmed. Vince [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: The letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility an= d then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why t= hat makes sense? Specifically the New Jersey restructuring law like most= efforts of its kind in other markets is designed to separate the competit= ive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic reg= ulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the = business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relie= d upon to regulate the behavior of monopoly asset owners such as distrib= ution utilities. Therefore regulators continue to be called upon to set p= ricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a = great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for = lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign c= ontributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policie= s simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. = The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relativ= ely low barriers to entry multiple competitors etc.). These components of= the power and gas business can be regulated by the market with respect t= o rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any = more than grocery stores department stores appliance sellers or other re= tailers (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Com= petition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices a= nd terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of = service for such sellers there is no reason to be concerned about campaign= contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed the legislation and the = legislative history clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer I certainly understand the value of pleading= in the alternative. But I question how certain of our arguments woud be = perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents h= ave a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's clai= m of ignorance or mistake or the fact that we pled for the favorable exer= cise of prosecutorial discretion. I suggest that we add whatever we feel= is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument not make specific = reference to ignorance or mistake and not plead for the favorable esxerc= ise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item perhaps we co= uld suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a = claim under such circumstances. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Attached is revised draft of Enron comments on the NERC bill. The helpful editorial revisions came from Charles and Sarah. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think the presentation looks fine but consider adding this: there is real risk to utilities (as well as customers) in continuing a regulated regime. The California utilities have been pushed into or to the brink of bankruptcy [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Fly to New York late. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Anne For the time being it's fine. She will soon become an associate. Vince [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think it would be a good idea for them to talk but I wouldn't want Jeff to go to California right now. Maybe they could meet outside the state (if for example brown is going to be in DC or New York) or by phone. From: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 08:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown Jr. Wanted you to be aware that Mayor Brown is inviting Jeff to meet with him either in San Francisco or elsewhere. Please advise but I know that Jeff would probably not travel to California. Mark Koenig and Andy Fastow will discuss meeting with Mayor Brown on the CalPERS issue. Thanks Joannie [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Greg I scheduled a meeting with Norman Packard from the Prediction Company in Houston July the 30th 9:00 a.m. Liz blocked out a few hours for the meeting. Vince [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Maureen No problem. Vince [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Just following up on the Monday conference call discussion yesterday with Rick and others about nailing down the numbers and documentation so we can feed the Hill information on the mistakes Governor Davis made last year and this year on power supply contracts. As I understand it there are two aspects of this: 1. The offer of Enron and others last year to sell power to California utilities for 5 cents per kw. Failure to accept these offers resulted in higher power costs in the range of $15 billion as I recall from yesterday's call. 2. The long term contracts that California signed this year after taking actions and making statements that drove up the forward price curves are now under water to the tune of $20 billion. On both counts we will be pressed for assumptions and documentation to pursue these arguments which parallel the comments made by senior management in Capitol Hill meeting last week. We will work on back up on this end but we would greatly appreciate your assistance in this regard as well. With Congress out of session starting COB on Thursday we will need information pulled together by tomorrow COB to get the final product in the hands of congressional types and others who can use it on a timely basis. Thanks. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please detach the attachment combine it with the articles Gavin Dillingham sent me and attach to an e-mail to Robert Zoellick and Irwin Stelzer with this message from me: Attached is some background information on the reregulation crisis in California. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: fyi ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Marilyn Yes please call Shirley (3-5290) to setup a meeting. Vince [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: See attached From: Karen Denne/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/12/2001 08:33 PM To: Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Mark Palmer/ENRON@enronXgate Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: EBS Article for eBiz Jim and Ken -- Attached is an article for eBiz (our biweekly online newsletter) which we are scheduled to launch at 7:30 a.m. Friday. Kelly Kimberly has reviewed it but has asked that you view the article as well. Since only EBS employees received your memo about the restructuring -- and the rest of the employees did not receive any communication -- it is extremely important to provide information through this vehicle. Please let me know of your approval or if you have any questions. Thank you. Karen x39757 [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Congrats Linda Robertson 07/19/2001 09:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron mark s palmer/enron@enronXgate@Enron cc: Subject: California Amendments DEFEATED! John Shelk will provide a more thorough report in a later Email but I just wanted you to know that the Waxman price cap amendment was just defeated in full Committee markup and the Eshoo refund amendment was defeated. Both by sizable margins. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I understand that we may have no choice in the matter but having wtinessed Loretta Lynch's inability to define market power when asked to do so by Joe Barton last Monday and having heard Carl Wood declare war on capitalism at FERC's hearing on Tuesday and knowing that the likes of Harvey Morse (PUC FERC attorney) who has never come down on the side of no market power here in any analysis is heading up the PUC investigation and seeing Gov Davis' press releases demanding refunds from the faceless out-of-state suppliers I'm well maybe a little nervous about them getting their paws on our data. Jeff [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Purely Personal

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Tara You are right -- those changes were not included. For Vice President level employees corporate comp.does not promote guaranteed performance bonuses. The request that he be able to get out of his employment contract if he is not promoted also is not something that we can do otherwise it will undermine the enforceability of our non-competes across the board. I spoke with David Oxley on both of those points and he concurred that these changes could not be made. Michelle Tara Rozen 04/05/2000 12:23 PM To: Twanda Sweet/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope Thanks for this Twanda I have two comments 1)I cannot find the exception clause which indicates that David Pope can resign if he doesn't make MD as described in previous email. Am I missing this or can we not put this in? 2)Danny McCarty wanted guaranteed bonus for 2000 rather than performance target bonus as per email. Is this possible? Thanks Tara [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: As discussed. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please send Pam Benson the information for Joe on where to send the check who to make it out to etc ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Mary- Ken has been asked by Mayor Brown to chair the fundraising effort to get voter approval on a light rail referendum in Houston. My guess is that he will decline given the other demands on his schedule but I don't know that for sure. I think our respnse Mary Clark@ENRON 04/13/99 02:21 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Joe Allen/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Trains - Light rail Steve/Joe: Mark suggested that I contact you to provide a response to this employee's question (see below) to Ken and Jeff about trains and light rail. Please draft a response and send it to me. I will format it and send it to Ken and Jeff for their review. Thanks. Mary Clark ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Several employees have asked about the exercise policy on stock options. Specifically they want to know what the exercise policy is on i) termination eg as a result of the prc process ii) voluntary departure iii) retirement or iv)resignation and to what extent do the rules vary across plans: i) AESOP LTIP deferred bonus etc. The main focus is on the length of time to exercise. I am concerned that there may be some odd incentives in the structure -- eg are severed employees allowed more time to exercise than employees who just leave voluntarily ( ie if you want to have a full three years to exercise options are you better off becoming a performance issue and getting severed than you would be if you simply left the company? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Shanna I certainly believe that Jennifer is better than Kim. Jeff is certainly the appropriate judge but she is very young and has a lot yet to learn. This comment is not meant as a cut down at all. John's questionable judgement shouldn't just be trumped however. My thoughts m Shanna Funkhouser@ENRON 01/30/2001 07:44 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Confidential - Executive Committee Assistants Mike and Jeff I wanted to let you know that Kim Hillis is being promoted from Sr. Admin to Executive Assistant. Cathy Phillips Nicki Daw and Kay Chapman are also Executive Assistants. Please let me know if we need to re-visit a promotion for Jennifer and whether it should be considered now mid year or at a later time. Thanks Shanna [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Can we also get something in the stip that limits the market making activity or at least promises a reexamination of the scope of the market making activity after some period of time. Also can we strengthen the language to give us something beyond simply a right to file -- which is a right we have anyway. James D Steffes 03/16/2001 03:34 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: PJM Stip Attached is the proposed Stip to allow PJM to move forward as an RTO. In the Stip we argue that PJM should be approved by FERC but condition our acceptance on a FERC process to unify the Northeast markets. My only comment is to delete the final WHEREAS paragraph on congestion management. While our ability to later stop PJM from being an RTO is limited I believe that this gives us the ability to drive a consolidation of the Northeast markets - which is one of the goals of the East Power desk. In addition I think that the overall direction of PJM in commercializing its software is a good activity for our interest - even if we don't want everything in their package. Sarah is out until Monday when we need to get back with PJM. Jim [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think you have picked the two most interesting industries. Because energy and telecom both have natural monopoly characteristics the government gets involved in economic regulation (not just the usual environment safety labor and other types of regulation which all businesses are subject to). That means that there is constant interplay between policy makers and the business community and that policy makers have alot to say about which business strategies will be successful. Rob Wilson@ENRON 07/24/2000 04:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Doctoral studies Steve Vince Kaminski suggested I contact you I'm the Gov't Affairs rep for NNG in Omaha and begin a doctoral studies program this fall at NU. I plan a research emphasis in regulatory politics specific to energy and telecom market convergence and the public interest. I'd welcome any advice or suggestions you have regarding other potential area's of research based on your professional experience in the public policy arena. I appreciate any guidance I'm in the earliest stages of forming my advisory committee and curriculum of study. My supervisor Mike McGowan sends his regards. [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I'll be there as will Sandi McCubbin. Are you interested in going? I thought not. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please send any comments directly to Peggy. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think this is a great initiative but it is critically important that any announcement of the panel makes it crystal clear that the objective of the group is to come up with standards to facilitiate competition. We will do nothing but waste time if it becomes a negotiation over competition. the best and politically easiest time to make that objective clear is in the original announcement not after the group gets underway. Can we get in touch with DOE to make sure they pick this up? Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/18/2000 05:03 PM To: Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES cc: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Re: Mtg w/Bob Gee Jeff: I have followed up with other DOE politicals who advised they will meet this Thursday with Bob Gee to finalize and approve his speech to NARUC on Monday July 24th. It is looking positive that he may be positioned to make the announcement Monday. However DOE will likely need to revisit some folks on the current Blue Ribbon Reliability Panel in order to replace some of the utility transmission-only focused members with others who focus on business practices plus add additional people to represent the internet like APX Altra and HoustonStreet.Com. (these are Steve Kean's suggestions.) Too I have been cautioned about referring to the Blue Ribbon Reliability Panel as a model since their timeline was slow but rather suggest the TVA Blue Ribbon Panel model since they were able to issue a report after only four meetings. I have asked for this issue to be brought to Secretary Richardson's attention and advised this will be done this week. I have also discussed this with John Anderson of ELCON who is supportive. Jeff Brown@EES 07/18/2000 12:45 PM To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Mtg w/Bob Gee Cynthia and I met with Bob Gee regarding a potential role for DOE in creating a national standards board. Bob appeared comfortable with establishing a Blue Ribbon panel similar to the reliability panel to address this issue. In fact Bob suggested that the reliability panel which includes a balance of key stakeholders could be re-tasked with this issue. We recommended that the focus of any panel should be on the structure (governance segments executive committees) and scope of the organization (retail wholesale gas electric). Bob plans to follow-up with us next week. Jeff [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We will be asking for confidential treatment unless and until the FERC requires similar information to be released by all market participants. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: KRTH? 9:10 - 9:55 JP Pritchard 630-3600 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Your assessment makes perfect sense to me. What do you think about having Nels make the call to Lundquist just to find out what his status is what he might look for when his current assignment is over etc. (obviously without identifying us -- presumably Nels would have reason to talk to him anyway in the normal course of business)? I am not wedded to the idea but am inclined toward at least getting the information unless you see a problem. Linda Robertson 03/13/2001 02:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Andrew Lundquist I got your message about Andrew. He would be an excellent catch. However I see a couple of significant problems. My guess is that Andrew is too senior for this position particularly after having chaired the Cheney task force. Also I would not anticipate that he would be available for several months if then. We should fill this position immediately. We are already missing opportunities because this position is vacant. As for our search using Korn Ferry I have narrowed the field to two very good candidates. I am setting up time for Rick to interview these candidates next Monday. The first candidate is Drew Maloney with Rep. Tom Delay's office. Drew would give us enormous visibility in House Republican leadership circles seems trustworthy and capable of learning most of the substance of the energy portfolio. Drew has strong networking skills which I think would nicely fit with Tom's strategic and technical skills. The second candidate is John Shelk whom I have known for nearly 15 years. John was the lead Republican staff on the House Energy and Commerce Committee under Norm Lent. John left the Committee in 1992. Since then John has worked in the financial services and gaming industries where he has enhanced his political and Republican networking skills. John in very short order would have extremely strong technical skills atlhough he has been away from the industry for eight years. I believe both candidates bring different but very strong talents to the job. I have a second opening for an enviromental advocate. I am discussing with Rick the possibility of whether we could redirect one of these candidates (probably John) to that slot. That said please let me know if I should have Nels pursue Andrew. [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: My copy shows long term comp on the exhibit under Grant Award. And yes the date will be revised. Mark Schroeder@ECT 04/14/2000 03:31 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Mark Frevert/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: new contract The contract Mark gave me to review yesterday only covers monthly salary. I had expected there to be some discussion/reference to long-term comp plan. Mark had mentioned that what he gave me did not deal with certain non-compete payments owed to me in 2000 so I am not looking for that but I did think he had said that there was something in the doucment re:long-term which I cannot find. Please advise if I am missing something. I will withhold other comments for now except to note that the draft was dated 13 March and had a 14 day period before expiry (now passed) and will assume that that is an irrelevancy. Look forward to hearing from one of you. mcs [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: what do you think? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: To:SHACKLETON SARA - 7138535620 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures') which have been revised as of November 15 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information our reputation for integrity and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419 Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544 Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214 Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I enjoyed talking with you the other day and am happy to answer your questions: both the Texas position and the Washington DC position report to Rick Shapiro. From a government affairs standpoint I've divided the world between Rick's group (the Americas) and Mark Schroeder's group (Europe and Asia). Both Rick and Mark report to me. Joe Allen continues as part of the Texas legislative team working for the head of that group (formerly Kathleen Magruder). Terry Thorn has taken a commercial position in Enron and no longer works on government affairs issues for the company (except to the extent we call on various executives to help from time-to-time). Untermeyer Chase <Chase.Untermeyer@COMPAQ.com> on 08/31/2000 04:53:09 PM To: 'skean@enron.com' <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Thanks & Questions STEVE: I very much appreciate your call the day before yesterday and your asking if I would like to compete to succeed Joe Hillings as head of Enron's Washington office. Although until that moment I hadn't thought of returning to Washington except to serve again in national office I would be pleased to talk further about this opportunity with you or your recruiter. In recalling our conversation I realize that twice you asked if I had any questions and if I had been quick to take advantage of your offer I would have asked how government relations are handled at Enron. To whom does Joe Hillings report: to you or to Terry Thorne? You mentioned a woman who currently has responsibility for government relations in Texas and some neighboring states but is leaving for another job at Enron to whom does she report? Then there is Joe Allen whom I have known since our days in the Legislature doesn't he (also) handle Texas affairs? I am sorry I didn't ask you all this on Tuesday. Whatever the answers it's clear that government relations are much more central to the work of Enron than at Compaq which is why it would be a very exciting place to work. Thanks again for your call your courtesy and your indulgence with this tardy line of questioning. With best wishes CHASE. CHASE UNTERMEYER Director of Government Affairs Compaq Computer Corporation P.O. Box 692000-110706 Houston Texas 77269-2000 Tel: (281) 518-1093 Fax: (281) 518-1106 chase.untermeyer@compaq.com [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Let's process this request. I think it's justified. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Mike - perhaps you can help me or forward this on to someone who can. The people in my organization support all the Enron business units but many are specifically dedicated to certain business units. As a consequence we have ended up on a variety of LANs with a variety of support people. Due to the fine efforts of your team many people in my group have migrated over to the Enron Corp LAN. We are also now enjoying great support from Russell & Russell (Servat and Mitchell). As the IT guy I'm sure you are accustomed to such profuse praise. However many of the people on my team (including me) are on the EES LAN. Historically EES has supported us with the equipment we need and they too have been doing a fine job in that regard. Historically therefore we have not budgeted for IT .... a practice which will change starting next year. In the meantime when we sought to migrate the rest of my organization to the CORP LAN we were told that we would have to pay for all of our current equipment or give it back to EES. If you need me to I can explain in detail why this makes no sense. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: This is a very good try. I think it comes off too defensive and too genera= l=20 (I just don't think the topic lends itself to the format). Here's what I= =20 think we should do: Jeff is filming a piece for etv about the stock price. = =20 We should perhaps use and expand upon those messages. This approach is= =20 more directed at the bottom line: why our stock price should go up. =09Sarah Palmer@ECT =0903/09/2001 03:14 PM =09=09 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON =09=09 cc: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON =09=09 Subject: Re: Per Your Request Thanks Steve. Here's an initial draft -- I've taken a very light eBizy= =20 approach to delivering the message. Perhaps by having some fun with it we= =20 can look a little less defensive. Let me know if we're on track or pitiful= ly=20 way off. Thanks. Comparing Enron to Apples You may have noticed =01) or you may be asking why =01) industry analysts o= ften=20 compare Enron to Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs or investment banks= =20 like Chase Manhattan. We thought it was time to sort out any confusion=20 between our businesses just in case someone asks you to explain. Here's h= ow=20 we're different from those guys: w Enron provides physical delivery of energy products to customers =01) we = are=20 not just traders. Those guys mainly act as brokers and do not participate= =20 physically. w Enron proactively seeks to reform and create markets. Those guys simply= =20 participate and compete. w Enron extends its business model into new and deregulating markets=20 enabling high growth rates. Those guys are in markets that generate less= =20 aggressive growth rates. w Enron owns physical assets that provide consistent cash flow such as our= =20 pipelines. Those guys do not have them. And if that's not enough we think our employees are so much cooler than=20 theirs. =09Steven J Kean@ENRON =0903/09/2001 01:06 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sarah Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Per Your Request Here are the message points [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: looks fine From: Terrie James/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/19/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate Marge Nadasky/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Management Conference - Save the Date Steve and Cindy Attached is the electronic Save the Date memo for the Management Conference. We are preparing to send it out next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns on the e-mail. As for distribution we've worked with HR on the distribution list for VPs but will circle back with David Oxley's team to ensure we have the most up-to-date list. Since some VPs in redeployment will most likely find positions within Enron by November I don't plan to exclude them from the distribution ... unlike United Way where we are not soliciting employees in redeployment for a contribution. I look forward to any feedback. Terrie James Senior Director Public Relations Enron Broadband Services (ph) 713.853.7727 (fax) 713.646.3248 terrie.james@enron.com [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We don't have revised versions yet. when we do we will probably only want to put some (not all) of the documents on the intranet. Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/24/2000 02:06 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4) Have we received the newly revised principles facts and statements for the Luntz Focus Groups? I was hoping to place these on the California power issue database. Thanks Gavin ----------------- [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Yesterday I spent about 45 minutes with the three key energy staff to the H= ouse Energy and Commerce Committee -- Andy Black (for Barton) and Sean Cunn= ingham and Jason Bentley (the energy counsels to the full committee). We m= et at my request to discuss Barton RTO draft. (The group EPSA meeting with= Chairman Barton that was to have been yesterday afternoon has been resched= uled for next Tuesday.) =20 Key points from the meeting -- =20 1. They do not expect the Barton Subcommittee to mark up the electricity l= egislation this year. Time is running out and Members of the subcommittee = are not focused on the issue. Instead they plan to continue working on th= e issue at the staff level. Probably will be another draft version circula= ted and then a version will be introduced by Barton as a formal bill by the= end of the year. The earliest they see any kind of vote is late Jan. or ea= rly February. =20 2. Barton feels strongly that FERC should not be the tail wagging the do= g on RTO policy. =20 3. On particulars of the bill they are clearly reconsidering the 40000 = MW minimum threshold for the size of an RTO. They are getting pulled in bo= th directions they say and are inclined to drop the 40000 MW number -- p= ossibly leaving it to FERC to set a number. They conceded that the mechani= cs of the draft make it unlikely that the 18 month deadline for all trans= mission owners to get into an approved RTO would stick. They consciously c= hanged the normal judicial standard of review for FERC actions from arbitr= ary and capricious to preponderance of the evidence because they think o= therwise the courts will rubber stamp FERC. Spent a lot of time on how the= draft would aid and abet the recalcitrant utilities and that the overall n= ature of the draft assumes there are only two parties to this -- FERC and t= he transmission owners -- while the rest of those truly affected -- from us= to others -- are left out. Sean said we could still intervene but I said= that was the truly pro forma aspect of their process since FERC's hands an= d our's would be tied by the rights given to transmission owners to drag = their feet. =20 Bottom line -- FERC has a window until next Spring without likely congressi= onal interference at least not of the formal legislative variety to both= move on RTOs and improve its relations with Congress. FERC staff has been= pushing the committee staff on concerns similar to our concerns. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Here are the message points [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Steve Good news. As you indicated would happen Kalen Pieper called me mid-week. We had a very good conversation about EES and Dave Delainey's leadership. She explored my views about doing business with government. Shortly thereafter Dave's office called to invite me to Houston on Thursday July 26. Kay Chapman explained that Dave's schedule would keep him out of pocket until August 16. In order to move forward Janet Dietrich will be meeting with me when I go to Houston next Thursday. (I must confess that after all the great things I have heard about the man I do look forward to meeting Dave himself.) Is there a time next week that I can speak with you by phone to fine-tune my thinking / preparation for Thursday's meeting with Janet? Thank you for your all of your help. I am pleased and appreciative that things are moving forward at a good clip. Kevin Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles CA 90021 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: A PDF version of the original letter is attached below. To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government in this case deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday October 5 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director Energy Resources and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday October 4 2000 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Looks good. Some of his questions suggest he's going to include a fair amount of industry reaction -- which could be a mixed bag some are clearly threatened by efficiencies in bw markets. Looks like it will be a really good story. He definitely appears to be excited by it. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks so much for your message. Your communications are always complete firm clear and polite. I am sorry that perhaps the most critical aspect of your efforts -- security-- has been so confused by our end. I understand from John Brindle that the confusion generated by our end has not kept you from accomplishing a great deal of the work anyway. I have asked John to lead the effort to the extent you need him. John and his team are very experienced and have been in contact with and coordination with the London office. Mike Hicks is a good hand but for the most part all I have asked him to do is be in a position to identify outside resources skilled in the area in question. It is a bit too much to ask Mike to be hands on for all of Enron's corporate security needs. A little background I'll bore you with: after Andre Legallo (formerly VP of Security for Enron) left we did not replace his function. Most of the operating companies had their own security and business controls groups. When Andre left we reduced the corporate function to a default provider role -- if a business unit had a need it was not otherwise meeting Mike Hicks (as well as an outside consulting firm) would help identify competent resources in the area. With the reorganization of EBS I have inherited the very competent and experienced team they had assembled (led by John Brindle). John identified some concerns regarding India mid last week. I urged him to get in touch with Rebecca he did. It was clear after further inquiries by John that the India team had already addressed many if not all of the concerns and much of the remaining work involved implementation. John volunteered to send some people over to help and I said OK. He had already been in touch with the London team and Mike Hicks (who I have asked to return to Houston). The last thing you need right now is confusion caused by a group saying we're from corporate and we're here to help. If you don't need any help or if the situation gets anything other than significantly better let me know. To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Rebecca McDonald/Enron@EnronXGate James A Hughes/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: India Help Steve As you are well aware we are facing a lot of things happening fast in India. We are using several parts of your team and are very pleased with most. I want to mention a couple of areas HR and Security. 1. HR: I heard that some folks in Houston had raised concerns about the quality of the India HR team and their preparedness. The HR team is doing an outstanding job and I wanted you to hear that from me. Once we realized we had a major issue on our hand and I received clearance from Rebecca and Jim to bring some HR folks into the loop HR had someone on a plane within 20 hours of my first call. We have always had great HR support through Drew Lynch and Bob Sparger helping our team led by Sandip Malik and this time Scott Gilchrist has joined in and helped as well. But the two workhorses have been Bob and Sandip. Bob got on a plane immediately and came over and he and Sandip have been working around the clock so that we are much better prepared now than we were just a couple of days back. We really relied heavily on HR and Drew had his team there for us. 2. PR: top notch team of John Ambler and Johan Zaayman working with and supporting Jimmy Mogal on the ground. Johan and Jimmy have been a strong team on the ground and John has provided leadership and all coordination with Houston. Great efforts and productive work. 3. Security: This area has not worked as well and if you ever want feedback on our one-time experience with this group I will provide it. I don't have any idea who is in charge from Enron's perspective here. There are 2 groups headed this way. Mike Hicks will arrive Thursday night and Mike has informed us that he will be leading all security efforts. Jim Rountree is apparently travelling with Mike and Don Hawkins sent me an e-mail earlier today telling me that Don has instructed Jim that Jim is in charge of coordinating our security. John Brindle has sent me an e-mail saying that you have asked him to coordinate and help in the ongoing efforts and John is sending 3 people over arriving Saturday night. First we are very happy to have the help but I just hope that Mike Jim and John know which of the three are in charge. If you could just let me know who you want to be in charge we will coordinate with that person. On a side note the people who have really been helpful were brought in through Drew Lynch of Europe HR. They are Jim Roth and Dave Lawler both of whom work for John Sherriff. They had a great attitude were willing to work day and night and were planning on coming to coordinate until Mike decided he would come. At Mike's earlier suggestion we engaged Hill & Associates to help on security. Because I was having to meet with them 3 to 4 times per day I asked Jane Wilson to help coordinate all our security efforts. Jane has done a fantastic job in an impossibly short time frame. The tasks she has been overseeing include coordinating with Hill & Associates removing (in a lowkey yet rush manner) over 400 boxes of files and documents and getting them through customs and to Europe removing 2 container truck loads of files from the Dabhol site and getting them out of the country and overseeing a complete security check and file removal of all our electronic files from servers desktops and laptops. In addition she has coordinated security for all expats and families as well as worked with EOGIL expats and Anthony Duenner of EBS Asia. Again we appreciate all the help. Wade [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I just spoke with Clark Smith head of Elpaso's merchant arm. I told him that we had been hearing that El Paso was blaming Enrononline for problems in Western gas markets. He asked for some more specifics about who exactly was spreading the rumor (I told him we had heard it from 3-4 sources). He acknowledged that EOL was not the problem said he couldn't believe that it had been identified as such and said he would bring it up on his call with his Washington team this afternoon. I think he will put it to rest (except for whatever damage has already been done). I did promise to get some more specifics on who has told us that El Paso pointed to us. Can anybody give some info on that? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jeff Per your request below is the value of the deal based on MID prices as of Friday June 28. We have also estimated the Bid/Offer costs at $30 million based upon several quotes we received last year. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards Eric <Embedded Picture (Metafile)> [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I get so worked up over this issue... I really think now is the time to speak up and dissent. Skilling told us at a floor meeting that as an organization we've made poor decisions in the past and he believes it's because the people who disagreed with those decisions never spoke up. So help me out! From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/13/2001 12:34 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Amen. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Ehud Sorry for the delay in replying to your message. I was on the road a lot. I am in London right now and plan to attend the conference. I am leaving on Saturday morning for Houston. I have asked Shirley to get tickets for one of the evening you mentioned. I should know by Thursday if the tickets are available. Vince [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please coordinate with PGE on the comments. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I believe it is timely to discuss this again and I agree with Cynthia that stand alone legislation does nothing to address the essential transmission structural issues. I am open minded on the issue if someone can make a compelling case to support stand alone legislation BUT my gut reaction is that it would be a serious mistake. Congress would happily put off dealing with this issue for years if it passes reliability only legislation. I think the legislation itself makes little or no progress on our issues and may even set us back on making progress at FERC and in other fora. I realize that if this gets going it may be hard to stop but it would be such a cynically ineffective approach to the real reliability problems that we should help whomever we can to put a stop to it. If it gets through committee I have no confidence in this Congress to actually amend it into something better and broader so again I have difficulty seeing why we should go that route. I look forward to the discussion. Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/17/2000 02:20 PM To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON I cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES dwatkiss@bracepatt.com cingebretson@bracepatt.com Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON ed@buckham.com Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation Joe: thanks. Allison is arranging a brief (thirty minutes) Conference Call for sometime tomorrow so we can assure that we are all on the same page on this issue. Although we had supported the policy agreement we had been on record to oppose for political reasons the bill's movement on a stand-alone basis since policing the grid does nothing to address the essential transmission structural changes the market is crying to have addressed in order to provide reliability. However given Jeff Brown's efforts the political need for inoculation and other political developments it is timely to once again discuss Enron's position. I look forward to our call sometime tomorrow. Cynthia Joe Hartsoe 07/17/2000 03:09 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation FYI. Thoughts? JOE ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Shriram We have suspended hiring for the next few months till we shall sort our physical space problem (we have no space left in our old building). Please feel free to contact me again in September. Vince Kaminski [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Wolak makes some good points. In ERCOT Enron is in support of nodal pricing. I would not go so far as to say we are pushing for PJM's implementation however but for a market with nodal prices (and unilateral bids - aka unbalanced schedules congestion reflect by price differentials etc). I was unaware PJM had such great power to alter bids. This is something we don't want and something for which I am not aware we have advocated. Perhaps in Enron's promotion of locational prices it has been retold as PJM-style locational prices. Given that PJM is the most commonly cited example of locational prices it does not surprise me to have the sloppiness in discussions that could lead to the rumors. Martin [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Though I had a somewhat different notion when I initially raised the idea of co-sponsorship I agree with Lee's observations and think that we should proceed the way he suggests. gramlr@pjm.com on 08/29/2000 04:06:56 PM To: amosher@appanet.org hcameron@uclink.berkeley.edu lfried@uclink.berkeley.edu jeff.dasovich@enron.com cc: Subject: FW: Possible co-sponsorships All Lee asked me to forward this. I'm still awaiting additional suggestions from anyone on speakers. I guess Lee's e-mail changes things. If the business school wants to go forward with a conference anyway then it may be a bad idea to have a separate one. Jeff has said he likes the idea of coordinating. Bill and Allen what do you think? I will chime in that Carl Shapiro is very much a big wig as a former chief economist at DOJ. As for the Frank Wolak suggestion Frank is a Stanford economist who is an outstanding analyst and has published probably more than anyone else on electricity market design performance regarding the UK Australia and California. He speaks a mile a minute though and his understanding of policy and politics is a bit naive. I should note that ICF will not be able to contribute. I heard from Michael Berg this morning. So he will not be participating in our discussions either. My opinion is let's do whatever is best for the school. One positive outcome of this would be stronger relationships with some of the University's top notch economic policy faculty. Overshadowing is possible. Lee does Dean Nacht have a view on joint sponsorship? Rob > [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: The EPSA leg. affairs cmt. met today during the fall meeting. The speakers were Howard Useem Republican counsel to the Senate Energy Committee and Jimmy Glotfelty senior policy advisory to the Secretary of Energy. Useem said Senate Energy Committee Republicans were meeting later this morning to finalize their energy proposal. (We later learned that they opted against including any electricity provisions not even the PURPA PUHCA and reliability issues that Howard thought might be included when he spoke before the senators met this is good news since it makes it less likely that anti-FERC provisions will be added.) (Howard said now is the best time to legislative on electricity because the Supreme Court has not yet acted on the bundling/unbundling issue.) On RTOs in some what of a surprise Useem said that there is general support among Senate Republicans for RTOs including consolidating them into a few RTOs of large scope (surprising since this is not what we have heard in meetings with individual Senate offices). While he said that he also said that support is stronger in the abstract than in specifics. He said the biggest opposition was coming from very vocal state regulators (EPSA staff did a good job of pointing to state regulators mainly in the Midwest who support larger RTOs). Most importantly Howard said none of the senators on his committee take a not over my dead body approach to RTOs. Jimmy Glotfelty explained to several EPSA members who asked questions just why it is that the Administration wants Congress to be silent on RTOs. He said while they would prefer a sentence or two affirming FERC's authority they do not believe this is what would come out of the legislative process. They are not willing to run that risk. He stressed that the president wants to include other electricity issues. He said they were very close to an agreement with Western governors on regional transmission siting. Jimmy further said that the Administration also wants silence on incentive rates another issue where FERC can act now. They continue to talk to Barton and his staff in an attempt to get them to back away from the restrictive approach to RTOs in the Barton discussion draft. (He said Pat Wood spent several hours with Barton and other House committee staff yesterday.) Of concern Jimmy said something like could be 4 RTOs could be 8 RTOs what is important is getting standard design. He also said DOE will make sure that PMAs are included in RTOs. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: fyi ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Linda requested some background and talking points on the pending RTO letter from Chairman Tauzin to FERC that is sitting on Chairman Barton's desk TODAY for his decision whether to co-sign the letter. While we have not seen the text we are told that it is anti-RTO and may go so far as to state or imply that FERC does not have authority to do what is doing with RTOs. (We know this is the view of one of Chairman Tauzin's counsels who formerly worked for Southern Co.). Chairman Tauzin has been contacted by Entergy and the Louisiana Public Service Commission to send the letter. I spoke to Chairman Barton's staff Andy Black this afternoon and relayed our concerns. The Barton Subcommittee is now expected to mark up an electricity bill in December (per a Republican Member meeting held this morning). ACTION ITEM: Call Rep. Joe Barton (202/225-2002) TALKING POINTS: 1. Should start with something about the Dynegy/Enron transaction (it will be strange if Mr. Lay or Steve calls Chairman Barton and does not start the conversation with some reference to the transaction). 2. Mentioning the transaction naturally leads into the importance of competitive wholesale markets for power both for consumers and for the largely Texas-based marketing trading and merchant power industries. 3. We understand that Chairman Barton has been approached by Chairman Tauzin about a letter to FERC on the RTO issue. We know Chairman Barton is well aware of Enron's strong support for FERC's RTO initiatives. We respect Chairman Barton's interest in seeing to it that Congress does not abdicate its responsibility to make energy policy. 4. If as we have been lead to believe the letter states or implies that FERC does not have authority to act in the RTO arena this will be seen as a potentially destabilizing development since FERC is so far down the road of creating RTOs. 5. While we understand some in Congress and elsewhere were concerned that FERC was moving too fast as of the last FERC meeting earlier this month that is no longer true even if it ever was true. While we think RTOs should be created sooner rather than later FERC is listening to state regulators and others who had concerns. 6. A letter from congressional leaders questioning FERC's authority goes too far in the direction of those who oppose any RTOs. Furthermore it is wrong as a matter of law. The D.C. Circuit held in the gas cases and in the power cases on Order 888 that FERC has authority to address systemic discrimination which is in large part what the RTOs are all about -- a remedy for iscrimination. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Alan and I spoke about point #2 on the comparison benchmark. At this point we may be able to just say it is based on a comparison of the contracts with today's forward market and gloss over the exact forward curve we used. Of course if there is a way to come up with a similar number using publicly available data (or if we are willing to provide our numbers if pressed) then all the better. In the mean time should I hold off on using the $13.8 billion number until I hear back from you about the conversation with Steve? Also do I understand correctly from Alan that the $13.8 billion figure is NOT comparing the long term contracts California signed with recent spot market prices but rather is a comparison of the contracts to our present forward pricing curves? From you e-mail it is the latter I take it. As to point #1 on the deal last year we just need a similar back of the envelope calculation on what California could have saved had California taken us up on the offers we and others made. Any guidance on where to get that would be most helpful. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: You have probably heard this already but on July3 the CPUC postponed their direct access decision until mid-August. Dan Leff@EES 07/02/2001 07:15 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Customers Steven J Kean@ENRON 06/30/2001 07:24 AM To: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Customers You may want to forward this to your customers. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: http://www.ssrn.com/ [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Scrutiny of Davis and crew is taking hold. The state controller Kathleen= Connell also has a well written op-ed critical of Davis in today's LA Ti= mes. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 [IMAGE]Los Angeles Times - latimes.com =09[IMAGE] [IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09Home | Subscribe | Register | Site Map | Ar= chives | Print Edition | Advertise | Feedback | Help [IMAGE]=09 Marketplace jobs * cars * homes * rentals [IMAGE] Arts and Enter= tainment Movies Music TV Dining print edition [IMAGE] Fro= nt Page Inside A California Business Sports So Cal Living Calendar = Editorials Op-Ed [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Weekly [IMAGE] Health Food Tech T= imes Highway 1 Workplace [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Sunday [IMAGE] Books Calen= dar Magazine Opinion Real Estate Travel TV Times [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [I= MAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] The World [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] The Natio= n [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] California [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Busi= ness [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Politics [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Spo= rts [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Technology [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Tr= avel [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Editorials Op-Ed [IMAGE] Sections [I= MAGE] Books Columnists Education Food Health Highway 1 Obituaries = Real Estate Religion Science So. Cal. Living Sunday Opinion Tech Time= s Times Poll Workplace/Jobs [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Editions [IMAGE] Print E= dition National Wireless [IMAGE] Extras [IMAGE] Crossword Horoscop= e Lottery Traffic Weather Multimedia [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Feat= ures [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SITE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Subscripti= on Services Subscribe Change of Address Vacation Stops Suspend Delive= ry College Discount Gift Subscriptions Mail Subscriptions FAQ [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Classifieds jobs homes cars re= ntals Print Ads Shopping Advertising Supplements [IMAGE] [IMAGE] LA= Times Initiatives [IMAGE] Times in Education Reading by 9 Times-Mirro= r Foundation Events [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] July 31 2001= [IMAGE] Talk about it [IMAGE] E-mail story [IMAGE] Print THE STATE= Davis' Energy Advisors Draw SEC Attention *Probe: Under review is the pos= sible use of inside information to buy power company stocks. GOP rival of = governor requested the inquiry. [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Times Headline= s * Latinos Assured Water Is OK * Car Dealer Not Bound by Ad Error = Court Rules * Suspect in Simi Valley Serial Rapes Arrested * New LAPD= Radios Get Negative Reviews * 2 Shot to Death 1 at Home by Stray Bulle= t more > [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Subscribe By WALTER HAMILTON JEFFE= RY L. RABIN and DARYL KELLEY TIMES STAFF WRITERS The Securities and Exch= ange Commission has launched a preliminary inquiry into whether energy con= sultants advising Gov. Gray Davis used inside information to trade stocks = of power companies doing business with the state a source with knowledge = of the matter said Monday. The federal agency began its review late last = week the source said in response to a request from California Secretary = of State Bill Jones. A Republican rival of Davis Jones charged that stock= trading by consultants may have violated federal laws barring buying and = selling based on information not available to the public. On Friday top = aides to the governor disclosed that five consultants had been fired for = possible conflicts of interest between their official positions and their = personal finances. As news of the SEC inquiry spread through the capital M= onday Davis officials were confronted by a flurry of questions about who = in the administration owns energy stocks. Financial disclosure records fi= led by the governor's spokesman Steve Maviglio show that he owns between= $10000 and $100000 in a Texas company he and his boss have accused of m= aking obscene profits while California has been on its knees. Maviglio= said he bought the shares in Houston-based Enron Corp. in 1996. It's no= t a crime to own energy stock Maviglio said. He also owns 300 shares of= San Jose-based Calpine Corp. which has the largest share of the $43 bill= ion in long-term state power contracts. Maviglio placed the order for the= stock on May 31 one day after San Jose's mayor dropped his opposition to= a controversial Calpine plant favored by the governor and others. Under t= he terms of Maviglio's purchase the transaction was completed about three= weeks later when the stock reached $40 a share a value of $12000. It ha= s since fallen in value. I viewed it as a good long-term investment M= aviglio said adding that he purchased the shares for his retirement accou= nt based on publicly available information. The Davis administration has = spared Calpine the kind of fierce criticisms that it has leveled at other = electricity suppliers such as Enron. But California's grid operator has i= dentified the company as one of many energy merchants to overcharge the st= ate millions of dollars. The fired consultants also owned shares in Calpi= ne ranging in value from several thousand dollars to more than $100000 = records show. Another top Davis administration official legal affairs s= ecretary Barry Goode disclosed in his economic interest statement that he= recently held between $100000 and $1 million in another out-of-state com= pany accused of multimillion-dollar price gouging. In a statement Goode = said he sold his stock in Williams Co's. a month after he began working fo= r the governor in February. Goode said the shares were supposed to be sold= before he went on the state payroll but his broker failed to do so. In = light of the recent disclosures Secretary of State Jones said the governo= r must do more to ensure the public that its interest comes first. The g= overnor should direct all of his staff to immediately file updated conflic= t of interest statements that reflect current holdings and any activity si= nce their last statement of economic interest was filed said Jones who = is seeking the GOP nomination for governor. Word of the SEC's entry into = California's energy problems comes as the governor faces harsh criticism f= rom lawmakers and others for the quick and broad hiring of highly paid pri= vate consultants to guide him through the crisis. In his written request = to the SEC Jones said that recently filed disclosure documents showed tha= t at least one consultant bought and sold shares of two energy companies w= ithin the same month raising a red flag about the possibility of inside= r trading. State law prohibits officials from participating in decisions= involving their personal financial interests. The five consultants fired= last week were among 11 named in Jones' letter delivered to the San Fran= cisco office of the SEC last Wednesday. It was not clear which individuals= are the focus of the SEC's inquiry or whether the agency's review would = result in any charges. Two of the former traders said Monday that they ha= d not been contacted by federal investigators and knew nothing of an inqui= ry into possible insider trading. But William Mead fired Thursday said = it is no mystery why so many of his colleagues owned Calpine stock. Mead = said he bought it 2 1/2 years ago and made so much money he recommended it= to his colleagues last year while they all still worked for the now-defu= nct California Power Exchange in Alhambra. Calpine power was not traded on= that exchange so there was no conflict of interest he said. Mead and = three other energy traders--hired by the state in February and March--were= terminated by the Davis administration for allegedly buying power for the= state from Calpine while owning the company's stock. Fired traders Herman= Leung Peggy Cheng and Constantine Louie did not list the date of their C= alpine purchases on financial statements that the state required to be fil= ed only two weeks ago. But I'm sure they bought it while they were still= at the power exchange because that's when we discussed it Mead said. = It was kind of like a hobby. I'm sure it wasn't done with the intent to ma= nipulate. Former trader Elaine Griffin who also owned Calpine stock and= resigned two weeks ago to take another job said she didn't know she owne= d energy securities until she checked with her financial advisor July 13 = just before leaving her state job. Griffin said she and her husband own a= bout $10000 worth of Calpine stock in individual retirement accounts mana= ged by their advisor who bought the stock Feb. 1 without their knowledge= she said after research found it to be a good investment. I kind of fe= el like we've been used for political reasons Griffin said. We would ha= ve disclosed anything right at first but they never asked. As a trader= Griffin said she occasionally bought Calpine power for the state but on= ly at market prices. Meanwhile two Democratic political consultants who= helped Davis polish his image after the ongoing energy crisis caused his = poll numbers to plummet have agreed to accept no payment for their work a= s part of an out-of-court settlement of a taxpayer lawsuit. Tom Hiltachk= a lawyer for conservative anti-tax activist Lewis Uhler said the settlem= ent was reached last Friday after negotiations with lawyers for communicat= ions consultants Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane. Now they will not receiv= e one red cent said Hiltachk. Very simply Mr. Fabiani and Mr. Lehane ha= ve agreed to cease all activities for the governor to accept no payments = for their services and to basically get out of the consulting business wit= h the governor. As his part of the agreement Hiltachk said Uhler with= drew his lawsuit Monday morning. Uhler had filed a lawsuit against the tw= o consultants and Controller Kathleen Connell in June contending that they= should not receive any payments because of a conflict of interest. The tw= o men also did consulting work for financially troubled Southern Californi= a Edison which was seeking help from Davis and the Legislature. Connell= a former Los Angeles mayoral candidate who has been at odds with Davis si= nce he endorsed an opponent had held up the payments pending the outcome = of the lawsuit. Under an agreement with Davis the men were to have been = paid $30000 a month for six months. Fabiani and Lehane could not be reac= hed for comment. * Times staff writers Nancy Vogel and Virginia Ellis i= n Sacramento and Robert J. Lopez in Los Angeles contributed to this story.= For information about reprinting this article go to http://www.lats.co= m/rights/register.htm =09[IMAGE]=09 a d v e r t i s i n g Subscribe NO= W and SAVE on your home delivery subscription! [IMAGE]Cool down rooms w= ithout touching the thermostat A floor lamp that spreads sunshine all = over a room Bring the power of the digital revolution to your fingert= ips Private DVD theater puts a floating 6-foot screen right before you= r eyes! It?s time to put all of your photos onto your computer NASA = research creates smart bed sleep surface [IMAGE] =09 =09[IMAGE] Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times By visiting this site y= ou are agreeing to our Terms of Service . Powered by Genuity =09 [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Dan Joe and Charles: Let's meet in the hallway 15 minutes before to discuss strategy. Joe we can share a cab. thanks. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: [IMAGE] Qwiklist(9) MyAccount Rental History Shipping List We have received L.A. Confidential(1997) on 12/31/2001 We will be processing your QwikList selections and will send the next available dvd on your QwikList. You will receive another email when it ships. Thank You! [IMAGE] L.A. Confidential(1997) Home | Customer Service | Rental Details [/INST] Category: Purely Personal

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: fyi ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Rita I have postponed all the hiring decisions till late August - early September. We can revisit Joao's case at this point. We shall have better information about the space in the new building we can count on and the time of the move. We appreciate Joao interest in Enron. Vince Kaminski [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: There may be some press today about Enron's involvement in the Nepal hydro project. The government of Nepal is hopeful that we will pursue it but we are not going to. Kelly's response on press inquiries will be that we are not pursuing the project. Kelly will also be getting in touch with David Howe. I just wanted to keep you guys posted in case you are getting questions. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Is this someone in the analyst/associate program? ----------------- [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: any interest? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Tony Pryor (GPG legal) asked if we have any credentials/tickets left for die hard democrats in the company. I know Tony will understand if they are already spoken for but if we have some left that would go unused we have a volunteer. How's it going? Are you partied out yet? [/INST] Category: Purely Personal

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: calendar [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: TASK ASSIGNMENT Task Priority: 2 Task Due On: Task Start Date: [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Slade Gorton -- Craig Gannett meeting Christa Donahue (PFI in North Carolina -- 2024672778) Greg Piper Carol Dillon 503-464-8536 Kathleen -- Providence Gas (Mike McCall) Linda Clemmons -- MIT forum at MIT Bob Foster 818 302 9210 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I have also received regrets from Horton but confirmation from Metts ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks for the explanation. I agree though I may not have explained the context adequately to Ken. Linda Robertson 05/11/2001 04:32 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Barton Bill You seemed troubled by the call to Barton. This bill may or may not be subsumed by the comprehensive energy bill that Congress undertakes this summer. Both bills have a very difficult if not nearly impossible path ahead given that the Democrats are in no mood for compromise. The call to Barton was to: a) repair relationships (and with the Wall Street Journal calling Barton about his troubled past with Enron repair is needed) b) proclaim victory even of a limited nature (something I think Enron has not done much of) c) build a further bond with Barton so we would have more input at full Committee (something we will need given the chances that this will go off the track are real) and d) allow Enron to get significant credit for the defeat of price caps. I hear from lots of DC sources that we have not had any success in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Numerous folks at the markup noted in private conversations that this was Enron's first real role in the Committee. Thus even though this is a very limited bill the call made sense. I do not think that this means we should call the White House to push the bill with them. The bill itself still has lots of obstacles and many potential threats ahead. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: - California Changes Stance on Refunds Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks By Peter Behr Washington Post Staff Writer Friday July 6 2001 Page E01 California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. We've made suggestions we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion. The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr. according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood Wagner told reporters. In the event we're unable to do that [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment. The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner FERC's chief administrative judge has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California's largest utility drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative Michael Kahn chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high sources said. Wagner's settlement conference which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a joke that the parties might as well wear clown suits according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers led by Reliant Energy Inc. Williams Energy Services Duke Energy and Southern Co. for failing to make serious settlement offers these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile spot market prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer so did the state's electricity bills. In response Davis's aide S. David Freeman and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a refund because the deals were reached under commercial duress according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be said Michael Zenger California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a just and reasonable standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. It's not rocket science but it does require the regulators to regulate said Frank Wolak a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room billions of dollars apart as the talks approached their final weekend sources said. 2001 The Washington Post Company [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: great idea. [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: fyi - there has been some concern that this deal was being put together without Connecticut authorities knowing the full extent of our interest in FCEL. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: With Rick Mark Lou and possibly Hillings [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Late tonight the Barton Subcommittee passed an energy policy package (without any electricity provisions other than those related to conservation) on a bipartisan vote of 29-1. The subcommittee approved an amendment by Mrs. Wilson to conduct a national assessment and inventory of possible renewable energy projects. During consideration of the bill several amendments of interest and concern to Enron were offered and withdrawn they are likely to be offered when the full Energy and Commerce Committee meets to consider the package next Tuesday and Wednesday. The amendments in this category are: 1. Mr. Waxman has an amendment he called the blackout and price gouging prevention amendment that would require FERC to modify its June 19 price mitigation order within 15 days of enactment to impose cost-of-service based rates (with a rate of return of 15 percent) if an entity is found to be withholding power from the grid during an emergency. The cost-of-service rates would thereafter apply to all of the offending entity's sales in the Western U.S. Several of us were rounding up opponents to the amendment when it was clear he was going to offer it and before he decided to withdraw it until full committee. We will continue those efforts before the full committee vote. 2. Mr. Ganske has an amendment on net metering that he said would promote wind in Iowa and other renewables (he may wait until an electricity bill rather than full committee on this bill). 3. Mr. Shadegg has an amendment to exempt natural gas pipelines from the requirements of the National Registry of Historic Places. He said that currently this process holds up much needed pipeline expansions that are FERC approved. 4. Mr. Waxman has an amendment that would require the President to develop and implement a plan to achieve the greenhouse gas reductions called for in a UN agreement that President George Bush (41) agreed to in 1992 (reducing these emissions to 1990 levels). Chairman Barton indicated that the Subcommittee will take up an electric restructuring bill either later this month or early in September depending on how long it takes to process this first energy package in the full committee and in the full House. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: prepare for my siganture. cc Lisa ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: let's bring him in Christi L Nicolay@ECT 10/02/2000 12:29 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Kerry Stroup/DUB/EES@EES Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Wabash Valley called re: AEP filing Don Morton general counsel of Wabash Valley Power Association a co-op in AEP's area called me about Enron's protest of AEP's market based rates filing. Wabash has filed an appeal in the DC Circuit of AEP/CSW merger (its brief is due 11/20). He thinks FERC is out of control and not carrying on its duties. Wabash is also preparing a protest of the Alliance compliance filing (due this Friday 10/6) on the following grounds: Filing is really a continuation of pancaking Does not want FERC to approve on a conditional basis (expecting Alliance to be a true RTO)--Wabash thinks that Alliance simply creates a larger profit center for AEP's transmission system Mr. Morton also had some specific OASIS problem examples that happened to Wabash that involved preferential treatment for AEP. I told him to call or email Scott Miller for the investigation. Mr. Morton and Wabash CEO Ed Martin would like to come to Houston to visit with Enron about our concerns and about the possibility of making some joint filings. His number is 317-481-2815. Please let me know if I should set something up or if someone else would like to talk with him directly. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: In anticipation of potential litigation involving TW's operational activities please prepare an analysis for me of the reasons for TW's sale of excess natural gas at the California border. I am aware of several of these sales and have been informed that excess pressure at the border is the basic reason for them. I'd like a more specific explanation that includes the following information: 1. What are the specific pressures and volume considerations that could make it operationally necessary to sell gas at the California border? 2. What is the process that is followed to make such a determination? 3. Which individuals or groups are involved in determining whether an operational sale is necessary? 4. In what way have system operations changed since last year and how do those changes contribute to the increased frequency of such sales compared to previous years? 5. What alternatives to operational sales are considered before the decision to make a sale is reached? Thanks for your attention to this request. Please give me a call to discuss and please designate your response as Privileged and Confidential Attorney Client Privileged. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jeff & Sue -- We need to discuss at 9am your time (as well as other things). Jim [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I'd prefer to skip. How big of a problem would that be? From: Susan M Landwehr on 05/14/2001 03:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Gov Geringer meeting Steve/RIck ---as you may be aware Governor Geringer personally asked Ken Lay to come to the kick off meeting of the Wyoming Energy Task Force a group that was created by legislative mandate last month. The meeting is on May 30th in Cheyenne. Mr. Lay told the Governor that he would not be able to make it on that date but promised that a senior Enron exectutive would be there. I spoke with Governor Geringer's staff person again this past week and was hoping that Paul Kaufman could be the senior executive but no such luck (unless you give Paul a huge new title!). In talking with Maureen I understand that you have a previous conflict Steve but I am hoping that you can review your calendar to see if you could make an adjustment in order to meet the request of the Governor. Your speech would be in the morning--I've been told about 9 o clock or so---which would allow for you to leave by noonish. I [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)