Split (1)

train · 1k rows

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.

prompts stringlengths 590 30k	text stringclasses 8 values
<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: yes Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/13/2001 12:10 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Steve: Based on the note from Rosalee and if you agree I'm going to assign low priority to the issue. Jeff Rosalee Fleming 03/13/2001 08:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Hi Steve and Jeff - This was a cold call to Ken that Vanessa took while we were in Exec. Comm. meeting. She had asked Ginger who to refer him to as it was CA. and she mentioned Jeff. Please only call if there is any interest. Rosie From: Steven J Kean on 03/12/2001 04:46 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay It was not mentioned to me. I'm copying rosie and vanessa to find out if this was a simple referral (in which case you should keep the work to a minimum -- return the call but don't get distracted from your other efforts) or whether Ken is especially interested in this and wants us to follow through. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/12/2001 03:54 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Just got a call from a fellow named Jame Edgerly at the Enterprise Zone Inc. He told me that Ken Lay (through Ken's secretary Vanessa) referred me to him. He is very interested in getting us to help him work with the Legislature to establish an Enterprise Zone energy tariff to encourage investment in California's Enterprice Zones. Before I launch on the effort just wanted to check in and see if this rings a bell with you. Thanks. Best Jeff [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 post on internal site [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 DC Team (Linda Robertson Ray Alvarez) attended and reported on today's prehearing conference in the California case. The schedule has moved back about a full month mostly due to the time required by PX and CAISO to produce mitigated market clearing prices and to re-run settlements based on those revised prices. Testimony by Enron on what it is owed is now not due until October 26. In addition to adopting this schedule the ALJ reported that the FERC likely not rule on petitions for rehearing of the July 25 order until October 15 2001. A revised schedule is attached. (To see how it has changed you can toggle Track Changes \| Hightlight on Screen on and off) The PNW case is moving along on schedule changes attached are corrections rather than actual changes to the schedule. Notably in today's case Seattle and Tacoma waived all cross on TFG witnesses including Enron's. Alan Comnes [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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: Thought you might get a kick out of ISO California (at the end of this=20 email) written by Steve Huntoon who is now with Dynegy's DC office. --= =20 Lisa [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: Privileged and Confidential This email contains legal advice Hoyt and Melissa I am assuming that we are discussing contract personnel who provide some sort of services for MG/RW. It looks like there may be some key personnel we want to employ but that there are many whom we don't want to hire. I am not really familiar with the specific facts here. The question of a joint employer arises when a company treats its contract personnel like its own -- by setting compensation controlling their activities engaging in etc. decisions and other ways in which an employer treats its own employees. So if the plan is to have workers doing the same thing with one as a contractor and one as an employee there could be some issues particularly if they share a supervisor. Unfortunately that often is the case with contract personnel. If there are distinctions among the various responsibilities of these workers -- and like workers are treated similarly -- the risk may be reduced. It is cleanest however to use all of these workers through the contracting agency for a while (assume we don't want to hire them all which is the other alternative). Then the company may want to make selected offers to people who may be in a managerial role or have some other distinction from the bulk of the contract workers. I would like additional information on this situation before reaching a definitive conclusion. So let's try to discuss it. I am booked until about 11 this morning but am available after that. Michelle Hoyt Thomas@ENRON 08/08/2000 04:21 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Melissa Laing/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Priviliged and Confidential communication to my attorney Re: Henry Bath LA Michelle I guess emails will get to you sooner if I remember to add you to the addressee list! Sorry. Hoyt ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 -- please send Vince my California testimony and the talking point presentation for Jeff Skilling at the National Press Club. Eliz-- keep Vince on the distribution list for the documents we are generating now to repond to the California situation. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: Could you work with Allison to get the needed information to cathy. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 talk with Rick but he will be working until June or July then he will retire and be available as a consultant to us. m Shanna Funkhouser@ENRON 02/08/2001 10:09 AM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Rick Subject: Confidential -- Terry Thorn Mike I wanted to let you know that Cindy Skinner passed the information she gathered on Terry to me. Please let me know what the status is with his termination ie timing etc. so that I may start the process. Thanks Shanna X59386 [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) </s>
<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: Rep Scott McGinnis (colo) told Ken that he would like to be briefed on the California and broader energy situation so that he can speak out on the issue. Also don't forget that we need to go see your buddy Newt! [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 probably saw the announcement that Mike Mcconnell is now CEO of Enron Global Markets. EGM will be focussing on a number of new and existing markets (including coal LNG crude and products interest rates agricultural commodities equities weather etc). One of the markets Mike's group is actively considering is transport capacity. I mentioned your work in the area. He is anxious to see it and meet with you after he has had a chance to review it. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 the Federal Trade Commission issued a staff report on electricity restructuring issues. It is an update of the July 2000 report done at the request of House Energy Chairman Tauzin and Subcommittee Chairman Barton. They requested the report be updated. A summary of the report and the full 80+ page text is on the FTC web site at www.ftc.gov on the upper left side of the home page. I read the summary and will read the balance. So far so good. It basically says that even states that have opened up to retail competition are in transition with a hybrid of regulation and competition thus the expected benefits of competition have not yet emerged. However the report states that nothing to date indicates that competition once the transition period is over will not produce additional benefits for consumers. The report's major conclusion is that competitive wholesale markets are important to achieving effective competition in retail markets. The summary includes something that sounds promising on RTO policy saying And as wholesale and retail markets become regional governing policies and jurisdictional approaches also must move in that direction for wholesale and retail competition to be successful. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: Sorry for the delay. I have asked the question and should have an answer in a day or two. . . . don't do anything rash in the meantime. Jane M Tholt@ECT 05/07/2001 12:15 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Stock Options Hi Steve. I know you are extremely busy but I was just wondering if you found out about whether the 3 year period apllies to all options or just the ones in that program. Question 2) does the 3 year time frame apply to only options that are vested at the time of departure or does it apply also to options which vest over the 3 year time frame. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you. [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you) </s>
<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 memo needs some additional work. I have made a number of suggestion (highlighted on the attached). From: Karen Moore/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/30/2001 07:56 AM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT David Oxley/ENRON@enronXgate Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON Gina Corteselli/ENRON@enronXgate Robert K Jones/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: PRC MEMO from Skilling Attached is a draft of the PRC memo to go out from Jeff at the end of this week for your review. Karen Denne Michelle Cash and Gina Corteselli have reviewed the document and their comments/edits/suggestions have been made accordingly. Please have your responses to me no later than COB Wednesday May 2 2001. Thanks Karen [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Document editing/checking(collaboration) </s>
<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] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 in too late tonight but maybe dinner or drinks on Thurs? Linda Robertson 06/19/2001 06:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Dinner Plans You are here Wed and Thur nights. Do you have plans? Do you want to do something with some of the DC staff? [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 the economist piece around. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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. Vince J Kaminski@ECT 01/11/2000 08:01 AM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Congratulations Rick I have just looked at the memo regarding promotions. Congratulations - well deserved. Vince [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you) </s>
<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 talked with Ken yesterday. He would like to keep David on until May 15 to finish up some things he is working on for Ken. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 04/09/2001 08:45 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: organizational announcement Just out of curiosity did this ever get resolved? Apologies if I'm being too bold! SRS From: Steven J Kean on 03/14/2001 07:33 AM To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: organizational announcement Ken was meeting with him the day before yesterday. I'm just waiting to hear back. Sherri Sera 03/13/2001 10:07 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: organizational announcement Just saw the memo about Sanjay Diomedes and Jim. Guess David Haug is still around? SRS [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you) </s>
<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 drafted the attached letter denying the Cal ISO's request to send it (and the EOB) EPMI and EES' cost information for transactions over the FERC's cost cap. Since I believe we are on very firm ground my initial inclination was to send no response to the ISO's letter so there would be nothing to quote in the press. However I drafted this letter at Alan's suggestion for purposes of discussion. We should decide whether to send a letter before distributing this draft more widely in-house to discuss how to parse the message. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 Attached is memo I prepared for Jim and Rick on the PNW refund case. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 don't see a fit Lexi Elliott 02/28/2001 02:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Chris Harman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Will Hixon - UT Candidate Steve: Per my voicemail message to you I have forwarded Will's resume for your consideration. Thank you! lexi ----------------- [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) </s>
<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: Richard Following our coversation of yesterday I set out for you below the following: 1. An explanation (in draft) of the Dutch power market and the events leading up to the current market squeeze by certain players which we have produced and discussed for our external lawyers. 2. A schematic of arguments which we produced for external lawyers before Christmas just relating to the mis-application of capacity by TenneT. 3. A copy of our e-mail to Clifford Chance of last Wednesday summarising the issues in order of priority for their advice. Please note that purely on the swap element of this jigsaw we are attempting to arrange a conference with a Queen's Counsel for next Monday afternoon. Hence it may be better for our meeting (with Jeff patched-in) to take place next Tuesday - clearly the advice on all the elements involved (as set out in 3) in toto will not be complete until we have had the conference with the QC. I am due to receive tomorrow however from Clifford Chance their legal strategy report on all the other issues raised in my e-mail (item 3) and shall forward you a copy on receipt. Kind regards Mark ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 - as we discussed adding a sentence on open access is key. Also I would delete the sentence about the transmission system not being designed for the way it's being used today. Richard Shapiro 04/02/2001 04:23 AM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron Subject: Re: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA It would be nice to get a one sentence mention made of open access just to show they care....I say this in part because of Scott Miller's e-mail pleading for more focus on this issue. Thanks. Linda Robertson 03/30/2001 12:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA 1. I am faxing to you a bootleg copy of the draft talking points Ed received this morning at the White House energy messaging meeting. These are very close hold. Ed asked that we not circulate these to anyone. Ed asked us to give him feedback of any concerns we have with the talking points (he will be giving them comments). After glancing at the TPs the obvious missing point is open access. However I am not sure we should be alarmed about that. There really isn't any policy in the TPs. This is a typical WH message document. Let me know if you think it is imperative to insert open access. Also Ed would like to position us as the coalition leader of the White House outreach effort. Any thoughts? 2. I am faxing to you EPSA's summary of the generators meeting with Secretary Abraham. I am glad I did not attend this meeting. As you will see from the summary there were three parts to the meeting: a) an exchange of policy views both long and short term b) discussion of how to maximize generator output in Calif and c) a request that industry participate in a DOE reliability group. I don't see any follow up for Enron outside of our normal course of activities and independent interchange with DOE officials. Let me know if you have additional thoughts. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Document editing/checking(collaboration) </s>
<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: Ken will be making a call to Bob Glynn at PG&E. Please give the attached to Ken before the call. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: CANCELLED...... [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: Yes you are. Mark Palmer@ENRON 07/17/2000 09:32 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Wimbledon update I left Hannon a message that we PAID for the attention we got from Wimbledon. It came out of the advertising budget. We did Kevin a favor by trying to leverage our media budget to create new business for EBS. Am I looking at this the right way? Mark ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: No contact Rosalee Fleming (ken's assistant). I let her know that you would be preparing the briefing. Ricardo Charvel@ENRON 08/03/2000 08:30 PM To: Steve Kean Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Lay-Fox meeting Do we have an estimated deadline for presenting the info to Ken Lay? Please let me know. Ricardo [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 love you baby. Study hard. Kean_Nora <Nora_Kean@Duchesne.org> on 05/04/2001 01:09:47 PM To: 'skean@enron.com' <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Hi Daddy Hi Daddy. I love you!! - Nora [/INST] Category: Purely Personal	<s>[INST] [/INST] Purely Personal </s>
<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 also need to know the base salaries of Jay Reitmeyer and Monique Sanchez. They are doing the same job as Matt. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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: He could have solved this problem in 20 minutes right? Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/25/2001 12:40 PM To: skean@enron.com Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron mpalmer@enron.com Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Davis favors tiered rate increases but still clings to no new rate increases Power Hogs May Get Hit In Pocketbook Davis favors tiered rate increases David Lazarus Chronicle Staff Writer Sunday March 25 2001 2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: N30195.DTL Gov. Gray Davis faced with the near inevitability of raising consumers' electricity bills is leaning toward a rate system whereby those who use more power pay more than those who conserve The Chronicle has learned. Sources close to the governor said he is being lobbied by his own staff members to accept a so-called structured rate system. Top officials from his own administration told lawmakers Friday that the state may end up spending more than twice the $10 billion previously estimated to purchase power on behalf of California's near-bankrupt utilities. If so the officials warned that consumers' electricity rates could double. In the case of Pacific Gas and Electric Co. this would mean customers' average monthly power bills would rise from $60 to $120. Consumers throughout the Bay Area believe that at least some increase is on the way. We're going to have to bite the bullet and pay the money said Larry Webster a retired Caltrans worker in Redwood City. We might as well admit that electricity is no longer a nickel. It's a dime. If you're going to use it let's pay for it. Steve Maviglio a spokesman for the governor distanced himself yesterday from estimates that rates would double. The figures reported in the press he said were wildly high. The governor still believes he can live within the existing rate structure Maviglio said. Until we know the results of the negotiations with the utilities you can't conclude anything. The state is negotiating a multibillion-dollar bailout package with PG&E and Southern California Edison Co. to relieve the utilities of about $13 billion in debt. PG&E and Edison have been saying for months that there is no way California can overcome its current energy woes without higher rates. The irony of the Davis administration now saying the same thing was not lost on the two companies. The state is in the exact same position the utilities were in last fall said John Nelson a PG&E spokesman. Either wholesale prices need to come down or retail prices need to go up. The disparity is too large. Statewide blackouts last week drove home the precariousness of California's energy situation to ratepayers -- and may have served as a blessing in disguise for the governor. COST VS. OUTAGES If given a choice between further outages and paying higher rates many consumers said they would accept increases in their power bills. I don't like either choice said Janet Leroux facing the possibility of a gooey mess if the air conditioning goes out at her downtown San Francisco candy store. But I guess I'd go with higher rates. I sure didn't like the blackouts. Publicly the governor has been insisting for weeks that rates will stay within the existing rate structure -- a stealthy way of saying that January's 9 percent increase and an expected 10 percent increase next year will remain in place. But privately he and his staff are discussing additional rate increases that could be spread over as long as 10 years sources said. Utility executives and power generators told The Chronicle last week that a minimum 30 percent rate increase lasting up to a decade is in the cards. For the good of California it's inevitable said Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum a Menlo Park energy industry association. Sacramento resident John Hax observed that when temperatures soar in the Central Valley this summer he'd be more than willing to pay a higher price for power if this keeps the air conditioners on. It's like gasoline he said. I don't like paying higher prices for gasoline but that's the price of doing business. Ratepayers draw the line though at any increase topping 10 or 20 percent. If it was 20 percent I'd probably do it said Tracy resident Mark Dougherty. But if it was more like 50 percent I'd rather go with rolling blackouts. I'd rather have blackouts agreed Jenny Soghomonian owner of a shoe- repair shop in San Francisco's Financial District. I don't want to pay rates that are so much higher. NOT EVERY COST PALATABLE This is the tightrope that state officials and industry players now find themselves walking: While consumers may be willing to pay more to avoid blackouts they aren't willing to swallow virtually any cost thrown their way. Yet if rates are not high enough they may not prevent daily blackout threats this summer and beyond. Higher rates are the price signal that it takes for conservation said Tom Higgins senior vice president of Edison International parent company of Southern California Edison. Simply put he meant that most consumers will not aggressively conserve power and thus alleviate shortages unless there is a financial incentive to do so. Rebates proposed by the governor have met with only a lukewarm response requiring critics say too much effort on the part of individual ratepayers. But a sudden spike in monthly power bills almost certainly would prompt widespread conservation measures. It adjusts consumer behavior Higgins said. People want to get their bills back down. RATES' EFFECT ON USAGE He and other industry sources said higher rates are perhaps the only way Californians will achieve the 10 percent conservation goal sought by the governor -- a move seen as vital if blackouts are to be avoided this summer. It's intellectually dishonest to think there's any other way out of this Higgins said. Consumer activists' initial reaction to any talk of a rate increase comes across loud and clear: No no no. No bailout. No rate increases. No secret deals said Harvey Rosenfield head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. We need to get back to a regulated system. Rosenfield is the biggest fly in the governor's ointment. He has threatened to push through a ballot initiative re-regulating California's power market if Davis cannot find a consumer-friendly way out of the current fix. Because of Rosenfield's past success in writing a ballot measure on insurance rebates which delivered about $800 million to consumers his threat is taken seriously in Sacramento. We've paid too much already Rosenfield said. A fair price is what we were promised by deregulation which was a 20 percent rate decrease. However when he was asked whether there was any room to discuss a structured rate increase such as the idea being promoted by the governor's staff Rosenfield toned down his characteristic rhetoric. Big users should pay more he said after a moment's reflection. I'm open to a tiered system but only if it's fair. Rosenfield quickly added that he would have to see how other consumer advocates felt about the matter before agreeing to negotiate such things with Davis. MOVE TOWARD STRUCTURED RATES Clearly though momentum is building toward a system of structured power rates which probably would include increases of varying sizes for consumers. The California Public Utilities Commission is scheduled to address January's 9 percent rate increase on Tuesday. That increase originally was given only a three-month duration but most observers expect it to be renewed for at least another three months if not longer. PUC President Loretta Lynch declined to comment on the likelihood of rates going up but added her voice to those backing a structured system. I am a fan of restructuring rates to exempt conservation she said. People who use a whole lot of power should pay more. The biggest electricity customer in the state is the state itself now that California is purchasing power on behalf of its cash-poor utilities. The state already has spent about $4 billion buying electricity and has yet to determine how the cash will be recouped from consumers. San Francisco resident Rosita Magee accepts that for California to find its energy footing once more rates will probably be heading up. That way you have more convenience and electricity more stability she said. But Magee has come up with another solution one that doesn't involve rate increases and rolling blackouts. She's moving to Texas. Chronicle staff writers Matthew Stannard and Pia Sarkar contributed to this report. / E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com. 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1 [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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 spoke with Jeff and he is not going to be available for the speech on the 26th. Do we pass or is there an alternative? Can we get done what we need to get done with Ken's visit the following week? Nicholas O'Day 08/31/2000 06:01 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: John Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON Mika Watanabe/AP/Enron Takashi Kimura/AP/Enron@Enron Subject: Ken Lay/ Jeff Skilling visits Ken Lay Visit. Following discussions with the Prime Minister's office and a quick check with venues 31 October is firming up as the preferred date for a meeting with the Prime Minister and an office opening by the PM. Jeff Skilling Visit. The Nikkei and the Tokyo University have now made the decision to invite Mr Skilling to give the key note address at the symposium on 26 November in Tokyo. As mentioned the symposium is the most prestigious conference on IT in Japan. While the conference itself receives significant media attention the President of Nikkei has offered to interview Mr Skilling. This honour is usually reserved for Heads of State. The interview will be featured on the front page of the Nikkei and picked up by other major media services. kind regards Nicholas O'Day 08/29/2000 07:43 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: John Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON Mika Watanabe/AP/Enron Takashi Kimura/AP/Enron Subject: Re: Ken Lay meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Ken Lay Visit. Balancing the need to push out the arrangement of high level meetings as far as possible with the desire to have a meeting with Prime Minister Mori prior to the US Presidential election the week commencing 30 October would be the optimum time for a visit by Mr Lay. PM Mori is generally available in that week. We will get a preferred time from the PM's chief secretary first thing tomorrow morning Tokyo time. Jeff Skilling Visit. The boards of Nikkei and Tokyo University Institute of Advanced Studies have yet to make a decision on the key note speaker for the one day invitation only seminar to be held on 26 October. As mentioned the boards will choose between the chairman of Cisco and Jeff Skilling. The conference is focused on the IT revolution and an invitation only event for approximately 600 of Japan's corporate leaders. The speaking panel and topics for discussion will be developed around the key note speaker. If Mr Skilling were to give the key note speech it is likely that key senior Government Ministers would be asked to present at the seminar. Following the Prime Minister's commitment at the Okinawa summit of US$15billion expenditure in the region on IT infrastructure and education Japan's focus on e-commerce is almost reaching fever pitch. There will be significant interest in the conference from senior levels of Government and the business community. Further as you would expect with the involvement of the Nikkei there is typically significant media coverage associated with the key note speaker's presentation. kind regards [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc) </s>
<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] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>
<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 taken a stab at putting a draft response together indicating areas where we need more flesh. I will forward Tim/Mary's presentation to FERC EPSA's California Fact Sheet and the transcript from the hearing held on 8/23 and 8/24. Witness Wolak Market Surveillance Committee of ISO had some good points about rational behavior in markets with scarcity of supply. His comments were on 8/23. Please feel free to comment. Dan Douglass Arter&Hadden (818-596-2201) will be filing these comments on Enron's behalf which are due on Friday. I would suggest that Dan provide some of the legal view on whether the CPUC has adequate jurisdiction over retail rates not wholesale rates. We should shoot for final comments by 10:00 a.m. tomorrow if possible. This will allow an opportunity to discuss any last minute changes if necessary before filing. Seabron Adamson Frontier Economics (617-354-0060) will be providing additional drafting. Be sure to send any comments to these parties along with the internal list. Thanks. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)	<s>[INST] [/INST] Document editing/checking(collaboration) </s>