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: Lydia McGowan (Chairman Frisbee) 410 767 8072 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 [/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: Per our discussion [/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: Eric July works for me. Vince [/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: Nice work Kerry and Barb. I think we should do the follow up work on setting a follow up meeting with the Senator. Ken left it open whether he would be available when the Sen is in Houston so we have made no commitment in that regard. Janine Migden 04/27/2001 08:32 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: call to Sen Kinder Thanks Steve. That's great news. Just as an FYI the memo that Ken worked from was prepared by Kerry Stroup and Barbara Hueter who are the leads on Missouri. As a follow-up will Sen. Kinder be contacting Ken Lay directly or should Kerry and Barbara contact Sen. Kinder's office as the date gets closer to make arrangements? Please advise. Thanks Janine Steven J Kean 04/26/2001 08:07 PM To: Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: call to Sen Kinder Ken talked to Sen Kinder. He made the points you had prepared. Kinder agreed to shelve the legislation for this session. He said he had been hearing from several others including Proctor and Gamble (which has a big facility in his district) that the legislation was not going to help competition develop in the state. He expressed willingness to work with us on a better package and also expressed interest in coming to Enron's offices. He is going to be in San Antonio in August and would like to come to Houston around that time. [/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'm glad things are moving forward. I've talked with Dave briefly and will= =20 follow up with him again. Kevin Scott on 07/13/2001 10:14:01 AM Please respond to kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com> cc: =20 Subject: Spoke with Jeff Steve =20 As planned I spoke with Jeff this morning. It was a great call. I am=20 really excited about what is ahead. =20 We discussed the =01&title=018 issue. I don=01t have any problems. We sh= ould go=20 with what is the best way to enter the organization. =20 =20 Jeff said he was going to touch base with Dave this morning to move the=20 process forward. I can=01t wait for my interviews and to join the team.= =20 =20 Thanks for all of your help. =20 Kevin =20 Contact Information E-mail Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ? Los Angeles CA 90021 =20 [/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: Here's the proposal to form the Team. Note that the complete team list includes: =01&The MRT will be led by Philippe Auclair and will include Market Partic= ipant=20 Advisor (MPA) Eric Woychik Market Assessment Advisor (MAA) Steven Stoft and any others= =20 appointed by the Board.=20 =01&The Market Design Group may be comprised of a number of national expert= s on=20 energy market structure and regulation and to be used as needed by the MRT. Sever= in=20 Borenstein Joe Bowering (PJM=01s Market Monitor) William Hogan Paul Joskow and Fra= nk=20 Wolak have all expressed their willingness to assist the ISO Board through the Market Repa= ir=20 Team.=018 Does anybody have a read on Bowering from PJM? Alan Comnes Susan J Mara@ENRON 03/13/2001 03:06 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT= =20 Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Steve=20 Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: =20 Subject: You Can Put A Stake in Their Hearts but They Never Die Gang Just heard from someone at the ISO that the ISO Board is shoving a new mark= et=20 approach down the staff's throat. Rising from the almost dead ... This Market Repair Committee is supported by Eric Woychik advisor to Boa= rd=20 Member Florio. The Committee members are Joskow Hogan PJM people et=20 cetera et cetera. There will be something posted on the ISO's web site=20 shortly. It will be approved at the Board meeting Thursday. I'll be there. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/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: 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: This responds to Charles's voice mail and the RTO conference calls that Janel has been on where we have discussed responding to those who say the heightened interest in security is a reason NOT to do large RTOs. Jim Steffes is the EPSA witness on reliability and other issues at a Barton subcommittee hearing next Wed. Oct. 10th. While the written testimony filed for the Sept. 11 hearing that was canceled is still operative Jim's oral remarks can be whatever he wishes. Also even if he does not raise it in his opening statement the issue will no doubt come up by others or in Q&A. Thus -- any talking points need to be ready by Tuesday for this hearing. Does not have to be anything fancy or hand-out quality. Just something for Jim to consider using. Charles I do not recall any specific articles on what NERC said but Sarah Novosel said she would check since she thought there was something like what you raised in your voice 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: 6:00 Photographer [/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: 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: Julia and Steve--here are some questions I've sent to Darrell on the TW Cal. border line pack sales. I'd like him to pull in the right people to get me the answers so we will be prepared if we need to explain these events. Darrell--I thought I'd better let your bosses know that I've been putting more stuff on your already full plate. Thanks all. DF ----------------- [/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: Zausner is kind of a mixed bag. I think he's strong intellectually and has some influence but I don't trust him to keep our strategy and contacts confidential. [/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: MARC Conference per Iowa Commissioner Emmett George 8:30 Sue Landwehr will meet you at the hotel for breakfast 10:30 - 12:00 Power Supply and Transmission Lunch at 12:00 at conference Irene Baeg 515-281-8644 Afternoon fly to DC [/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 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] [/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: There was an all day meeting of the NERC/reliability legislation group today. I will provide a more detailed report but the group completed the process of reviewing the changes that some had suggested to shorten and streamline the NERC electric reliability organization legislation. Sarah and I asked a series of questions and made comments on our key issues and concerns. I want to give you a more complete report once I have gone back over the now final draft version. The timing being imposed by NERC is that they will circulate a clean version of the proposal tomorrow or Monday. They have asked for comments by next Thursday August 16th with an indication of whether each company/organization does or does not sign on to support it. They will then transmit the proposal and the endorsement letter to Congress and the Administration so they have it as Hill and Energy Dept. staff work on electricity drafting issues this month. I pointed out that EPSA is not due to meet internally with its members to discuss these issues until after the NERC deadline. That is not deterring NERC from moving forward with the above time frame. [/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: Is Catherine working on environmental policy related to sustainability or is she working on greenhouse gas transactions . . . or both? ----------------- [/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: Maureen No problem. 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: To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as part of its investigation of California markets has requested information that my be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. Such information consists of participant specific schedules and bids. The FERC staff has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than 24 business hours after the date of this notice. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to FERC's regulations or other legal authority the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the FERC staff provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to FERC and delivered to: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Building A-9 W Fifth Floor Alhambra CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Information must be received no later than Tuesday September 12 2000 9:00 A.M. PDT to be included with any information delivered to the FERC staff. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. [/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: Attached are my edits. From: Rebecca Carter on 05/24/2001 04:42 PM Sent by: Kelly Johnson To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Board of Directors Meeting - February 13 2001 Please provide comments the attached minutes by June 1 2001. If you approve as written please let us know. Regards Rebecca CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any review dissemination or copying of this email or its attachments if any or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank you. [/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'll give 150. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Jeff Skilling 04/19/2001 05:18 PM Sent by: Sherri Sera To: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT Rick Buy/HOU/ECT Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT Michael Brown/NA/Enron Wade James A Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Greg Piper/Corp/Enron John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron Stan Horton/Houston/Eott@Eott Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: I know how incredibly busy you all are so I'm sure that making a pledge to Jeff for the MS150 has simply slipped your mind. Well the ride is this weekend time is running out and we need you! Enron's goal is to raise $700000 and Jeff's personal goal is to raise $50000. As of today we are a little better than half way there. Won't you consider helping him reach his goal? Thanks for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you tomorrow... Sherri :-) [/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 have also received regrets from Horton but confirmation from Metts ----------------- [/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: Steve ? This is a draft of the contact list I promised you.? There are still some typos in it.? I will clean them up and get send you a draft in the morning that is ready for circulation. ? This list is made?up of?people that I know?and trust.? By an large I have excluded sitting pubic officials.? In cases where a given organization has several useful contacts with similar knowledge I have listed just one person for now. ? Give me a call at your convenience and we can discuss this in great detail. ? Kevin 213-926-2626 - Kevin Scott - Key Contacts - Draft.doc [/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: This is an excellent update. Thanks for putting this together. Dale/Patrick - lets regroup on how we want to move this onward. Seems like SJ's suggestion of our spending more time with Bill Dwyer is a good one. Thanks Matt Sarah-Joy Hunter@ENRON 12/12/00 02:42 PM To: Matt Harris/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Patrick Tucker/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Peter Goebel/NA/Enron@Enron Dale Clark/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Jennifer Medcalf/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: HP -- confidential internal document Matt: As GSS Business Development transitions the HP relationship for broadband to your team there are several issues I wanted to clarify in terms of how the relationship has been developed and who the contacts have been to date. Additionally I outlined the discussion points/action items from this morning's meeting you held with Jennifer Medcalf and myself. Per your request the HP presentation complete with a listing of HP's business partners was e-mailed to you this morning. HP contacts to date: Bill Lovejoy Western Gulf Area Sales Manager Houston TX #(713)-439-5587 (Gerry Cashiola's boss) Gerry Cashiola sales representative Houston TX #(713)-439-5555 (To date HP person coordinating the relationship--seeking a short term play) Greg Pyle Solution Control Manager Southeast Region Austin TX (#(512)-257-5735 (Pyle has been playing the business developer role but continues to defer leadership of the process to Gerry Cashiola) Daniel Morgridge Manager of Internet - E-Services long term alliances Austin TX #(512)-257-5736 (Interested in E-services/wireless longer term alliances) Bill Dwyer Chief Architect e-Services Solutions Cupertino CA #(408)-447-5240 (To date clearly the most knowledgeable person on HP's business propositions strong technical financial background to craft value propositions. Gerry Cashiola and Greg Pyle deferred to his judgement in the 11/16th meeting) Matt On November 10th GSS Business Development took HP through a tour of Enron's trading floor the gas control center and the peaking power plant unit center on the trading floor. This tour was one meeting amongst several held in October and November to provide HP a full overview of Enron's products and services and introduce them to appropriate contacts at Enron (EBS GSS buy side -- Peter Goebel). On November 16th GSS Business Development Patrick Tucker and Dale Clark outlined 3 possible EBS/HP focus areas -- connectivity storage and wireless. Three EBS action items were defined in that meeting: 1) HP was to provide an HP contact on connectivity (to date Gerry Cashiola has stalled on providing this). Sarah-Joy will continue to pursue this information and get a sense from Gerry Cashiola of what he means by short term opportunity. What is HP's time horizon for short term? 2) EBS and GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call on Storage with Ravi to explore size and potential scope of opportunity (completed 12/8) 3) GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call with Peter Goebel GSS IT Sourcing Portfolio Leader (set for 12/14) In conversations with you Jennifer Medcalf and myself this morning several decisions on forward-looking strategy with HP/EBS were confirmed: Gerry Cashiola has been unable to take control of the process. More importantly despite numerous visits to Enron in which he has had overviews of Enron's products and services met with Peter Goebel and his team on the GSS buy side and participated in an Experience Enron tour Gerry has been unable to define an HP business proposition. The coordination between Cashiola (short term initiative) Morgridge (long term 12-24 months) has remained unorganized. These initiatives need to be developed separately. Clearly the conversations with HP need to be elevated to a more senior level so EBS can work with HP decision makers who can move the relationship forward at a strategic level. As the relationship is developed at this strategic level shorter term opportunities will crop up along the way. But Gerry's short term plans will not be the focus of the EBS/HP relationship rather a by-product. To facilitate this process of elevating the relationship Jennifer Medcalf and I are following up with Bill Lovejoy and Greg Pyle. Lovejoy's boss is Dan Sytsma VP of HP's America's Central Region. In the conference call Thursday 12/14 with Peter Goebel and HP regarding wireless initiatives Peter will support the GSS/BD push for the HP/EBS initiative by reiterating the following two points: a) Enron is already an HP customer the onus is on HP to move forward on the process of building a strategic relationship (IBM and Lexmark are only some of the HP competitors who could push them out of the running) b) HP's ability to bring the right people to the table will influence HP's business relationship process with Enron Patrick Tucker and Dale Clark could build their relationship with Bill Dwyer Chief Architect e-Services Solutions (met at the meeting 11/16) in the near term. Perhaps plan a visit to Cupertino California to see Dwyer in person. We look forward to continuing close collaboration with your team on this and other opportunities. Sarah-Joy Hunter Enron Corporation Global Strategic Sourcing - Business Development #(713)-345-6541 [/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 lyoho@enron.com 09/26/2000 09:03 AM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: job applicant Steve -- Yes I am interested in talking to him. Should I contact Eric? Thanks for passing this along. Lisa From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 09/24/2000 05:37 PM Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON To: Lisa Yoho/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: job applicant any interest? [/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: 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] [/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: 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: thx Jeanie Slone 12/19/2000 04:51 PM To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: confidential employee information-dutch quigley Dutch requested a meeting with me today and I gave him the scoop on the promotion. I will follow-up with him after our meeting the first week of Jan. He was ok with everything. let me know if you need anything else. ----------------- [/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: John Anderson PTC/NERC Brad Petzold Power Nav -- John Henry (202) 466-0547 [/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 put on my calendar and call to confirm my attendance. thanks ----------------- [/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 appreciate you pressing this issue. You should both be aware that Unocal(?) has been sued by the families of four employees who were shot in Pakistan a couple of years ago. Their claim is that the company did not provide adequate security and ignored official warnings of trouble in the region. To: Gabriel cc: David Frank Shawn Elaine Bill Donovan/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT Melinda Winkler@ECT Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Security Assessment Report Gabriel et al: Looks like the risks to Enron travelers to (and employees in) Colombia have increased. This is another indication that a 'travel policy' for travelers to Colombia should be in effect. What happened to the one we were discussing earlier? The steps outlined there would go a long way in improving the security of our travelers. Control Risks' report discusses responses to the media - be sure you have the approval of Enron's media people before making any response. The report also recommends suspending bidding on new projects - probably not viable advice but reinforces the importance that additional security measures be built into all new projects from day one. Now that our name is in front of the Colombian public we could see retaliation for various acts not all of which we have control over. Recent US Government actions such as extraditing criminals to the US for trial and training Colombian anti-drug troops have done little to endear American businesses to the Colombian public who see such actions as interfering with Colombia's right to govern themselves. These actions have significantly raised the risk of all American companies and their employees in Colombia. A meeting I had about two years ago with David Beddow of Control Risks in Bogota indicated that we could see some changes in the methods of attack in urban areas by FARC/ELN. With an elevated risk level we should begin thinking about these threats. FARC seldom uses the car bomb method of attack because it generates little interest among the domestic or international media. FARC plans on using letter bombs mailed to select targets i.e. head of an American-owned corporation who may have an office in Bogota. This method will generate headlines in the press and generate a fear of FARC among businessmen who may be targets. Control Risks' reported timetable for this change in FARC's tactics was to be three to five years but now that our risk is higher the timetable may well be moved up. On a related note - did you employ the security person we recommended? Please let me know how I can help you. Regards Mike Hicks Gabriel 12/05/99 08:15 PM To: David Frank Shawn cc: Michael Hicks@ECT Elaine Subject: Security Assessment Report FYI please find attached the Security Assessment Report carried out by Control Risk . Please let me have your feed back .GSS ----------------- [/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: meeting file ----------------- [/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: If you think this is worth pursuing get in touch with Christie. ----------------- [/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 our litigation meeting last Tuesday we learned that netting of spot purchases and sales is of paramount importance in limiting our exposure to refunds under the FERC's July 26 Order in both the California and Pacific Northwest proceedings. However in the California proceeding we are also afforded the opportunity in the Order to offset our receivables against any refund that would otherwise have to be paid by us. Also to the extent that our receivables exceed the refund amount the Order provides for payment of interest to us in accordance with CFR Section 35.19a. At present I am aware of the existence of three receivables. As you will recall I mentioned at Tuesday's meeting that we should be able to treat as a receivable for purposes of offset the revenues due us from the application of the CAISO underscheduling penalty. I communicated the possibility of offsetting this receivable against any potential refund at this mornings Western Wholesale conference call and subsequent research conducted by Alan Comnes indicates that the CAISO owes us $30MM as per the CAISO's own numbers. The CAISO also owes us approximately $40MM due to nonpayment for one to two months of business. These two figures alone totalling approximately $70MM exceed the estimate of our potential exposure in the California proceeding. Finally the negative CTC issue is another receivable due us by IOU's that under the plain language of the Order could potentially be used to offset any refund amount. I am not aware of the magnitude of this receivable but do understand that there are some sensitivities regarding this issue including concerns about revealing the amount of the credit due us. It is likely that the amount would become public if it is presented in the California proceeding. Please give us your thoughts as to the use of the CTC receivable to offset potential refunds in the California proceeding. [/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: http://www.vaionline.it/ [/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: The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee held an unusually long hearing today (9:30 am to 4:30 pm) on FERC's responses to the California situation and other related energy issues. The star witness was Gov. Davis. Others were Govs. Martz of Montana and Hoeven of North Dakota against price caps Sens. Murkowski Murray and Cantwell Washington State's attorney general Oregon's PUC chairman and the five FERC commissioners. Once Davis left after several hours of testimony and two rounds of questions most of the press and audience left. Enron was mentioned several times as follows: 1. Sen. Thompson the Ranking Republican mentioned Lockyer's Spike comments in the context of asking Gov. Davis about why business would make new investments in the state when on top of the regulatory uncertainty there is the broader political hostility expressed in this way by state officials. Davis had two chances to disavow Lockyer and did not. (Thompson gave him a second chance when he basically repeated the question and made specific reference again to Spike asking Davis if FERC acted this week because of the AG's Spike comments.) The first time Davis said that the people he represents are mad they want him to fight back this is rough business the industry people are used to a wildcatter's environment things occassionally get out of hand and we are not going to take it. On the second instance he said that the state was building new power plants and investment was not being diminished. 2. Sen. Bennett (R-UT) did an excellent job questioning Gov. Davis about his handling of the situation using quotes from California newspapers to make the case that Davis was slow to act. He also argued that the state had done a bad job as a power purchaser contrasting the state's recent 8-year contract with Constellation for power at $150 peak and $59 off-peak with Enron's willingness last year to sell them power for five years at $50. The Republicans also pressed Davis on why he attacks out-of-state generators but is not nearly as vocal about California munis who charged even more. Davis said they should make refunds too. 3. While not saying Enron by name Gov. Davis did make a comment about companies with trading floors that compete with the New York Stock Exchange with meteorologists and very talented people who might have the ability to find loopholes in the new order. He said this in answer to a question about what FERC needed to do now that the new order was issued and he said watch out for manipulation by those subject to the order. 4. Sen. Thompson pressed Washington State AG Gregoire about why she appeared to be investigating out-of-state suppliers even though they had a small percentage of the market in her state with lots of document requests and other investigative action while not doing the same to others. During that exchange either Thompson or the AG (I think it was the AG) said Enron had over $1 billion in sales to Washington State. Enron was not on the list of companies Thompson or the AG said were subject to her information demands. She said she would be expanding her inquiry though. Highlights and Analysis 1. As started at yesterday's Senate Energy hearing the mantra from the Western Democrats was: we want our money back. Chairman Lieberman and others pressed FERC about how California could get refunds and the same in other Western states particularly Oregon and Washington. Chairman Hebert said that the settlement conference process would allow all parties to raise all issues including refunds in California and outside California. He said that the conference could include issues that the commission could not act on itself including refunds not otherwise allowed under the Federal Power Act. Chairman Lieberman vowed to keep the committee active in overseeing FERC's activities in implementing the new order particularly as it relates to refunds. While he acknowledged that new legislation could not apply to pending cases he seemed inclined to pursue legislation to repeal the 60 day delay in the Federal Power Act relating to refunds. 2. Commissioner Wood spoke of the need to increase the penalities and enforcement tools available to the commission including the ability to order short suspensions of authority for regulated entities to transact business treble damages and other administrative penalties. There was also discussion among the committee and commissioners about beefing up FERC's market monitoring capabilities so that it acted more like the SEC FCC and FTC than it has in the past. 3. The Democrats on the committee and among the witnesses said that FERC's latest order is a step in the right direction. None of them called for legislative action on price caps as proposed by Sens. Feinstein and Smith. Sen. Murkowski had done a good job of taking the wind out of the legislated price cap sails by saying at the start of the hearing when he testified that the bill's sponsors had pulled back from swift action when they spoke at yesterday's hearing. Davis did say the still thinks that cost-based rates are better but he said the new order is some price relief and that it corrected the mistakes in the April order. 4. There was some discussion of natural gas again. Davis said that FERC should now turn its attention to natural gas. He said that El Paso controlled too much of the capacity until recently. He called on FERC to enforce laws against price manipulation. (Note: we have had several back channel reports that the Lieberman committee intends to look into the El Paso and Williams cases now at FERC about alleged affiliate issues.) 5. There was some discussion of the termination of the new FERC order. Lieberman pressed several witnesses about whether Sept. 2002 is too soon. Davis said it was and that they needed at least until the end of 2002 if not more time and that order should apply until California has enough new generation in place. Hebert did not back down when pressed by Lieberman later in the hearing saying there needs to be a deadline to get action on new supplies however he and the others basically said they would revisit the issue if events warrant. 6. Several times Sen. Lieberman and others said they generally support deregulation but that the effort to get more states to do so will never happen if the price situation is not brought under control and public confidence restored. 7. Gov. Davis did throw a few kind words toward Pres. Bush and Pat Wood saying that each was open to doing more about the high cost of natural gas to California including the possible reimposition of rate regulation of transportation to California. He said he liked Pat Wood and he noted that FERC did not take serious price mitigation action until the two new Bush appointees were on the commission. 8. Lieberman asked the Washington State AG whether the Justice Dept. or the FTC were doing anything to address high energy prices. She said not to her knowledge even though she has asked them to do so. We can expect a Lieberman et al request for Justice and FTC involvement going forward I suspect. 9. While Chairman Lieberman's tone and closing comments were in the nature of his normal thoughtful tone it is clear that he and others see this as a major issue for them to ride. He commended FERC at the end of the hearing for doing their best but pledged he would stay involved closing the session with a smile and the words see you soon. [/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: Dear Jeff There aren't any corporate speak words that can express what I feel so I will use plain English: I am thrilled that I will be working for you at Enron. I look forward to helping you and your team continue to transform Enron into the number one company in the world and into the best company in the world. I have sent my bio to Steve Kean and will send him my list of my preferred California contacts. By mid-week I will send you a cleaned-up version of the suggestions I outlined in our meeting. I look forward to the next steps. It is an honor to be working with you again. I pledge to you my very best. Sincerely [IMAGE] Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles CA 90021 - image001.png - image002.gif [/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: See below. this is one of the issues that concerned us more than price caps because it could limit our ability to move power to other markets in the west. In addition if you get questions from the analysts on reregulation or price caps it is worth pointing out that the high prices prevailing in many markets help our retail sales pitch to end use customers and create opportunities for our wholesale price risk management services . . . even a $250 price cap is 5-10 times what large customers are accustomed to paying. ----------------- [/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 know we are holding for a later filing but I have attached further comments anyway. The document is still too rough to send out. We need to take the opportunity as soon as possible to get a hard hitting thoroughly researched and carefully written document in front of the Commissioners. California's reaction to the Judge's recommendation is likely to give FERC (especially the new commissioners) a feel for how irrational the California politicians can be. We will have a limited opportunity to take advantage of that realization. We need to hit it hard in the pleading our conversations at the Commission the Hill and the media. Linda Robertson 07/09/2001 09:58 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON Robert Frank/NA/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT Let me emphasize that these comments are to be filed COB TODAY. James D Steffes 07/09/2001 10:50 AM To: Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT HERE IS THE MOST RECENT STATEMENT WITH STEVE'S COMMENTS. Jim [/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: 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: While I appreciate the virtue of flying below the radar if possible the matter here is complicated by the fact that FERC's discovery rules (18 CFR Subpart D) pertain only to proceedings set for hearing . . . and to such proceedings as the Commission may order. 18 CFR 385.401. In this case FERC stated that a trial-type hearing is not necessary . . . . and specifically rejected the use of a trial-type evidentiary hearing. Slip op. at 47-48 & n.97. Thus while I have not researched the matter as yet my preliminary view is that the CPUC's attempt to invoke FERC's discovery processes would appear to be outside the contemplation of FERC's Nov. 1 order and its regulations unless FERC specifically orders discovery in this case. (The CPUC seems to recognize the relevance of this consideration when it specifically attempts to equate paper hearings with trial-type hearings see page 1 of its Motion.) The CPUC's motion may prompt FERC to decide whether or not to allow discovery in this case under Rule 401. While the CPUC's motion does not apply directly to marketers FERC's ruling will be precedent in the event the CPUC or someone else hereafter serves discovery on other parties. As a result we need to consider whether laying in the weeds risks losing an opportunity to present our views on whether FERC should allow discovery in a paper hearing with an expedited decisional track particularly in light of the fact that Staff has already conducted. >>> Jeffrey Watkiss 11/08/00 10:31AM >>> Does anyone have an idea as to why marketers including EPMI are not included in the list of subject companies: Exh. B? Since EPMI is not a subject of the motion why should it answer? Lying in the weeds may be a more prudent course of action. >>> Fergus Gary S. <GFergus@brobeck.com> 11/07/00 10:08PM >>> I just spoke with Mary to make sure we have the same information. Here are the facts we have so far. On November 4th the CPUC filed a motion with FERC to adopt the form of protective order that the CPUC entered to compel the production of documents and to shorten time to answer. According to Exhibit B (read to me by Nancy Pickover at Bracewell) the following CPUC moved against the following entities: AES Williams Duke Dynegy Reliant and Southern. Enron entities were NOT named in exhibit B. This is not to say that we could not be easily added to the group. While the motion reads as if the CPUC was moving against everybody in fact in footnote 2 they state they are only moving against the entities named in Exhibit B. We will have Exhibit B in hand first thing tomorrow via FEDEX to confirm this. To repeat Enron is not named yet. Thanks Gary [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])	<s>[INST] [/INST] Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics]) </s>