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: Looks good. Peggy Mahoney 07/24/2000 06:20 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Karen S Owens@ees@EES Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Dave S Laipple/DUB/EES@EES James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Rich Products Please review the attached draft news release about our agreement with Rich Products and let me know if you have any comments by 5pm Tuesday July 25. We are scheduled to release on Wednesday July 26. If you have any questions please call me at x57034. Rich Products is a major US food manufacturer headquartered in Buffalo NY. The company ranked #122 in Forbes Private 500 and has sales around $1.5 billion. Rich Products is owned and operated by the founding Rich family. Products manufactured include frozen meats bakery products and non-dairy creamers. [/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: Don't know how I got on the list but just got my invitation to the Western Conference of PUCs meeting June 3-6 where the guest speakers are Frank Wolak and Gary Locke. Oh dear.... Best Jeff [/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: My comments are attached. I think the pleading is well written but as you'll see from my comments I believe we should be incorporating more of the arguments from the previous pleading. Ray Alvarez 07/09/2001 07:14 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: Comments on Judge Wagner's Proposed Recommendation As you may be aware the Chief Judge informed the parties to the settlement proceeding this afternoon that he intends to recommend to the Commission that it employ the June 19 rate methodology for the refund period from October 2 forward. Attached are draft comments that Sarah Novosel and I propose to submit to the Judge and his legal staff tomorrow. While we would like to convince the Judge that the June 19 methodology is not appropriate we also provide a fallback approach. Please review the comments (they are only 4 pages) and send your comments to us. We plan to submit the comments tomorrow. Thanks Ray and Sarah [/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 assume we avoid Libya completely. The question though may be how we proceed if we are doing business with someone who has activities in Libya. Your views please. [/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: Helyette Thanks for your message. I am in London right now and I shall attend the RISK conference this week. Stinson Gibner left Enron and I have another person in charge of software. I hope to close the loop in the next few days. 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: Confirming 1:00 p.m. meeting on June 12 at the Venetian Resort in Las Vegas. Thanks Joannie Williamson 713-345-7774 Kevin Scott on 04/25/2001 04:46:18 PM Please respond to To: Jeff Skilling <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: Sherri Sera <sherri.sera@enron.com> Subject: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott ? ? ? ? ? April 25 2001 ? ? ? Dear Jeff ? Thank you for setting aside time to meet with me.? I have attached my resume to help bring you up to date on my career.? ? As you will see I have been providing advisory services since 1995.?? During these years I have done some of my best work.? I am proud of the service that I have rendered as an independent consultant.? ? Now I feel it is time to move to a new chapter in my career.? I look forward to sitting down with you to think through ways to apply my experience intellect and energies to new professional challenges.? I respect you tremendously and wherever the next part of my career may lie I know that my search and choice will benefit significantly from your perspective. ? Finally I am attaching the recommendation to HBS that you wrote in 1981.? I found it during a profoundly challenging period in my life.? Your historic words of support helped me keep fighting and successfully moving forward. ? If you would like to reach me before our meeting please call (213) 926-2626 or email Thank you again. ? Sincerely ? [IMAGE] ? Kevin ? ? Attachments (2) - image001.png - image002.gif - Resume of Kevin Scott.doc - Skilling HBS Recommendation.doc [/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: Sam We can use a piece written by Rakesh on liquidity. I shall ask him to send it to you. Vince [/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: Looks fine to me. Maureen - please keep on file From: Billy Lemmons/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/13/2001 07:08 AM To: Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Ted C Bland/ENRON@enronXgate Teresa Bosien/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: DRAFT - PRC Follow Up Memo Stan and Steve Below is a short email that I suggest we send as a follow up to each PRC meeting. Please adjust as you feel appropriate and I'll ask Terry Bosien to provide your assistant with a list of attendees after each meeting for distribution. I'm traveling today but will be back in the office Thursday. If you'd like to discuss my asst Maxine (x33499) knows how to reach me or you can contact Ted or Terry. Regards Billy ___________________ Thank you for participating in the [EES] Analyst & Associate PRC meeting [last Friday]. The Western Hemisphere final PRC meeting for Analysts & Associates is set for July 18. The purpose of this meeting will be to review the collective ranking distributions and to discuss the performance of individuals in categories 1 and 5. A subset of those who participated in [Friday's] meeting will be selected to participate on July 18. After the July 18 meeting you will receive the ok to provide feedback to those you represented. If you are not the direct supervisor of those you represented it is critically important that you work with the supervisor to insure consistent and clear feedback and ownership of the ranking results. If you have any questions please feel free to contact Terry Bosien (x35230). Thank you again for your contributions to this important process. [/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: ----------------- [/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: Empty message(due to missing attachment)
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message(due to missing attachment) </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 is the draft testimony of Scott Jones. Comments should be received no later than 3:00 PM EST on Sunday August 26. All comments and suggestions need to be in writing and can be faxed (not E-mailed) to Dan Watkiss at 202-857-2131. Also if your suggestion is a proposed addition please write out the exact language you would propose we incorporate into the testimony and where you would place the addition. Donald A. Kaplan Esq. Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds LLP Suite 500 1735 New York Avenue N.W. Washington D.C. 20006 Ph: (202) 662-8466 Fax: (202) 331-1024 donk@prestongates.com (See attached file: TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-6.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-3.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-4.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-5.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-2.doc) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email message is intended solely for the individual or individuals named above. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and/or attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient you are requested not to read copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify the sender by return email or by telephone. Thank you. <<TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc>> <<Exhibit STJ-6.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-3.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-4.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-5.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-2.doc>> - TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc - Exhibit STJ-6.xls - Exhibit STJ-3.xls - Exhibit STJ-4.xls - Exhibit STJ-5.xls - Exhibit STJ-2.doc [/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: Moved to 11:00 per Larry Trybus Please address issues in 889 OASIS in addition to deregulation material You will have an hour to speak [/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: Shirley Please send me my SAP #. I need it to approve the expense report. 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: I think I confirmed for this already but could you check and put on my calendar and put this in the 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: fyi [/INST] Category: Empty message(due to missing attachment)
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message(due to missing attachment) </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 letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility an= d then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why t= hat makes sense? Specifically the New Jersey restructuring law like most= efforts of its kind in other markets is designed to separate the competit= ive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic reg= ulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the = business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relie= d upon to regulate the behavior of monopoly asset owners such as distrib= ution utilities. Therefore regulators continue to be called upon to set p= ricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a = great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for = lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign c= ontributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policie= s simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. = The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relativ= ely low barriers to entry multiple competitors etc.). These components of= the power and gas business can be regulated by the market with respect t= o rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any = more than grocery stores department stores appliance sellers or other re= tailers (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Com= petition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices a= nd terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of = service for such sellers there is no reason to be concerned about campaign= contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed the legislation and the = legislative history clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer I certainly understand the value of pleading= in the alternative. But I question how certain of our arguments woud be = perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents h= ave a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's clai= m of ignorance or mistake or the fact that we pled for the favorable exer= cise of prosecutorial discretion. I suggest that we add whatever we feel= is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument not make specific = reference to ignorance or mistake and not plead for the favorable esxerc= ise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item perhaps we co= uld suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a = claim under such circumstances. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])
<s>[INST] [/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: Jody Thanks. Confirmed 8:30 Thu. Vince [/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: yes -- just make sure the working group leaders know. Maureen McVicker 12/30/99 02:56 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Additions to Working Groups SK - STILL OK TO KEEP ADDING PEOPLE? mm ----------------- [/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: Reed -- USAir 1062 arr. 10:02 Anthony Duenner -- 6235 Mark Muller Darrel Dunson -- 602-492-8570 Distribution list labels & copying Craig Goodman (Equitible Re 202333-0311(h) [/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: Yes thanks. Lay is going to be giving the keynote. It may be a hard story to assemble: the gas market is deregulated and structured pretty much the way we would like to see it done in both gas and power markets yet we still have high prices. It's a bit of a stretch to blame it all on OPEC. I'm interested in any views you may have. David Haug@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/01/2000 10:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: The Governors' Natural Gas Summit: Responding to the Challenge I assume you are involved in this but just in case... - - -DLH ----------------- [/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'm envious. See you when you get back From: Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/15/2001 08:21 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Kissinger We're going to be two ships passing here. I leave town on Friday and return to the office on Wednesday morning. How about I give you a call when I get back. I am only in a few days and then I am heading to DC for my son's college graduation exercises. ( I know exactly what you are thinking - Lordy she's old!!) Talk to you then okay? Rebecca [/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: ----------------- [/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 genuinely believed in Enron and the Values of the company You demonstrated that that trust was misplaced and worth nothing I particularly like your adherance to the core values - you respected us you communicated brilliantly with us your fucking us over was excellent your integrity was without question You load of bastards - you screwed us all and got fat on the profits of our sweat I hope that the board and upper management rot in jail and never see the light of day again - apart from when you are exercising in the open prison yard in your shackles Just Another Fucked Over Ex-Employee Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at [/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: calendar. Also I would like you to set up a meeting with me Cindy Olson Beth Tilney Kelly Kimberly Mark koenig Rick Causey and Rick Buy. I was thinking the easiest way to get us all together would be to get a room at a restaurant for 6 or 6:30 some evening. I have contacted Beth and Cindy already so they know what it is about and I will leave messages for the others. I just need to check schedules for now. Also I think it would be a good idea to have a get together after work once a month or so for the Public Affairs organization. Nothing fancy . . . Cadillac Bar or something similar. . . spouses and significant others invited. Talk it over with a couple of people in the group and let me know what you come up with. ----------------- [/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: Thanks. I was glad to do it and would do it again... next time my computer will work. I benefitted a great deal from what I heard from the group especially regarding the PRC. Roger Sumlin 03/23/2001 09:34 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Gary P Smith/OTS/Enron@ENRON Wilson Barbee/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON Brian Schaffer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Ann Vaughn/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON Fran Fagan/OTS/Enron@ENRON Subject: Presentation at ETS HR Employee Meeting Steve . . . FYI -- we conducted a post-event survey on opinions about the HR employee meeting held last month and the HR management team thought you should know that participants rated your presentation very high. When asked what should be kept the same next time participants commented as follows about your presentation: I think a presentation from Corporate HR is of great value. Keep the presentations by the officers . . . to talk about the business. I liked having other people from ETS/Enron there to better understand the big picture and where Enron is going. Continue to bring in invited guests to keep the group apprised of Corporate activities. I liked the opportunity to hear both Stan and Steve--the field staff don't get as many opportunities to hear from corporate management. Visits by Steve Kean and Stan Horton. Their perspectives are very good . . . Clearly your participation provided much value to the group and we appreciate very much your taking the time to come meet with us and share information. You should expect that we'll be asking you to come back again! Regards - Roger [/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: Article II of the NONCOMPETITION AGREEMENT entered in connection with the sale of HPL to AEP (which closed as of June 12001) provides: ENA [for 3 months post-close] will not solicit negotiate or enter into any contract agreement or arrangement for the purchase of natural gas on the HPL Pipeline from any Person which is a supplier or producer of natural gas connected to the HPL Facilities provided however nothing herein shall be construed or interpreted as prohibiting ENA from entering into any such contract agreement or arrangement which is less than one month in duration and involves or is related to an Enron Online transaction. This is not the most clearly drafted provision as it was the subject of much negotiation....and was significantly narrowed from the original scope proposed by AEP. Thus please consult with me prior to entering into any solicitation agreement or arrangement which might arguably be covered by our limited covenant not to compete on the supply side for 3 months. There are many aspects of the post-close transition which will require cooperation between Enron and AEP/HPL and thus it behoves us to carefully weigh the risks and rewards of stepping too close to or over the line. Furtheralthough a technical reading of the non-competition agreement only applies to ENA no ENA UPSTREAM deals which would violate this covenant if there were to be done as ENA should be done without clearance from Brian Redmond and me. Please communicate this restriction to those who report to you and have need to be aware of this limited restriction. Sincerely BNG Dan J Hyvl 06/07/2001 04:59 PM To: Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Barbara This appears to be supply deal for deliveries at Katy that would be subject to the 90 day non-compete. Sandi is in the process of getting me a copy of the non-compete so that I can determine if this deal is covered. Do you have any thoughts. [/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: John Stauffacher? [/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: Drop the first comma in the first sentence of the third paragraph. Otherwise good to go. Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate Sent by: Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate 03/16/2001 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES Barbara Keith Dodson/NA/Enron@ENRON Brian Stanley/EU/Enron@ENRON Subject: DEnron Engineering and Operational Services - DRAFT Announcement Please find attached draft announcement for your review and comment. I would like to release this on Monday (March 19th). Thanks Mark [/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: OK From: Jo Ann Hill/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Kathryn Schultea/ENRON@enronXgate Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Request for PR2 Access Steve -- For your approval. As some additional information regarding the request Kathy Diane Taylor and I met with Deana Taylor this afternoon to understand what each person's role was and the specific access needed. For the interim we are recommending that the HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP and View Payroll and Time ENTP role be granted to each of the individuals listed below. Until January 1 this function was performed in the Payroll Department and at that time was transitioned to Karen and Deana's group. The people listed below actually transferred from the Payroll Department. For the long term we are going to look at creating a specific role for this group that would let them access only those data elements needed. I've spoken with Mary Joyce by phone and she has approved so I am requesting your approval as well. These people have basically been prevented from being able to reconcile any of the net pay accounts etc. for the past week. Please let me know if you will approve or if you need any additional information. Thanks. Jo Ann [/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: see below. Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday July 4 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N186091.DTL=20 Officials in California and Nevada after months of lobbying for federal=20 regulators to cap Western power prices warned yesterday that the newly=20 imposed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat o= f=20 blackouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling=20 blackouts yesterday afternoon and one day after the first-ever rolling=20 blackouts in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains a= nd=20 reduce air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a=20 closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revisio= ns=20 that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during=20 shortages.=20 We need some clarity to this order said Oscar Hidalgo a spokesman for t= he=20 California Department of Water Resources which is spending billions of=20 dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 Generators need to be held accountable he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages yet= =20 power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es=20 during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the=20 expense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that=20 electricity must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps said= =20 Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum an=20 energy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no=20 economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price control= s=20 are in effect.=20 This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t=20 having enough Ackerman said. It increases the threat of blackouts.=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when= =20 power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert=20 about an hour later after finding additional supplies.=20 Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts said Stephanie McCorkle = a=20 spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator which oversees= =20 the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= =20 Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time prompting= =20 heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their=20 lights.=20 Don Soderberg chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission said tha= t=20 the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that they= =20 are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had in= =20 exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 We're looking very closely at this he said. There seems to be a potenti= al=20 for unintended consequences.=20 Specifically Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older less= -=20 efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking if not vanishing= =20 under capped prices.=20 We're going to see how the caps might have played into this he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states excluding California is about $9= 2=20 per megawatt hour. In California a 10 percent surcharge is added because o= f=20 the state's credit risk bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve=20 extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials however said that they still have faith= =20 that price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federa= l=20 regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot=20 withhold output.=20 The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan)= =20 said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= =20 that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months federal=20 regulators refused to impose price controls preferring instead to let supp= ly=20 and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k=20 on output Monday California officials immediately dialed the hot line numb= er=20 provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emergencies= .=20 No one answered he said. They were closed.=20 State officials tried again yesterday and this time were told that the=20 commission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for= =20 when the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Out-of-state generators pull plug over uncertainty on price controls By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published July 3 2001)=20 Confused by the federal government's new controls on electricity prices=20 generators withheld so much power from California on Monday that the state= =20 was nearly plunged into rolling blackouts state officials said.=20 The confusion began when the state's electric grid operators declared a Sta= ge=20 1 power alert in the early afternoon triggering the price caps for the fir= st=20 time since they went into effect June 21.=20 Out-of-state generators pulled about 1500 megawatts of electricity off the= =20 table at midafternoon enough to power about 1.1 million homes because of= =20 uncertainty about how much they could charge under the new Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission pricing system said Oscar Hidalgo spokesperson for= =20 the state Department of Water Resources. The department buys electricity fo= r=20 the state's financially distressed utilities.=20 They didn't understand what they were going to be paid there was confusio= n=20 over the FERC order Hidalgo said. We saw 1500 megawatts disappear.=20 The problem was exacerbated by a heat wave across the West which forced=20 California to compete with other states for scarce electricity he said.=20 Rolling blackouts hit southern Nevada.=20 Most California officials credit the FERC system which is based on a=20 variable price cap with reining in what had been a runaway wholesale power= =20 market. But power generators have complained that the price caps by limiti= ng=20 profits could discourage the production of critically needed electricity.= =20 And as Monday's episode suggested even the uncertainty about where the cap= =20 will fall could lead to unexpected shortages.=20 That's the risk that you run (with price controls) said Arthur O'Donnell= =20 editor of the newsletter California Energy Markets. People want any kind o= f=20 certainty at all.=20 Hidalgo said the state avoided blackouts only because of last-minute import= s=20 from the Bonne=0F'ville Power Administration the federal agency that marke= ts=20 government-produced hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest. The state= =20 went into a Stage 2 power alert the next-to-last level before blackouts ar= e=20 ordered. The alert was canceled in late afternoon.=20 The blackouts would have been the first in California since May 8.=20 FERC imposed a round-the-clock ceiling on power throughout the West. The=20 price fluctuates and is tied to the production costs of the least-efficient= =20 plant operating in California during a power alert declared by the=20 Independent System Operator which runs the state's power-transmission grid= .=20 When there's no alert prices can't exceed 85 percent of the cap that was= =20 established during the latest alert.=20 Until Monday the maximum price held steady at about $101 a megawatt-hour i= n=20 California. But when the ISO declared a Stage 1 power alert in early=20 afternoon signifying that reserve supplies had dwindled to less than 7=20 percent of demand confusion set in Hidalgo and others said.=20 Because of a steep drop in the price of natural gas which fuels many=20 California power plants suppliers knew the cap would fall. But no one knew= =20 by how much until the price was posted by the ISO.=20 The ceiling for California fell to about $77 at 3 p.m. but was back up to $= 98=20 in two hours according to the ISO. Those prices include the 10 percent=20 premium that sellers can charge California because FERC said there's a cred= it=20 risk in selling to the state.=20 O'Donnell said it's likely suppliers will pull back from the market every= =20 time the ISO declares a power alert.=20 In-state generators have to operate their plants if summoned by the ISO. Bu= t=20 out-of-state suppliers can withhold supplies and on Monday it was the=20 out-of-staters that were pulling back Hidalgo said.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Power Sales Halted by New Pricing Curbs=20 Electricity: Confused suppliers unsure what they will be paid refuse to= =20 sell to state which asks FERC for a ruling but doesn't get it.=20 By NANCY VOGEL Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Confusion over new federal price restrictions prompted=20 several electricity sellers to back away from sales to California on Monday= =20 afternoon pushing the state closer to blackouts energy officials said. ?????The state lost sales that would have provided enough electricity to=20 supply more than 1 million homes said Ray Hart deputy director of the=20 California Department of Water Resources which has been buying much of the= =20 state's electricity since January. ?????At least five companies producing or marketing power are telling us= =20 that since they don't know what they're going to get paid they're not goin= g=20 to take the risk and so they're not going to sell the energy Hart said. ?????The electricity sales fell through after power consumption soared in= =20 summer heat and grid operators were forced to declare a Stage 1 emergency= =20 meaning reserves had dipped below 7%. It was the first such emergency since= =20 May 31. ?????Under a June 19 order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission=20 intended to bring down wholesale electricity markets across the West a pow= er=20 emergency in California triggers the setting of a new price limit that=20 applies to power plant owners from Washington to Arizona.=20 ?????The new price is supposed to be based upon whatever it costs to run th= e=20 most inefficient expensive power plant selling electricity to California= =20 grid operators during the first full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. ?????But much uncertainty remains about exactly how and when the new price = is=20 supposed to be established under the commission's order and that apparentl= y=20 drove away sellers Hart said. ?????Shortly after the state issued the Stage 1 alert at 1:30 p.m. putting= =20 the old price limit of $90 per megawatt-hour in question companies that ha= d=20 committed to provide the state electricity hour by hour Monday afternoon=20 backed out Hart said. The companies include TransAlta Energy Marketing of= =20 Oregon Constellation Power of Baltimore and Sempra Energy Trading a unit = of=20 the San Diego-based energy conglomerate. ?????Forced to dip even deeper into the state's power reserves and declare = a=20 Stage 2 emergency water agency officials called the federal energy=20 commission's hotline for clarification about what the new price should be a= nd=20 when it should take effect. They got no answer. ?????Hart said commission officials reached at home promised to try to=20 clarify their order today. One outstanding question is what obligations pow= er=20 suppliers have to deliver electricity to California in an emergency. ?????Both buyers and sellers in the market agree that the new price when i= t=20 is set will probably be lower than $90 per megawatt-hour because the price= =20 of natural gas the main fuel in California power plants has dropped latel= y. ?????Temperatures soared several degrees higher Monday than grid operators= =20 had anticipated. But they said they expected to avoid rolling blackouts in= =20 part because the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland Ore. had=20 agreed to provide several hundred megawatts of Pacific Northwest hydropower= =20 each hour in exchange for a return of electricity from California later thi= s=20 summer. ?????Bonneville is giving us emergency power to get us through Hart said= .=20 Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron= =20 Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON=20 dwatkiss@bracepatt.com=20 Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Proces= s The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to= =20 Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain= =20 confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as= =20 Monday am. 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: Molly Thanks. I am in London this week but I can pick up my messages from here. 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: help is on the way. We are going to establish some senior executive oversight as well as an executive director (probably someone who came through the program). Charlene is going to be moving into a commercial role (which was the original plan when she was brought into the organization). I'd be happy to talk to you in more detail when I get back to Houston. Jeffrey A Shankman@ECT 02/26/2001 10:21 AM To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Hi guys. I wanted to let you know that I am extremely concerned about the Associate/Analyst program so much so that I feel all the work I have done and all the time I have spent on the program has had little impact outside Wharton/Penn recruiting. In fact we won't get more than 1 associate from Wharton this year for a variety of internal and external reasons. This program has brought incredible talent into the organization but we have lost a lot of momentum over the last two years. In as much as I would like to continue to support the program I can't in its current form and don't have time to fix what I thought we had been addressing. The entire program is disfunctional and the commercial teams are not lending support to the program. I'd be very happy to spend a few minutes of your time (rather than blather on in an email) to give you both my overview of the program and suggest changes and improvements. You know you have my support but the current state of affairs down there has gotten me to my rope's end with the program. [/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: Michael It looks like we have sponsorship. Jeff Dasovich at Enron (GSPP ~'90) thinks he can get commitments from his company and others. He's excited about the idea. Severin Borenstein of Haas and UCEI and Frank Wolak at Stanford are very interested. When you return from vacation could we have a conference call with you me Jeff and whoever at the school might be involved to proceed with the plan? We were thinking perhaps a one day session in October with dinner the evening prior with a few panels featuring widely varying points of view. We'll need to figure out how to get press attention among other things if/when we talk. Enjoy your vacation. Thanks. Rob > [/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 is the spreadsheet for the Houston Commercial Admins. Those in white are slated to recieve offers first. Those in red will only recieve offers if someone on the primary list declines. Please make sure you and the other desk heads are comfortable with the list as it is. I will be at the Houstonian today but Amy Fitzpatrick will be here and can assist you if you need to have a meeting to discuss. Thanks. [/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: ----------------- [/INST] Category: Empty message(due to missing attachment)
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message(due to missing attachment) </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: 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 - I haven't heard of these guys. Do you know them? ----------------- [/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: David i agree in principle with this process. I assume that you and your team will implement. Like we spoke about I do not see a need to widely distribute this through the commercial organization. I would just implement. Regards Delainey ----------------- [/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: Do we have someone who works for us now who was at Transredes when the government owned it and could help us do a comparison between our respective environmental records? It seems to me that even though we are having our share of problems we have probably had fewer problems than the government did and have probably been more responsive and thorough in our clean up efforts. Obviously we would need to be judicious about how we used such information (we don't want to aggravate the government) but having such an analysis may be helpful in showing the progress made and in discouraging overly punitive action by the government. What do you think? [/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: A memo is coming out shortly. From: Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/30/2001 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Analyst PRC Where can I go to find out what is required of me for the upcoming Analyst PRC? Rod Hayslett EB4054 713-853-6178 [/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 good idea. We may want to think about CNBC as well. Brandon -- any technical obstacles? Margaret/Cindy -- how does the link work? does it go straight to the clip or do users have to navigate within CNN's site? ----------------- [/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: mo - calendar Rob - fyi upcoming speech ----------------- [/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: Date: 4/20/01 To: Jan Smutny-Jones Steven Kelly Katie Kaplan Cc: IEP Board of Directors From: Julee Malinowski-Ball Edson + Modisette RE: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20 RECENT EVENTS: -- IEP with the help of Chris Ellison has been at the negotiating table mos= t of the week dealing with the most recent amendments to SB 28x. SB 28x (Sher/Battin) makes various changes to the siting process including many IEP-sponsored proposals. As you will recall two new provisions were added to the bill at the last minute before going to the Assembly Floor dealing with both retrofit schedules and environmental dispatch of generating facilities. Per the direction from IEP member companies IEP has decided not to negotiate on the environmental dispatch issue. If the provision remained in the bill IEP would continue to push the Republicans to hold their opposed position. We were however given the authority to negotiate on the retrofit issue as long as we were only talking about facilities that already have retrofit requirements. I will be faxing out the agreed upon language which in essence says the ARB shall set a schedule for the completion of any mandated retrofits. It does not expand the authority of the air districts and ARB to mandate retrofits under existing law. The schedule would require completion of the retrofits by July 1 2004 or such later date as the ISO determines is necessary to maintain reliability. With these amendments including some clean-up language SB 28x will be voted-on on the Assembly floor on Monday and go to the Senate for concurrence on Tuesday. The final version will include the following IEP-sponsored proposals: ? Conforming the timing of offsets for power plants to Clean Air Act requirements ? Substituting CEQA-style hearings for the trial-like proceedings of the CE= C ? Streamlining the permit process for the modernization of existing power plant sites ? Giving consideration to the positive environmental impacts of a proposed project. ? Improving the timeliness and coordination of state and local agency review. ? Extending the current deadlines for the expedited review process established in AB 970. Since SB 28x is only a first step in making changes to the siting process IEP member should now be thinking about what is next. IEP proposals still on the table include: ? Permitting local agencies to make zoning changes or other decisions for power plants contingent upon CEC CEQA Compliance ? Giving deference to other state and regional agencies ? Easing the threshold for override of local land use requirements. ? Making the ISO responsible for determining interconnection requirements -- Bad news on the =01&California First=018 issue quickly followed the good= news. The CEC staff analysis which said the State can't require builders of new power plants to sell electricity here even as a trade-off for expedited permitting was countered by another staff analysis that says the state can= . Both documents cannot be obtained due to attorney-client privilege. This issue is coming to a head next week with a decision pending by the CEC to include a California First clause on the approval of an expedited AES power plant project. AB 60x (Hertzberg) which ties to the siting process the requirement that a developer enter into a contract to sell power to specified California entities is still poised to be heard in the Senate Energy committee. IEP members company lobbyist should continue to lobby against this measure regardless of the CEC=01s decision on AES although our arguments are definitely strengthened if the addition of the clause at the CEC is denied. -- IEP has finalized negotiations with Senator Burton=01s office on amendm= ents attempting to solve our problem with the eminent domain provision in SB 6x (Burton) which is the State Power Authority measure. Attached is a copy o= f the bill in PDF form. The agreed upon language which clarifies that the Authority=01s purpose is to supplement existing generation activities can= be found on pages 6-7 (Section 3310) 13 (Section 3341.1) and 16-17 (Section3352). Considering the inflammatory remarks made by Senator Burton in the press lately regarding seizing generation assets this was most likely the best we could get. -- The first of Senator Dunn=01s hearings with the Senate Select Committee= to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market occurred this week. This week and next week=01s topics will be to go over previous investigati= ons into market power. The committee heard or will be hearing testimony from: Frank Wolak Chairman Market Surveillance Committee CAISO Eric Hildebrandt Manager Market Monitoring CAISO and Elaine Howle State Auditor. -- The Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee met this week and focused on the issue of natural gas collusion. Testifying before the committee were representatives from Dynegy and El Paso commenting on the rise of natural gas prices and whether illegal market manipulation and collusion occurred. The subcommittee plans on putting together a package o= f bills related to natural gas issues which would be the culmination of the committee=01s hearings over the last two months. This package will be up = for consideration first by the whole special Assembly Energy committee. -- Governor Davis came out this week supporting the construction of the Calpine Metcalf Energy Center the 600-megawatt power plant proposed for th= e San Jose region. The Governor urged the CEC to approve the plant siting so that construction can begin. -- Two long-term contracting bills are scheduled for hearings next week. IEP counsel is currently reviewing AB 57 (Wright) and SB 997 (Morrow) and will comment on their provisions as soon as possible. -- Attached is the most recent legislative tracking reports both the special session and regular session. Please let me know if you need copies of any of these bills. UPCOMING EVENTS: MONDAY April 23rd Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee AB 57 (Wright) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review TUESDAY April 24th Senate Energy Committee SB 997 (Morrow) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review WEDNESDAY April 25th Assembly Appropriations Committee AB 62x (Cohn) =01) California First AB 63x (Florez) =01) Sale of Kern Power Plant THURSDAY April 26th Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market Informational hearing on the overview of investigations studies and reports regarding the energy crisis. MONDAY April 30th Senate Appropriations Committee SB 1x (Soto) =01) excess profits tax Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee AB 128x (Corbett) =01) excess profits tax ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR SB 6x (Burton) =01) State Power Authority SB 28x (Sher/Battin) =01) siting --end-- Julee Malinowski-Ball Senior Associate Edson + Modisette 916-552-7070 FAX-552-7075 jmball@ns.net - 2001 Tracking Report.doc - 2001 Tracking Report.special session.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: Please go ahead with preparation of the talking points. I'll give Ken a heads up. ----------------- [/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 add Dave Delainey John Lavorato and Louise Kitchens to updates with significant news like this one (they may already get them ... I didn't read through all the names). Susan J Mara 07/03/2001 12:35 PM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Don Black/HOU/EES@EES Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT mpalmer@enron.com Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES skean@enron.com Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT Robert C dwatkiss@bracepatt.com rcarroll@bracepatt.com Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON gfergus@brobeck.com Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Ren Lazure/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Michael Tribolet/Corp/Enron@Enron Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT jklauber@llgm.com Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Dirk vanUlden/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron Robert Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT psmith3@enron.com mjackso7@enron.com Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron Mark Fillinger/SF/ECT@ECT Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES wgang@enron.com Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON David Leboe/Enron@EnronXGate Jay Zoellner/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Fatimata Liamidi/HOU/EES@EES Sonia Perez/HOU/EES@EES Chris Holmes/HOU/EES@EES Venkatesh Mani/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Richard Crevelt/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT Malcolm Adkins/HOU/EES@EES Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES Chris Stokley/ENRON@enronXgate Steve C Hall/ENRON@enronXgate Tracy Ngo/Enron@EnronXGate triley@enron.com cc: Subject: CPUC Postpones action on Direct Access Until Mid-August The vote to suspend direct access has been postponed. This is a positive sign that the legislature is making progress on a comprehensive solution. 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: Thanks for the message. It's good to hear from you again. We have already hired Racicot (who now works for Bracewell and Patterson) but I'm not sure that our arrangement would include what you may need so I'm copying Linda Robertson in our DC office. Also I'll copy Jim Derrick so he knows we might expand our relationship there. Linda and Joe - thoughts on BPA and EOL? Pamela Lesh/ENRON@enronxgate 03/05/2001 04:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Several matters Hi Steve! Long time no talk. I hope you are well - I KNOW you are busy! I just have a couple of matters for your attention: 1. We as part of a group of Northwest IOUS are exploring the possibility of retaining former Montana Governor Racicot to work BPA issues on our behalf. PGE will continue with Mike Andrews as our lobbyist but Racicot would work for the IOUs as a group. Does this cause you any concerns? Incidentally we may step up our efforts somewhat in the general area of BPA because of the situation out here. Please let me know if I or Mike should be coordinating what we do with any of your folks in DC. 2. One of the major Northwest issues is who will be the next BPA Administrator. For a variety of reasons there really aren't any good candidates from the Northwest and we're probably all to close to the situation anyway. I was wondering if the Enron net could come up with any good ideas for someone with good energy and policy experience from outside the Northwest? Someone who would appeal to the Bush administration? 3. With the delay in closing our sale to Sierra we would very much like the ability to use Enron Online for trading. I believe we can get the regulatory approvals necessary but apparently when we raised this some months ago there was strong opposition from within Enron particularly Joe Hartsoe. Do you see an issue with pursuing this? How do you suggest I move this forward? Thanks Steve. As you may hear from time to time things are going well here in Oregon. We are proceeding on our restructuring which is beginning to get notice from NARUC and others as a possible model for states that have not yet proceeded. It's an interesting world. I look forward to hearing from 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: You may have seen this when it first came out a while back ... but it's worth a rerun. ----------------- [/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 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>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Tony Pryor (GPG legal) asked if we have any credentials/tickets left for die hard democrats in the company. I know Tony will understand if they are already spoken for but if we have some left that would go unused we have a volunteer. How's it going? Are you partied out yet? [/INST] Category: Purely Personal
<s>[INST] [/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: 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>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: greg piper Andy Keleman 628-7654 re Roadshow [/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: Jon -- Ricardo Charvel is pulling together the briefing for Ken so please share the EBS activities/ agenda with him. Thanks ----------------- [/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: Dennis Thanks. I have seen some of the papers you mentioned but missed one about discriminative auctions. Vince Kaminski [/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: We face two parallel tracks in the Senate in the coming weeks between now and the start of the congressional recess for one week on June 29th. In the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee we will be facing efforts by pro-price caps forces who will use the committee bully pulpit to pressure FERC into more action. This effort is led by incoming chairman Bingaman with support from Majority Leader Daschle. They are saying they will consider acting on the Feinstein-Smith price cap legislation unless FERC takes unspecified additional action by the end of this month. The new track in the Senate will be in the Governmental Affairs Committee chaired by Sen. Lieberman (D-CT). While this committee does not have the legislative jurisdiction over energy that the Energy Committee does in terms of moving legislation the Governmental Affairs Committee has broad oversight and investigatory jurisdiction over all federal agencies including FERC. New chairman Lieberman held his first press conference as chairman today and said addressing high energy prices would be a priority. In that vein the committee is expected to hold a hearing on June 13 featuring some of the economists who wrote a letter in favor of price caps last month. We are checking with the Republican staff to make sure that the anti-price cap economists (the majority of the discipline of course) will also testify. We also brief committee members and staff with our arguments against price caps and the latest publicly available market data. On June 20 the committee will hold a hearing on whether FERC has properly exercised its duties under the Federal Power Act to make sure that wholesale power rates are just and reasonable. We are going to meet with the committee majority staff but we presently expect this hearing to have political witnesses (i.e. elected officials possibly including Gov. Davis). We must keep in mind that Sen. Feinstein had earlier written to Chairman Lieberman asking for a hearing on the California energy situation including relationships between FERC and those it regulates (citing the NY Times article involving Enron and Chairman Hebert). There is at present no indicationi that either hearing will address this matter. We are as you might imagine paying close attention to this situation. Over in the House Energy and Commerce Chairman Tauzin has said he will write to FERC asking them to extend the April 26 price mitigation order to the entire west and to extend it to 24/7. He also asks FERC to see if it can implement negawatts demand reduction administratively. We are in the process of obtaining a copy of the letter which has not yet been made public. Also in the House we expect congressional committees to begin marking up portions of the President's energy legislation and related topics as the month unfolds. [/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: Natasha Thanks. I left my package and all the forms in Houston. I shall be glad to fill out the form tomorrow at the conference. 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: testing [/INST] Category: Empty message
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message </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 we need some clear indication that with Hogan on the Board this is not going to turn into a diatribe about the benefits of LMP. He's the most informed of the bunch and I doubt he would find a general work of interest (unless he can create a platform for his more detailed ideas). If it stays general I think the study is a good idea. One topic area might be to explore how politicians mess up the basic idea of deregualtion and suggest that the process needs to be handled in a more objective (and pure) fashion. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/16/2001 10:54 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON skean@enron.com Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Great points. Teece---and the lion's share of the folks on the participants list---are advocates of a minimalist role for government particularly where markets are a clear and preferably option as in the case of electricity. That said I think we're going to have to make a fundamental decision about what the goal of this study would be which will determine to a large degree whether we choose to pursue it. I'll throw out for comment the notion that the study should be designed to serve one purpose: to influence the policy decision currently under debate To de-regulate or not. As such I wouldn't see issues like PJM or APX or competitive default supplier or not or divest generation with vesting contracts or retain the assets being the focus. That debate over critically important implementation details would seem to come in Round 2 once the initial debate over deregulate or not is won. To try to do both i.e. resolve in the broad policy issue AND make the case for the specific right implementation plan would arguably bog the study down perhaps interminably. And it seems that time is of the essence in the current environment. In addition unless the fundamental policy issue is won--and won rather quickly--debating implementation may be moot. Of course it will be impossible to avoid some level of dicussion on how to do it but that would not be the emphasis. In sum I'd suggest for comment that it only makes sense to proceed---particularly since time is of the essence---if we focus on the high level policy level question of to deregulate or not and address implementation in a second or follow up study. I think we should try to make a call on this swiftly since the go/no go decision would seem to flow from resolution of this issue. Best Jeff James D Steffes 03/16/2001 08:22 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron skean@enron.com Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Jeff -- It would be helpful to get some feedback prior to starting to deal with the fundamental question related to direct access for smaller customers. I would like to know Teece's perspective on the role of government in this marketplace. In addition I think that the paper must deal with the drawbacks of having mixed roles - utility default supply and competitive markets. Jim Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/15/2001 03:11 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron skean@enron.com James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Greetings: As I've mentioned I've been discussing with a group of academics (principally from UC Berkeley) the possibility of producing an analysis of why it makes sense to move forward toward de-regulation and makes no sense to turn back to command-and-control regulation. Clearly we're at a fork in the policy road---move forward or go back. I've (finally) gotten a proposal from the group. It's attached. Please take a look. I'd like to distribute more widely internally for comment but wanted to run it through a preliminary screen to guage whether folks think it would be useful before cluttering up folks' in-boxes with more emails to read. Few points worth mentioning: The majority of the academics that would do the report are affiliated with LECG Inc. the consulting group that I worked with prior to joing Enron. List also includes Dan McFadden UC Berkeley nobel prize winner who wrote the recent op-ed piece in the WSJ. The list also includes Hogan and Joskow and Borenstein. We could certainly exclude these folks should we choose to go forward with the analysis. However the goal is to produce a high level analysis i.e. de-regulation is good and can work command and control regulation is bad and we know that it does not work. Once the study is released (if it is pursued) the authors could tour the country testifying before federal and state bodies to advocate the virtues of de-regulation and the pitfalls of reversing course. The analysis would not be a debate over To Poolco or not to Poolco PJM etc. In this way including folks like Joskow and Hogan could offer the added benefit of creating a Nixon goes to China scenario. Please take a look at the list of participants. Again we can add to and subtract from the list. Laura Tyson would be one of the two project leaders. (The other would be David Teece Chairman of LECG.) None of the folks on the list occupies either extreme of the political spectrum. It's a mix of D's and R's who are arguably centrist economist and strong believers in markets (I won't vouch for Joskow and Hogan). The idea would be to get a wide array of industry participants from across the country to support the project. This is for two reasons: 1) the more diverse the group supporting the effort the greater the credibility and 2) they are asking for about $1 million to do the study. If you think it would be useful to pursue the study as part of our national campaign to minimize the damage created by California I would like to start immediately to approach trade associations companies customers etc. nationwide to garner support for the project. Let me know if you think the effort would be worthwhile. Appreciate your comments. 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: cc:Mail to Bruce Stram and Tim Vail sent 6/23. Tim Vail is confirmed Bruce will be here until 10:00. [/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: Eric I shall be glad to talk to you about it. The first three days of the next week would work 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: calendar -- FYI ----------------- [/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: yes send to dennis 04/10/2001 11:33 AM Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 04/10/2001 11:33 AM 04/10/2001 11:33 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Budget transition info Hi Steve - Dennis Vegas has requested budget information from Kelly on the people from EBS that are transferring over to Corp. Kelly is on vacation now for the next week and a half and I wanted to check with you to make sure that it is OK to share these documents with him. They are what Kelly reviewed with you in your initial meeting regarding the subject. He only asked for information on the people shifting to Corp not the people on redeployment so I could delete that portion of these documents. Perhaps I could only send him the first document that is about budget but with the redeployment information taken out. Sorry to bother you but I am concerned about doing the right thing and following protocol in Kelly's absence. Thanks Stacy [/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: Thanks Vince - I'll give him a try. [/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: Could you coordinate with Cindy Stark on the meeting with Massey in a couple of weeks? Stan has asked me if I would like to attend. I would but don't know when exactly it is scheduled for. ----------------- [/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: Thanks. Vince [/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: great idea. [/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: Currently only a recommendation. Dan Allegretti is no longer with us so will co-ordinate through Christi to get an idea of timing and actions they must take to terminate. [/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: KRTH? 9:10 - 9:55 JP Pritchard 630-3600 [/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: Bill Yes one of the options I am looking at. 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: Committee on Regional Electric Power Cooperation in Tempe AZ [/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: test [/INST] Category: Empty message
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message </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 will attend. ----------------- [/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: Bonnie: Please forward to Michael Kirby. I think the draft looks good. Could you also prepare a draft of the letter we discussed yesterday to convey the proposal to the committee? Bonnie Hugyez <blh@pkns.com> on 07/17/2001 12:34:20 AM To: <mmolland@brobeck.com> <mark.e.haedicke@enron.com> <skean@enron.com> <breasoner@gibbs-bruns.com> <mtuohey@velaw.com> cc: Subject: From Michael L. Kirby Esq. Attached is a draft Nonwaiver Agreement per our telephone conferences of yesterday after the meetings with Senator Dunn. I am available in my office for a conference call to discuss this. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify Kathryn A. Pugh at kpugh@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. - 289271_1.WPD [/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: Steve I hope this email finds you well. ?Don't know if you remember me exactly however I worked at Enron for 4 years working closely with the Associate/Analyst Program under Charlene Jackson. ?I had to spread my wings a bit and flew to Reliant Energy to further enhance my career. As a former Enron employee I know Enron-candidate material! ?I would like to submit confidentially of course a resume on AJ McCormac. ?AJ is currently the Executive Director for Workforce Planning (HR) here at Reliant. ?She is very interested in opportunities at Enron and has the right stuff to compliment your strategic direction and objectives for Human Resources. ?I am confident that after just a few minutes with AJ you will quickly recognize her superior expertise. Realizing how expensive executive search firms can be advice from a Enron fan is free. Thank you for your time and consideration. ?If you would like to contact her directly here at Reliant her number 713-207-7162. Ginger Gamble 713-207-8824 (See attached file: AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc) (See attached file: AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc) - AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc [/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: ----------------- [/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: Barry Thanks for your message. I am forwarding it with my recommendation to Billy Lemmons who is in charge of our analyst/associate program. Vince [/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: Lay the groundwork and educate them about what's going on around the country from a regulatory standpoint sensitize them to coming opportunities. Also Steve Barth will be there to talk about creative products / services we can offer. 1:00 - 2:30 presentation then q&a then cocktails and dinner sponsored by Enron. Per Gary von Fischer 614-792-6010 [/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: PGE meeting -- identify alternatives Tom Hagen @ CSW Shockley would be avail on thurs or Fri or Lay [/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 are forwarding these messages to the wrong Dana Davis. Try Mark Dana Davis Jr. From: Thane Twiggs@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 12/13/2000 02:03 PM To: Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT Mark Bernstein/HOU/ECT@ECT Scott Healy/HOU/ECT@ECT Janelle Scheuer/HOU/ECT@ECT Tom Dutta/HOU/ECT@ECT Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT Paul J Broderick/HOU/ECT@ECT Chris Dorland/HOU/ECT@ECT Gautam Gupta/HOU/ECT@ECT Michael Brown/NA/Enron@Enron John Llodra/Corp/Enron@ENRON George Wood/Corp/Enron@Enron Joe Gordon/Corp/Enron@Enron Stephen Plauche/Corp/Enron@Enron Jennifer N Stewart/NA/Enron@Enron David Guillaume/NA/Enron@Enron Tom May/Corp/Enron@Enron Robert Stalford/NA/Enron@Enron Jeffrey Miller/NA/Enron@Enron Narsimha Misra/NA/Enron@Enron Joe Quenet/NA/Enron@Enron Paul D Thomas/NA/Enron@Enron Ricardo Perez/NA/Enron@Enron Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: ISO-NE failure to mitigate ICAP market -- Release of ISO NE confidential information The New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners (NECUPUC) filed an Answer if Support of the Motion of the Maine Public Utilities Commission for Disclosure of Information. NECUPUC supports the request for the release of the unredacted copies of ISO-NE's September 21 2000 Answer in this case. In the alternative they would ask that the Commission provide to the regulators that are parties to the proceeding unredacted copies of the ISO's September 21 2000 Answer subject to an appropriate protective order. Duke Energy North America (DENA) filed an Answer that opposes the MPUC request for public information. DENA argues that only a three month lag in the release of confidential information is impermissible under a prior FERC ruling in the NSTAR Services Co. case which set out a six-month lag rule for the release of information. Their second argument was that the request seeks information for all NEPOOL markets and not just the ICAP market which is subject to the suit. If the FERC authorizes the release of confidential information then it should be subject to a protective order which contains the following: The information may only be used for the purposes of this docket. Only specifically named reviewing Reps associated with the MPUC may review the information. The confidential materials may not be removed from the NE-ISO's premises. The reviewing rep must execute a nondisclosure certificate. Answer to the MPUC's Motion for Disclosure of Information from Northeast Utilities Service Company and Select Energy and request for expedited commission action. NUSCO and Select Energy Support MPUC's request for disclosure of information that the ISO has filed under seal but opposes the selective disclosure of this information to the MPUC and other regulatory commissions and not other participants. NUSCO and Select Energy request expedited action due the financial implications and there is also considerable uncertainty regarding prices in the residual ICAP market in January February and March of 2000 due to the suspended settlement pending Commission guidance. [/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 think the presentation looks fine but consider adding this: there is real risk to utilities (as well as customers) in continuing a regulated regime. The California utilities have been pushed into or to the brink of bankruptcy [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)
<s>[INST] [/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: Shirley Can you please arrange a phone interview: Alex Lance Vasant and myself. Vince ----------------- [/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: A bit lengthy but I think it looks fine. Peggy Mahoney@EES 08/30/2000 12:41 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES NotesAdmin/EES@EES Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES Bill Rapp/HOU/EES@EES Rob Rice/HOU/EES@EES Wendy Raleigh/HOU/EES@EES cc: Karen S Owens@ees@EES Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Starwood Draft Attached is a draft of the Starwood press release with our initial changes in red. Please review and let me know your thoughts by end of day Thursday Aug 31. It is clear that Starwood has several agendas with this release and after talking with them they would prefer not to cut any of their messages. Scheduled release date is Tuesday Sept 5. Please feel free to call me to discuss. Also - I've attached a map of all their US owned franchised and leased property locations. 87 of the properties are owned and there are approx. 400 total in the US. [/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: More indications that the power angle may be fruitful [/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: ----------------- [/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 schedule some time on my calendar for Littlechild. [/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: Here it is [/INST] Category: Empty message(due to missing attachment)
<s>[INST] [/INST] Empty message(due to missing attachment) </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 understand from Shelley that you are going to be seeing Commissioner Breathitt on Monday. We have been working to persuade her to vote for forceful FERC action on electricity issues. She is widely viewed as the swing vote (with Massey and Hoecker being the other two votes) needed for the Commission to take action. Attached are two documents -- one is a set of talking points for you and the second is a FERC action plan that we are floating with several of the Commissioners. [/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 is Jim's prepared statement filed last night for today's House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee (Chairman Barton) hearing on reliability transmission incentives and siting issues. You will see we use the opportunity to make a plug for large RTOs as well. Jim will actually deliver a five minute oral summary. He is appearing as the EPSA witness in his capacity as chairman of the EPSA Regulatory Affairs Committee. There will be ten witnesses on the panel. Others will represent EEI NARUC APPA LPPC NRECA NERC (David Cook) ELCON Consumers for Fair Competition and GF Energy. We will provide a report following the hearing. [/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: We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info curves validations/stress tests etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the o drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo [/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 purpose of this message is to provide key areas (specifically IT Suppor= t=20 and Purchasing Organizations which might receive questions about the new=20 ENhome program) with preliminary information about the ENhome program as we= ll=20 as a standard message to deliver. The goal is to communicate a consistent= =20 message to all of our employees. Please keep in mind that changes are stil= l=20 being made at this time so your discretion is welcomed until the internal= =20 communication has been distributed. At the same time please inform the=20 appropriate individuals within your area that you believe might receive=20 questions. What is ENhome? An OTC approved program that will provide eligible employee= s=20 (active regular full-time and part-time employees whose business units ele= ct=20 to participate) at home with high-end internet devices broadband internet= =20 connection (where commercially available) and an employee-centric portal fo= r=20 personal use.=20 Attached to this message are three documents concerning this new program. = =20 These documents are: ENhome PowerPoint Presentation - High-level presentation provided to all of= =20 the Business Unit=01s Human Resource Departments describing the program. = =20 ENhome Draft of Internal Communications =01) This is a draft of the interna= l=20 communication that will be sent to eligible employees. I will send you the= =20 final copy when it has been approved. ENhome Q&A Draft =01) This is a draft of the Q&A document in case you may= =20 encounter these questions. Please review this document and if you feel the= re=20 are additional questions that need to be addressed let me know and I will= =20 work to get these answered. This program is scheduled to be announced to all eligible Enron employees a= t=20 either the end of this week or early next week. Remember that these=20 attachments are drafts and may be changed. As soon as I receive final=20 copies I will forward them to you. =20 Questions regarding the message from the Office of the Chairman concerning = =01&A=20 Computer for You and Your Family=018 should be responded to as: This program is being sponsored by Enron=01s Office of the Chairman and w= ill=20 be coordinated by Corporate Human Resources. The Global Information=20 Technology unit of Enron Net Works and Global Strategic Sourcing are workin= g=20 in conjunction with Corporate Human Resources to support this endeavor. =20 Details about this program are still being finalized and will be communicat= ed=20 as they become available. An eSpeak session will be scheduled in the near= =20 future where you will have an opportunity to ask questions. If you have any additional questions regarding this program or the=20 communications that will be released please feel free to contact me at=20 713-853-7947. Thanks Susan [/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 forward on to Barry when you get his e-mail address. Barry - I don't know Humberto personally but looking over his resume I thought he might be a fit in your organization. ----------------- [/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: Please do send it out. Thanks for the kind words. I know you know how I feel about your work and I have shared that view widely. I have enjoyed working with you I always valued your insights your responsiveness and your work ehtic. I wish you all the best in your new role. Gwendolyn Petteway@ENRON 07/24/2000 02:47 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: REVISION - New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration Arquella's last day is Wed. 7/26. ----------------- [/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: ----------------- [/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: Although I don't yet have all the facts Steve Hall said that late yesterday (Friday) afternoon the Governor exercised eminent domain over the IOU forward contracts that the PX had been in the process of auctioning to pay PX participants. I would like Bracewell to research at least the following two possible ways this action is unlawful. First this violates the banking provisions of the PX tariff (Section 6). These provisions requires the PX to hold all PX accounts in trust for PX participants. Second these are wholesale contracts and the State only has the right to exercise eminent domain concerning retail service. I don't have any law to support the second idea but think it should be researched nonetheless. [/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: Steve - take a look at this and contact the sponsor with a yes or no. 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: test [/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: And another..... [/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: Anne For the time being it's fine. She will soon become an associate. Vince [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)
<s>[INST] [/INST] Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) </s>
README.md exists but content is empty. Use the Edit dataset card button to edit it.
Downloads last month
36
Edit dataset card