Datasets:

neelblabla

/

enron_labeled_email-llama2-7b_finetuning

like 0

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please review the attachment and let me know if you have any changes. The final document will provide a starting place for the year end review process. [/INST] Category: Empty message(due to missing attachment)

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

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I attended the U.C. Berkeley POWER (Program on Workable Energy Regulation) Conference on March 16. Here is a brief report on the relevant parts. Notably the Lieff Cabreser duo of Bill Bernstein and Barry Himmelstein were there listening carefully. The program consisted of the presentation of 8 economic studies followed by comments from two discussants followed by audience questions/comments. The following is a list of the papers and the discussants who presented with slides taken from the website of the U.C. Energy Institute You can click on this to see the slides in PDF format. The papers in green are not particularly relevant for our purposes and I won't say more about them beyond the note in brackets. The presenter's name is in bold. Bidding Asymmetries in Multi-Unit Auctions: Implications of Bid Function Equilibria in the British Spot Market for Electricity by Greg Crawford Duke University Joe Crespo NERA and Helen Tauchen University of North Carolina Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market by Steve Puller UC Berkeley Discussion by Anjali Sheffrin California Independent System Operator Identification and Estimation of Cost Functions Using Observed Bid Data: An Application to Electricity Markets by Frank Wolak Stanford University [A paper about economic tools to study power markets.] Forward Contracts and the Curse of Market Power by Jeffrey Lien University of Maryland The Impact of Retail Rate Deregulation on Electricity Consumption in San Diego by James Bushnell and Erin Mansur UC Berkeley [This looks at whether consumption declined with price increases. Not much.] Consumption and Home Energy Costs: How Prevalent is the 'Heat or Eat' Decision? by Julie Berry Cullen University of Michigan Leora Friedberg University of Virginia and Catherin Wolfram UC Berkeley [A macro study on how consumers change overall spending patterns when they have to shell out more $$ for power.] A Quantitative Analysis of Pricing Behavior in California's Wholesale Electricity Market During Summer 2000 by Paul Joskow MIT and Edward Kahn Analysis Group Electricity Restructuring and the Cost of Pollution Reduction by Dallas Burtraw Karen Palmer Ranjit Bharvirkar and Anthony Paul Resources for the Future Before I discuss the specific papers and presenters one big picture point needs to be made. There was an unchallenged consensus at this conference that the generators have exercised market power to the tune of billions of dollars. The focus was on how and how much not whether. The good news is that I heard no evidence supporting any collusion theory the thought was that generators are making independent output and pricing decisions knowing they could influence the market price given the auction rules and the completely inelastic demand. On the other hand I would have to say that the economic work on the tacit collusion hypothesis in incomplete at best. The bad news is that the scale of potential overcharges is pretty staggering -- >$5 billion. The plaintiffs will be able to put together quite a damage study. Crespo Bidding Asymmetries in UK: This is a marginally relevant paper examining whether bidders in the UK electricity auction markets behaved in a leader-follower mode i.e. asymmetrically. Crespo's model shows that in a uniform price-setting auction with clearing price rules a price setter will emerge and take all prices above marginal cost. Thus above marginal cost pricing does not require coordination. Crespo (from NERA) appeared knowledgeable but is not an inspiring speaker. His paper also got roughed up a bit in the audience questioning segment. Puller Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market: This is a very relevant paper as it tries to determine whether market power (presumably) exercised in California was static or dynamic meaning the product of individual firm decisionmaking (static) or tacit collusion (dynamic). The period studied was 4/98 to 12/99. Puller found evidence of static market power consistent with so-called Cournot pricing. This theory posits that in an oligopoly firms will take their rivals' observed price/output decisions as a given and decide how to maximize profitability given that behavior. He then tried to determine whether any dynamic games were occurring meaning a game where firms recognize their interdependence and try to follow a supergame trigger strategy in which firms try to induce favorable responses from rivals. It's quite complicated how he goes about this but fundamentally he tries to correlate observed output decisions with how a firm at that time might have expected a change in its behavior to affect its future share of the market. With this methodology Puller finds what he called weak evidence of forward-looking dynamic pricing for a brief time in 1998 but not otherwise. My impression was that the evidence for 1998 was very weak and the logic used to arrive at this conclusion was also weak. Puller then went at this a second time with a theory that attempts to determine what a firm's supply function would look like if it was exercising static and dynamic market power and then comparing this to an estimate of that firm's actual supply function. I found this even more speculative than the first theory. Nonetheless the results are basically the same: evidence of static but not dynamic market power. Puller took a lot of heat for the methodology of this paper during the questioning segment. He's not a dynamic speaker and does not appear to me to be a strong expert candidate. Anjali Sheffrin's commentary was very important. She is the Director of Market Analysis for CAISO. After general comments on Crespo and Puller she launched in to a discussion of whether their models explained the California experience. This turned out to be a preview of the CAISO FERC filing of last week in which they allege $5.5 billion in market power-related overcharges from May 200 to Feb. 2001. That filing and Sheffrin's report follow. They are essential reading. Sheffrin maintains that it was the absence of imports during this period that left the market power of the California generators unchecked. This permitted the in-state generators to engage in either economic or physical withholding of power. (Economic withholding is bidding a higher-than-needed supply curve physical withholding is cutting output at the plant.) Her study was intended to (1) Identify individual firms engaging in market power activity and (2) Analyze how each firms' actions set market clearing prices. She utilized full bidding data in CA ISO real time market for each hour between May and Nov 2000 defined and categorized bidding patterns and identified economic or physical withholding and then calculated bid-cost mark-up and a monopoly rent. She found what she claimed was strong evidence of both types of withholding but that economic withholding is the dominant bidding pattern used by the five large California generators. While Sheffrin's study does not name names it claims that most of the five in-state suppliers and many of the [16] large importers displayed bidding patterns which were consistent with the exercise of market power. Bernstein and Himmelstein were positively gleeful during this presentation. On the question of collusion Sheffrin's study is not terribly illuminating. She maintains that the dominant bidding pattern is consistent with two characteristics of a supply function equilibrium model of oligopolist pricing. I take that to mean Cournot which is a static non-collusive model. However when you read her study you'll see the picture is not entirely clear. Lien The Curse of Market Power: This is only marginally relevant for us as its thesis is that forward-looking supply contracts are better for both producers and society. Everyone seemed to agree -- and were confused why we needed a paper to prove it. Lien (U. Md.) is young and not expert material. Joskow and Kahn: (paper) (Kahn's slides). I'm sure many of you have already read this everyone should. Prepared for SoCal Edison it contends that 4 in-state generators (Reliant Dynegy AES/Williams and Southern/Mirant) exercised market power by withholding capacity during the summer or 2000. J&K use publicly available data on loads market prices and generation to (a) quantify combined effects of market fundamentals on market prices (b) calculate price gap (difference between actual prices and competitive market benchmarks) (c) account for quantify effects of ISO's ancillary services requirements and forced outages and then (d) calculate the output gap for high priced hours meaning the difference between observed and maximum profitable levels of generation. They conclude that prices were far in excess of the competitive benchmark and that the 4 in-state generators could have produced more power at competitive prices but chose not to. Hence market power was exercised. Kahn the Analysis Group economist who presented is a very colorful and rather undisciplined advocate of his position. He threw around allegations of conspiracy rather casually but mostly to be funny. I couldn't tell whether he believed his study proved that I don't think it even speaks to it. But Bernstein and Himmelstein applauded him when he finished grinning ear to ear. Severin Borenstein UC Berkeley and the conference director was supposed to comment on J&K but hardly did. He said that the generators would have been stupid not to exercise market power given the supply/demand conditions and the market rules and argued that permitting long term contracts and requiring real-time residential pricing were the solutions to all of this. Borenstein was the best expert material I saw at this conference and the fact he took a pass on the details of the J&K paper is puzzling to me. It made me wonder whether he already has a horse in this race or perhaps is trying to stay above it all. Hope this is useful. Regards Dan Daniel M. Wall Latham & Watkins 505 Montgomery Street Suite 1900 San Francisco CA 94111-2562 Direct: (415) 395-8240 Main: (415) 391-0600 Fax: (415) 395-8095 dan.wall@lw.com This email may contain material that is confidential privileged and/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender and delete all copies. - 2001032214541122276.pdf.pdf - 2001032214585222924.pdf.pdf [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I agree that we should not be opposing rate caps for small customers and schools but I think we should be pounding on the fact that market participants have been putting offers in front of sdge and that allowing the market to provide this solution is superior to legislated caps that require the creation of huge deferrals (and more problems in the future). Can we make that argument work? Mona L Petrochko 08/24/2000 09:45 PM To: Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES cc: West GA Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES David Parquet@ECT mday@gmssr.com Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mary Hain@Enron Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Daily Update/ Legislative activity - 08/24/00 I attended Cmmr. Wood's two-day hearing on Wholesale Markets which concluded today (8/24) in San Diego. Three Commissioner's were present (Wood Lynch and Neeper) with Duque and Bilas participating by phone. Administrative Law Judge Wetzel was present and a transcript was taken. The quasi-legislative hearing was the beginning of a record developed for the investigation into the workings of wholesale/retail markets. This session focused on Wholesale markets. There will be subsequent sessions on retail issues market structure and other related issues in the future. My conclusion from this session is that Wood is looking for support for increasing regulatory intervention in the market. Dan Larcamp Director of the Office of markets Tariffs and Rates FERC was present. He relayed FERC's concern of this matter and a desire to hold hearings in San Diego. He also relayed that Hoecker held a press conference announcing the opening of a 206 investigative proceeding into the operation of the wholesale markets in California which carried with it refund authority. The format of the hearing was to respond to pre-filed questions developed by Wood/Lynch. Each member of the panel would respond to the questions and any questions posed by the Commissioners the Judge or the CPUC Attorney. No questions were posed by members of the audience. Yesterday's panel of academics were comprised of: 1. Dr. Timothy Duane-UC Berkley 2. Dr. William Hogan-Harvard 3. Dr. Frank Wolak-Stanford (ISO Market Surveillance Committee) 4. David Marcus-Energy Consultant for the Coaltion of Utility Employees 5. Dr. Gene Coyle 6. Dr. Jean-Michel Glachant Universite Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne The panel was asked to speak as individuals and not on behalf of any institutions they may represent. While the purpose of the panel seemed to be to determine that market power was being exercised and that prices were too high and therefore not just and reasonable the panelist stopped short of blaming generators and market participants in behaving illegally. The concensus generally was that market power did exist at various times but the mere existence did not constitute bad behavior. None with the exception of Dr. Wolak who is in the process of doing a study using recent data as part of his role for the Market Surveillance Committee had done a study. There was some discussion though not much of the monopsony power of the utilities. I think ultimately the group conceded that scarcity of supply amplified concerns about the exercise of market power as even the increase in gas costs did not fully explain the recent spikes. Wolak believes that encourage utilities to enter into forward purchases will reduce the exercise of real-time market power. Hogan seemed to be there with Sempra's interests in mind. He continued to promote expansion of the ISO's abilities to dispatch load as well as maintain system reliability. There was alot of discussion about forward purchase ability for utilities so as to be less subject to volatile market prices. The concerns were also discussed about the appropriateness of a distribution utility making purchasing decisions on behalf of its customers. This included discussion of separation of these functions and the default provider role. Most everyone agreed that rolling back to a regulated market was not feasible without raising other major and serious concerns however there seemed to be support for some interim measures where cost-of-service regulation may be a good idea and that was during peak periods. All agreed that a demand response and price signals are important in the long-run although not to the extent currently experienced in San Diego. Today's panel included representatives from SDG&E SCE and PG&E TURN UCAN and ORA. While yesterday's panel maintained objectivity as to whether or not generators were exercising market power to the detriment of the system today's panel made no bones about the generators being to blame. SCE/PG&E indicated their need for relief for recovery of market costs in excess of the rate freeze. SDG&E was still on the hot seat for their inaction in hedging any of their supply. SDG&E brought up their failed PBR proposal and ORA and UCAN thought that that may be one way to incent the utility to be more responsible with their purchases. UCAN discussed the Governor's direction and the potential for putting rate caps into affect for residential and small commercial. He mentioned that C&I customers are experience difficulties as well. TURN raised the need for cost-based bid caps and cost-based peaking contracts. Mike Florio TURN urged against any further divestitute of assets and alleged market concentration on those assets that had been divested. In fact TURN urged the Commission to seek legislation to clarify the Commission's authority to order retention of assets. Neeper urged that part of the solution should be changing the current requirement to use the PX as the only authorized exchange although TURN disagreed. Bruno Gaillard 08/24/2000 06:09 PM To: SF Directors Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES David Parquet@ECT mday@gmssr.com Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mary Hain@Enron Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Daily Update/ Legislative activity - 08/24/00 Siting related bills 1. Good new - The Williamson Act passed the Senate 34-1 It should be heard at the assembly Saturday or Monday if it is not redirected to a Committee hearing. 2. There was a long meeting with Ducheny with regards to AB 970. The enviro's boycotted they want to draft a bill with Keeley. Labor was obstructionist - they wanted to gut all the expediting siting language with regards to all facilities except for the peaking plants. Rate Cap related bills 1. The Edison Language on Rate Stabilization may not go anywhere. Edison has not found an author because of the efforts of Enron and others lobbying against it. Furthermore there are signs that Gov. Davis opposes it. 2. The Governor's office has issued a proposed language for a rate cap bill. The language however is not available as of yet. It may be released today or tomorrow. SDG&E has shown concerns over the content of the bill. They seem to think that it is worse than initially proposed by the Governor in his press release. The bill includes retroactive rate caps through 6/1/00. The rate cap could reflect Wood's rate cap proposal (6.5 cts cap on the energy component The bill does not specify who or how the costs associated with the cap will be recovered. (The reasoning is that UDCs will be more cautious in their procurement if there is uncertainty on who is responsible for the costs.) All of this is speculative. We hope to see the actual language soon. 3. Enron has been working with the Republican leadership to promote a rate cap proposal similar to the amended language we have proposed for AB2290. The bill focuses only on SDG&E customers and our major principals are the following. The Interim Rate Cap should be limited to residential and small commercial customers plus specific institutions that have a significant public role such as schools and hospitals. The Interim Rate Cap should be limited to the period ending December 31 2001. The Interim Rate Cap must be structured so that any undercollection is eventually recovered from the same customers who benefit from the lower rates provided by the rate cap. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jeff Skilling proposed a solution to Gov Davis to solve the supply and pricing problems in the California market. In summary the proposal would have a neutral party conduct an auction wherein the utilities would seek bids for 5-10 year packages of power from suppliers. The gov asked if anyone had successfully conducted such an auction in the industry already. I need your help to identify and describe any such examples (European or North American) by mid day Monday. Jeff and I will have a follow up call with the governor on Monday. Thanks [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We are concerned about leaks to the press which may have ocurred from our Washington office over the last few months (including leaks from a former employee). Could you put someone in touch with Rick and Linda Robertson (head of our DC office)? ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: greg piper Andy Keleman 628-7654 re Roadshow [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think wholesale will be well covered. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 04/26/2001 02:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Next Corporate Policy Committee Offsite How much of an issue is this? So far Mark is the only one that has responded with a conflict. Please advise. Thanks SRS ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: The letter looks fine. Set it up as your letter to Ken Lay was forwarded to me for response and have Jeff B sign. Thanks Marcia A Linton 09/20/2000 04:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Letter to Bob Houck Here is the draft letter to Bob Houck from Ken Lay that Jeff Brown asked me to forward to you. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Here's the proposal to form the Team. Note that the complete team list includes: =01&The MRT will be led by Philippe Auclair and will include Market Partic= ipant=20 Advisor (MPA) Eric Woychik Market Assessment Advisor (MAA) Steven Stoft and any others= =20 appointed by the Board.=20 =01&The Market Design Group may be comprised of a number of national expert= s on=20 energy market structure and regulation and to be used as needed by the MRT. Sever= in=20 Borenstein Joe Bowering (PJM=01s Market Monitor) William Hogan Paul Joskow and Fra= nk=20 Wolak have all expressed their willingness to assist the ISO Board through the Market Repa= ir=20 Team.=018 Does anybody have a read on Bowering from PJM? Alan Comnes Susan J Mara@ENRON 03/13/2001 03:06 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT= =20 Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Steve=20 Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: =20 Subject: You Can Put A Stake in Their Hearts but They Never Die Gang Just heard from someone at the ISO that the ISO Board is shoving a new mark= et=20 approach down the staff's throat. Rising from the almost dead ... This Market Repair Committee is supported by Eric Woychik advisor to Boa= rd=20 Member Florio. The Committee members are Joskow Hogan PJM people et=20 cetera et cetera. There will be something posted on the ISO's web site=20 shortly. It will be approved at the Board meeting Thursday. I'll be there. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: looks good Meredith Philipp 10/13/2000 09:30 AM To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON Joseph W cc: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON Pam Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: i2 Bandwidth Management Agreement Press Release Attached is a draft news release announcing Enron's bandwidth management agreement with i2. EBS is planning to issue this release on Monday Oct. 16 prior to Enron's earnings release on Tuesday Oct. 17. Please review and let me know if you have any comments by end of day today Friday Oct. 13. Thank you. Meredith Philipp [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Robert Here is an updated sheet with EPMI physical transactions with deliveries in California. The format has been improved and I added a breakout for transactions with Dynegy. Please destroy earlier versions of this report. Rick Shapiro has asked to be the point of contact in Government Affairs regarding the merger. Please copy him on future communications. Robert or Rick: Please let me know if you need any help such as adding months putting the data in another format or combining this data with Dynegy market share data. Alan Comnes [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Attached is a resume for a gentleman who has relocated as a trailing expat spouse to Houston who we are looking to find a suitable position somewhere in Enron. I know that one or two of you have already seen his resume and at the time didn't necessarily have a role for him. I would be very grateful if you could take another look and see if anything has now changed. By way of background he was previously working with Eastern in the UK in a back office capacity looking at their approach to the UK Gas regulatory framework known as the Network code. He has done a little consulting work since relocating to Houston in the online area. His references are very good. He is available with immigration clearance as a local hire probably at Senior Specialist level. As an additional incentive I would be prepared to underwrite his costs in the event you decided in the first 6 months that his performance did not meet your expectations (Obviously - I am highly confident this will not be the case!). [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jim -- Please see attached from EPSA on their meeting today with Andy Black Chairman Barton's chief energy adviser. I have my own one-on-one with Andy at 4 pm tomorrow. Would you have a minute to read the EPSA memo and a list that Andy sent me (which I will forward separately) and we could chat about these issues tomorrow before the 4pm -- just so I have everything in perspective going into the meeting? I am open to any time tomorrow except 10 am (EDT). Please let me know. Thanks. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks anyway. no need to do anything right now. enjoy your vacation. Jeffrey Keeler 06/18/2001 01:10 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Sorry I missed this on Friday -- was on vacation end of last week and rest of this week. If its not too late I'll have Lisa pull some things together quickly. Also my wife Marietta knows Isikoff well....they worked together on a number of things when she was at Court TV in Washington. Let me know what I can do to help. Jeffrey Keeler Director Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: This responds to Charles's voice mail and the RTO conference calls that Janel has been on where we have discussed responding to those who say the heightened interest in security is a reason NOT to do large RTOs. Jim Steffes is the EPSA witness on reliability and other issues at a Barton subcommittee hearing next Wed. Oct. 10th. While the written testimony filed for the Sept. 11 hearing that was canceled is still operative Jim's oral remarks can be whatever he wishes. Also even if he does not raise it in his opening statement the issue will no doubt come up by others or in Q&A. Thus -- any talking points need to be ready by Tuesday for this hearing. Does not have to be anything fancy or hand-out quality. Just something for Jim to consider using. Charles I do not recall any specific articles on what NERC said but Sarah Novosel said she would check since she thought there was something like what you raised in your voice mail. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: To:GILBERT-SMITH DOUGLAS - 7138539310 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities Enron Wholesale Services (EWS) has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (Policies and Procedures). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process the Review Team will play a more centralized role so that the role of the Resource Group is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year you need not re-certify at this time although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: At the end of the article there is a presidential straw poll. It shows Bush with only a 6 point lead among oil and gas industry executives and analysts. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jerry: Here is the latest CA with everyone's changes. I feel that this is pretty close to the best we can offer in terms of the stand-still and non-solicitation agreements. Enron usually does not get into stand-still agreements so doing this one was a big step for Enron. Look forward to talking to you tomorrow morning. Thanks for your patience. Again this is a draft copy for discussions purposes only. Regards Ben [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I couldn't open link. I s this something new for me to sign or have I already complied? ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Can you circulate the link to Cal TV again? Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com> on 07/16/2001 01:58:41 PM Please respond to <sgovenar@govadv.com> To: Ban Sharma <ban.sharma@enron.com> David Leboe <David.Leboe@ENRON.com> Eric Letke <eletke@enron.com> Jennifer Thome <Jennifer.Thome@enron.com> Ken Smith <ken@kdscommunications.com> Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com> Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com> Miyung Buster <Miyung.Buster@enron.com> Janel Guerrero <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com> Robert Frank <rfrank@enron.com> Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com> Leslie Lawner <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com> Harry. Kingerski@enron. com <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com> Karen Denne <kdenne@enron.com> Steven Kean <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> Alan Comnes <acomnes@enron.com> Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com> Paul Kaufman <paul.kaufman@enron.com> Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com> Jim Steffes <james.d.steffes@enron.com> Rick Shapiro <rshapiro@enron.com> cc: Subject: Senator Dunn Hearing THE SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE PRICE MANIPULATION OF THE WHOLESALE ENERGY MARKET WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY JULY 18 AT 9:30 A.M. IN ROOM 3191 TO REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENAS FOR DUKE DYNEGY RELIANT AES NRG AND WILLIAMS. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Isn't our primary problem with AEP's internal merchant function rather than with the marketing affiliate (I realize we have problems with the affiliate too)? Can we protest continued market based rate authority for AEP until they have surrendered native load priority? Christi L Nicolay@ECT 09/25/2000 09:16 AM To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: EPMI protests AEP's continuation of MBRs On 9/21 EPMI filed a protest (Below) against AEP/CSW's 3 year update request to continue market based rates for power marketing. The filing includes examples of discriminatory behavior on OASIS (for ATCs etc.) that potentially benefitted AEP's marketing side. EPMI has already protested Entergy's request for continuation of MBRs earlier this year and plans to protest other large utility-based power marketer MBR filings this fall. Let me know if you would like the list. Thanks. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We should include David Oxley -- VP of human resources. From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 11:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: ENE Officer Elections Steve: Please review the attached ENE Officer list for your direct reports and approve. Thank you. Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, 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 would like to see research from all of these sources on areas of interest to enron -- energy and broadband North America and Europe. Thanks Henry Emery <HEMERY@firstunion1.com> on 07/19/2001 12:03:17 PM To: undisclosed-recipients: cc: Subject: Daily Research reports Attached are two research reports that I can send to you on a daily basis. One of our many benefits here at our new location is the availability of various research sources. The two reports I have attached are from : The First Union Securities Equity Marketing Group and Merrill Lynch We also have access to Goldman Sachs research and CS First Boston Research. Please let me know if you would like me to continue sending these reports on a daily basis or if you have any particular companies that you are interested in hearing about. Sincerely Hank Emery - Spotlight071801.pdf.pdf - smith.pdf.pdf [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think it would be a good idea to get together. I would include Eric Thode as he has been living through the PR battles on a daily basis. James D Steffes 05/30/2001 08:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Bahamas LNG Steve -- In a discussion today with Mike Kelly etc. it was apparent that the Public Affairs team viewed the Bahamas LNG transaction quite cautiously. Given the recent issues power plant development has had in Florida (big political fights that are going the wrong way) I was wondering if it made sense to bring together a meeting of all of Public Affairs and the deal team to analyze the implications of our development plans. My primary worry is that P/L under water could have severe ecological implications that are not being internalized into the transaction. I would like to try and arrange a meeting to (1) ensure Public Affairs coordination and (2) understand the deal impacts better. Please advise if I'm worrying for no good reason. Jim [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Earlier today the Senate Energy Committee held the first of two days of hearings on Chairman Bingaman's white paper on electricity and the electricity provisions of other pending bills. The hearings will continue tomorrow with all of the five FERC commissioners as witnesses plus private sector witnesses. Today's hearing went well from our perpective with support for Super RTOs and general support for expanding the grid both physically and from an access view point voiced by Senators and witnesses. Sen. Craig Thomas even said four RTOs were too many -- there should be one national RTO to run a national grid. Today's witnesses represented the Dept. of Energy EPSA EEI NRECA APPA IBEW union Alliance to Save Energy ELCON NERC NARUC NASUCA and the State of New Mexico. We will provide a more detailed analysis after completing a review of the lengthy written testimony but a summary of the DOE testimony and the first panel of private sector witnesses follows. 1. DOE said they are working on electricity legislative language. Should be done soon. Chairman Bingaman said they needed to get it done in time for the Committee to consider it when the Committee takes up electricity as early as the second week in September. Deputy Sec. Blake implied that their proposal was or would soon be shared with other Administration agencies for review. 2. In response to questions Blake said that legislative action on jurisdiction questions (fed v. state) would be useful but he stressed that they view any new legislation as clarifying that FERC has authority they feel already exists. He said that while states have an important role to play Congress must recongize the interstate character of the market and the need for open access to the interstate grid. (In response to a question Blake later said that FERC had largely addressed the access issue or would do so.) 3. On reliability he was given a chance to say that DOE supports th NERC consensus language but instead repeated that the Administration favors enforceable reliability standards but wants to work with the Committee on the exact language. I took this as confirmation of what we have heard informally from DOE in terms of key players there not being enamored of the NERC consensus approach at least as it exists in its old long form. 4. Sens. Craig and Cantwell pushed Blake on why the Administration has not fully supported BPA's request for a debt limit increase to finance expansion of the BPA grid. Blake said they support the BPA expansion projects but that OMB feels BPA has enough borrowing authority through 2003. This did not sit well with Craig and Cantwell. I spoke with Sen. Craig in the hall following up on a conversation I had with him the other evening about BPA and he stressed that he is committed to getting BPA the debt limit it needs. As you know commercial has asked us to help BPA given matters pending between Enron and BPA. 5. On the first private sector panel even John Rowe the Co-CEO of Exelon and past EEI chairman (testifying for his company and EEI) said several times that there should be strong RTOs that each cover a wide idea. He said his board voted yesterday to sell its transmission assets IF a strong independent operator could be found. Rowe also said that RTOs should be encouraged (implying not mandatory?). The APPA witness was strong on RTOs saying that all entities will be part of RTOs even without legislation. NRECA said that co-ops would oppose federal jurisdiction over them and that they favor voluntary RTOs. EPSA made the usual case for competition open access RTOs etc. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Per Mary Clark x37325 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I think this is an excellent letter. I agree with Sue's comments and have included her changes on Page 3. All changes have been marked in this version. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Last night Linda and I spent a fairly long time with Leon Lowery Chairman Bingaman's chief electricity advisor to discuss our concerns with the transparency and market-based rate language -- while at the same time commending the transmission access language in the draft and strategizing how to support the chairman in that regard. We made progress on transparency less so on market-based rates. On transparency Leon understands our concerns. In a nutshell he seemed amenable to amending the langauge to avoid the result of having to divulge transaction-specific trade-specific information. We persuaded Leon that was the impact of the initial language although he initially said details would be left to FERC. We persuaded him that if any data is to be provided it MUST be only in aggregate form. We also impressed on him that if as he said the intent is to leave details to FERC -- then more of the details should be left to FERC not set by statute. Leon strongly advised that we seek to craft language consistent with the above exchange that makes as few changes to the draft as needed to make the necessary corrections. This will make it easier for Leon to navigate the internal waters of the staff. (Sam Fowler th chief counsel is a drafting stickler). Others should obviously weigh in and review this but to facilitate internal comments (we need to get back to Leon today) here is my take on what he has in mind. Under new sec. 218(b) (to be added to the FPA by bill sec. 413) (pg. 13) under information required we would rewrite paragraph 2 as follows: (2) each broker exchange or other market-making entity that matches offers to sell and offers to buy wholesale electric energy in interstate commerce to provide aggregate statistical information about its sales of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce. The effect of the language change is drop the reference to sale prices of each sale of electric energy. By leaving it as aggregate statistical information this should give FERC maximum flexibility to permit indexes etc. As to the timely basis of information release (subsection (c)) the alternatives sent yesterday would require this to be done on the Internet after the end of the trading day. If we can restrict this to aggregate data question arises whether we want to concede that this would be done daily. That suggests the data to be collected would be more than we would want I think. Here is a take on how we might suggest a revision to that language to give FERC more leeway: (c) TIMELY BASIS -- The Commission shall require the information required under subsection (b) to be posted on the Internet and updated as frequently as practicable and appropriate. The change is to add appropriate so that FERC can consider other than whether posting is practicable. The use of appropriate is what came to mind -- perhaps there is some other word or phrase like consistent with ... or promote competition or some way of saying there are policy considerations other than practicability. There should be some valid purpose established before data is released. I would argue that the (d) language on commercially sensitive information goes only to exempting from disclosure not when disclosure is appropriate. Please let me have your thoughts although the tragedy in NYC and DC now underway will probably make this not a day to transact such business on the Hill. Will provide a further report on market-based rates. In sum Leon was not as sympathetic on this issue but asked for our ideas and further arguments. We sense Leon personally feels strongly about moving the FPA to some linkage to competitive markets. His argument is that market participants can be doing everything by the book and the result can still be uncompetitive markets. We pushed that penalizing us is not the answer -- nor is increasing regulatory uncertainty about deals doing to help keep prices down. Leon clearly does not intend this language to punish Enron -- but others who we might all agree have done things that are not in keeping with competitive markets. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Kate Not yet. I will know sometimes in August - September. Vince [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Yes From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/19/2001 03:45 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Make sense for me to attend the meeting? Steven J Kean 04/19/2001 12:31 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: I got a voicemail fro Ken. He would be happy to meet with Freeman. He is willing to work on other times but suggested the following After 3:00 on May 2nd (right after Ken's speech to the RGA) or late the day before or in the morning of the second (to do this though he would have to cancel his speech to the Texas Governor's business council but he is willing to do this if necessary) His least preferred alternative in this general time frame would be early morning on the third. Jeff -- could you coordinate with Rosie to get the time and place nailed down? [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Return-Path: <Gregory_Gordon@ssrn.com> Received: from rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (rly-xd03.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.168]) by air-xd05.mail.aol.com (v77.14) with ESMTP Sun 10 Dec 2000 10:57:06 -0500 Received: from zeus.ssrn.com (zeus.ssrn.com [38.202.236.235]) by rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (v77.27) with ESMTP Sun 10 Dec 2000 10:56:51 -0500 Received: from ssrn.com ([38.202.236.235]) by zeus.ssrn.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-61092U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com Sun 10 Dec 2000 10:56:50 -0500 Subject: Successful purchase of NBER Paper Date: Sun 10 Dec 2000 10:56:49 -0500 From: Gregory_Gordon@ssrn.com (Gregory_Gordon) To: <vkaminski@aol.com> CC: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Unknown Dear Wincenty Kaminski: Thank you for your purchase at Social Science Research Network. Your credit card has been charged $ 5.00. This charge will appear on your statement as Social Science Electronic Publishing our parent company. The confirmation number for this transaction is NBER_103397 and a summary of your order is below. If you have any questions about this charge please email Mailto:NBERSupport@ssrn.com for assistance. If you have any comments or suggestions about how SSRN can improve this service please let me know at Thank you Gregory Gordon President ORDER INFORMATION Diagnosing Market Power in California's Restructured Wholesale Electricity Market NBER Collection Borenstein / Bushnell / Wolak BILLING INFORMATION Wincenty Kaminski 1400 Smith Houston TX 77002 USA 713 853 3848 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Privileged and Confidential This email contains legal advice Hoyt and Melissa I am assuming that we are discussing contract personnel who provide some sort of services for MG/RW. It looks like there may be some key personnel we want to employ but that there are many whom we don't want to hire. I am not really familiar with the specific facts here. The question of a joint employer arises when a company treats its contract personnel like its own -- by setting compensation controlling their activities engaging in etc. decisions and other ways in which an employer treats its own employees. So if the plan is to have workers doing the same thing with one as a contractor and one as an employee there could be some issues particularly if they share a supervisor. Unfortunately that often is the case with contract personnel. If there are distinctions among the various responsibilities of these workers -- and like workers are treated similarly -- the risk may be reduced. It is cleanest however to use all of these workers through the contracting agency for a while (assume we don't want to hire them all which is the other alternative). Then the company may want to make selected offers to people who may be in a managerial role or have some other distinction from the bulk of the contract workers. I would like additional information on this situation before reaching a definitive conclusion. So let's try to discuss it. I am booked until about 11 this morning but am available after that. Michelle Hoyt Thomas@ENRON 08/08/2000 04:21 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Melissa Laing/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Priviliged and Confidential communication to my attorney Re: Henry Bath LA Michelle I guess emails will get to you sooner if I remember to add you to the addressee list! Sorry. Hoyt ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: In our litigation meeting last Tuesday we learned that netting of spot purchases and sales is of paramount importance in limiting our exposure to refunds under the FERC's July 26 Order in both the California and Pacific Northwest proceedings. However in the California proceeding we are also afforded the opportunity in the Order to offset our receivables against any refund that would otherwise have to be paid by us. Also to the extent that our receivables exceed the refund amount the Order provides for payment of interest to us in accordance with CFR Section 35.19a. At present I am aware of the existence of three receivables. As you will recall I mentioned at Tuesday's meeting that we should be able to treat as a receivable for purposes of offset the revenues due us from the application of the CAISO underscheduling penalty. I communicated the possibility of offsetting this receivable against any potential refund at this mornings Western Wholesale conference call and subsequent research conducted by Alan Comnes indicates that the CAISO owes us $30MM as per the CAISO's own numbers. The CAISO also owes us approximately $40MM due to nonpayment for one to two months of business. These two figures alone totalling approximately $70MM exceed the estimate of our potential exposure in the California proceeding. Finally the negative CTC issue is another receivable due us by IOU's that under the plain language of the Order could potentially be used to offset any refund amount. I am not aware of the magnitude of this receivable but do understand that there are some sensitivities regarding this issue including concerns about revealing the amount of the credit due us. It is likely that the amount would become public if it is presented in the California proceeding. Please give us your thoughts as to the use of the CTC receivable to offset potential refunds in the California proceeding. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Martin: Lance will be out of town on the 6th of December and he suggested that you interview Jingming (Marshall) in his place (it is a telephone=20 interview). =20 Can you do that? Thanks! Shirley ----------------- [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Minor changes shown on the attached (gotta get the big guy's title right). Lisa Connolly@EES 05/06/2001 08:17 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: DRAFT RELEASE Please see attached press release with Skilling quote in red and on top of second page. The press conference is scheduled for 3:30pm on Monday May 7. The City will need our comment by 10am Monday morning. Thanks Lisa X54840 cell - 713-569-9563. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Yes Phillippe left to join a firm in New York -- I don't know who. Christopher Culberson <cmculbe@us.ibm.com> on 06/26/2001 02:42:53 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Philippe Steven I hear Philippe is leaving for Putnam any truth to this? I've been unable to contact him directly. Thanks in advance. Best Regards Chris M. Culberson cmculbe@us.ibm.com (281) 556-8104 [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Jim If you are able to provide this to Dan for the meeting I would appreciate it. He may not want to circulate it to the group. It is intended as a work product for attorney. This e-mail and the attachments were prepared at the request of counsel. <<NOTES FOR DISCUSSION.doc>> Jan Paul Acton Vice President Charles River Associates 1201 F St. NW Suite 700 Washington DC 20004-1204 Voice: (202) 662 3902 Fax: (202) 662 3910 ***** This electronic message contains information from the consulting firm of Charles River Associates Inc. which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure copying distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error please notify us by telephone (617 425-3582) or by e-mail (postmaster@crai.com) immediately. ***** - NOTES FOR DISCUSSION.doc [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: This looks like a run-of-the-mill conference except that the guest list is fairly senior. Any interest? If not let Amy know. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Attached is the draft. It combines all three announcements into one with a common format. It reflects a just the facts approach. Let me know if you have changes (or answers to the questions in the text). [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Ross Malme -- 7587 Anthony D -- 6235 [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: You missed logistics as a rotaion. Also - Let's leave out where they graduate to. This might be an issue with the AA program if we say that they are going to re-enter the program. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Richard and Elizabeth At Christian's suggestion I am sending a memo I prepared summarizing some of the more exotic strategies used by our traders. Christian has reviewed the memorandum and believes that it will assist you both in preparing for our Thursday meeting. Between now and Thursday Christian and I are going to analyze the ISO tariff to determine if the tariff prohibits any of these strategies. Steve [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: CAISO BOG 10/25/01 Notes taken by G. Alan Comnes Meeting went from about 10:30 to 1 p.m. Written materials discussed at this meeting are available at www.caiso.com/bog. 1. Budget. Board approved budget which contains a significant increase in GMCs and for the first time applies GMC fees on the self provision of A/S. The motion to adopt was modified to say the Board would revisit budget if in response to Gov. Davis requests to par budgets the CAISO budget is cut. 2. Retirement plan Audit 3. Allocation of Above-MCP 487 charges. This mechanism will improve the allocation of OOM costs so that the per-MWh charges match up with actual OOM costs. Stated that penalty revenues used to lower OOM costs could come from imbalance penalties. Action. approved (?) to allow staff to make a tariff amendment on this change. 4. Winter Assessment. Presentation by staff Kahn took issue (i.e. did not even want staff report presented) that CAISO does an assessment without consulting the Power Authority CPUC and the CEC. Worried about conflicting with the other resource assessments out there and giving media ways to take shots at DWR buying practices. In the end the full presentation was not given but questions were asked about whether the assessment spells trouble or provides assurance. The answer: things are tight in some months but are expected to be ok given the level of conservative assumptions used in the analysis. Action: staff was tasked to compare this assessment with CEC's and others and come back in another month. 5. Generator maintenance program. Will use GADS data. This program is mandatory for PGA generator units. CAISO staffer represented that no other ISO has a prescriptive program like the one CAISO is proposing. Current schedule: brief FERC staff next week return to Board in November for approval make FERC filing implement in early '02. Benchmarks are based on each unit's historical performance i.e. dogs will be benchmarked against their past doggy behavior. There is no component to raise the bar on performance but a unit that falls relative to past performance would trigger further review. 6. MSC Selection Committee. MSC provides independent review of the CAISO markets for CAISO the state and FERC. Wolak is the only member left at the moment. Selection committee will be Sheffrin Wolak and Borenstein. Candidates will go to Exec. Director and the final candidates to the Board in February 2002 (!). Kahn questioned how the MSC can survive with only one member and take until February 02 to select a final members. Nonetheless the glacially paced schedule was adopted. 7. FERC RTO Seams Issues. Steve Greenleaf presented. Updated BOG on RTO week and said that the 4 RTO model took a step backward (off the table in the words of Chair Wood) in response to criticism from state PUCs on Thursday. (Is this an accurate recounting of Day 4?). ISO is engaged in interregional coordination. Mentioned CSIC group Mentions SSGWY's (?)sponsorship of a market monitoring workshop on November 16. 8. Update of CERS Settlement BEEP/AS Payment Procedure. Edison and PG&E are making progress but no agreement with CERS have been reached. SDG&E signed and the procedure was implemented at least in part with SDG&E. 9. Monthly reports: financial. 10. Monthly reports: DMA. Sheffrin. Mostly followed the briefing charts. Emphasized the following: CERS OOM purchases are generally down and are reasonably priced once purchases and sales are disaggregated. Said that suppliers are still bidding above costs. DMA files confidential reports that include info on bidding data weekly to FERC. Bids are not coming down. Intrazonal congestion is up due to new generation coming on line. That allows generators to play the dec game. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I heard you were a big hit. Leslie Lawner 03/20/2001 08:45 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: FERC's marketing affiliate conference Becky and I attended FERC's gas marketing affiliate conference last week. Non-affiliated competitors continue to build straw men and describe abuses with no real evidence to back them up (the funny money argument and capacity hoarding are two examples. The funny money argument assumes marketing affiliates will bid above market rates for capacity because they excess payment is going to the corporate bottom line. Hoarding capacity to drive up price may be an issue but it is not a marketing affiliate issue as anyone can do it). FERC staff did not seem terribly sympathetic to the points made but at least one FERC staffer seemed to believe that one solution would be to require the pipelines to offer capacity in smaller blocks to let smaller entities put together bids. FERC also indicated they were in fact auditing compliance but in a non-public way. There were some concerns voiced which I agree with and there is an opportunity to file additional comments on Apr. 30. I would like to put the following in these comments: Evidence of affiliate abuse/preference is just not there. The best folks can do is make up stuff. We welcome FERC monitoring if that is needed to bring confidence to the marketplace that abuse is not occurring. But the issue is really whether we do have a crisis of confidence or merely a bunch of disgruntled competitors who are just seeking to neutralize the affiliated competitors). The FERC rules and the information reported (with a caveat) under those rules are adequate for detection and enforcement and deterrence. That said the definition of marketing affiliate should be expanded to include affiliated electric generators who are siting plants along affiliate pipelines. The pipeline 637 reporting and internet systems should allow users to download and manipulate transportation related data which is not currently the case. We also need to address a deal on Northern where ENA took capacity at a discount albeit after other parties had an opportunity to match our bid. This was a deal brought up in the conference. Let me know how this sounds. Thanks. [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: looks ok to me Karen Denne 03/13/2001 11:54 AM To: Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Revised Merger Release & Q&A fyi... ----------------- [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Skilling will be speaking at the National Press Club next week. He'll give an overview of Enron's business talk about what's going on in power markets and what should be done to fix the current problems. California will get covered as well. Other than what we have already discussed is there anything Jeff should know or address in his remarks? [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Attached is the final letter. Please note - there was a small change at the top of page 2. [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks I hope we get there soon. Mary Clark 09/26/2000 01:55 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: So you will know . . . Steve I'm leading a team with Beth Tilney that will roll out communications to employees worldwide after our stock price closes at $100. We will keep you posted on our plans as they materialize. Mary [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please respond to ANDREW - 7138536278 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert Chairman & CEO Greg Whalley President & COO Mark Haedicke Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures') which have been revised as of November 15 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information our reputation for integrity and EWS and its employees from legal liability. You are required to become familiar with and to comply with the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419 Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544 Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214 Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Thanks for your message. I do think we need to talk this through. In the meantime though let's not make anymore VPs until this is resolved. As I said in my original message I am not looking to undo what has been done but to make sure we don't do it again unless the process is followed. I understand that there are significant title differences across the regions we operate. In fact one of the people in my organization who did not make VP is Dennis Vegas who has done an extraordinary job in Latin America. Notwithstanding his regional focus (and the significance of a VP title in his region) he was put through the company wide process and he David Haug and I submit everyone else on the Exec Comm understood that every new VP would go through the same process regardless of regional assignment (with the exception of certain joint venture companies). But I maintain that we need some consistency in the VP title in particular -- i.e. that it remain an Enron-wide title granted only through the PRC process. Though I don't personally feel this way for many people in the organization the VP title means something separate from the compensation structure it implies something like making partner in a legal or consulting firm. Making that cut should not vary based on where you live or what region you support. I also understand the point about needing a certain title for external purposes. In my organization we are dealing with very title-conscious elected officials and media. I can make the case for every one of my directors and senior directors that they would be more effective externally if they carried a more senior title regardless of any change in compensation. As an executive committee we elected to make such an exception only for legacy title holders -- i.e. people who had previously made VP outside the process. Everyone in my organization To: Cindy Olson@ENRON Steven J Kean@EES cc: Sanjay Subject: Job Titles and Job Banding From reading the e-mails on the issue regarding Regional Vice President at Enron India it sounds like there will be more discussion on this issue. I know that issues like this generally come up at the Enron ExCom level. There are a few issues that need to be kept in mind and although Cindy and I have discussed these in the past I have not had an opportunity to pursue them further (but would be happy to help out on this). I have noticed these not only in India but also in the other international settings where I have worked for Enron during the past several years. 1. International job titles and domestic job titles do not correlate. For example in India the title Director implies a very senior person within the organization (well above VP) whereas in the Enron domestic world it is a position below VP. Managing Director within Enron is below the most senior levels but in India a MD is the Ken Lay equivalent. For this reason I cannot use Managing Director in my title or on my business card although this is my title for Enron Houston purposes. 2. Job titles are much more important in an international setting than in a domestic setting. For example in Houston we have people at the director (and probably manager) level who lead deal teams and bring deals to successful closing. In an international setting particularly India to get to the decision-makers in your counterpart organization an officer title of VP or above is very often required. To a certain degree this is form over substance but that's what works over here. 3. To solve some of these problems Enron should consider doing what some other international companies have done (and I think Cindy and her team may already be working on this). A job banding study should be done and based on responsibilities everyone globally should be placed in a band. It would not be a title band of VP or director or manager but rather a band with a non-title classification. I hate to suggest a band with numbers such as 1 through 15 because that sounds way too much like the government but something like that would work. Once this is done communication is made to employees that the band is what is key in determining their compensation and level within the organization. Then the business units can rely on their particular market dynamics or on what their competition is doing to determine job titles. Thus if the Global Origination group needs to have a title of Senior Trader and EECC needs a title of Project Leader and Enron India needs a Regional Vice President all can be accomplished while keeping these same people at a consistent level for global Enron purposes. I will be happy to discuss this further with any of you. Plus I will volunteer to participate in finding a solution that works for all of Enron while taking into account the specifc business unit and/or global function needs. Wade [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Here is the latest copy. Once you may the changes I am going to run it by Mark Metts and send it over to CINergy. I am trying to get this sogned today so I can head down to Florida to meet up with Don and company. Thanks Ben ----------------- [/INST] Category: Document editing/checking(collaboration)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I am having lunch on Monday with Michael Isikoff a newsweek investigative reporter. He is doing yet another Ken Lay/Enron political influence story. One of the things he wants to talk about though -- and I think this is a good sign -- is Enron's climate change policy and how it compares to the administration's. What I need from you as soon as possible is a timeline (what the Administration said when -- doesn't have to be down to the day) the Administrations position and our position (and how they differ). Borrow heavily from existing materials. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: When we have described the problems and solutions for California we have focussed on generation siting and flexibility to hedge. We have stayed away from transmission issues on the assumption that California with its ISO and PX does not suffer from the same discrimination issues as other parts of the country. Is this true? Does California's system layer in priorities for utility use of the system -- eg doesn't PG&E control path 15? Does that control provide advantageous access to PG&E? Are there other examples and are there links between these preferences and the current problems in California? As we are trying to convert reliability and pricing concerns into FERC action these would be helpful arguments to have available to us. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: This is the negative CTC claim. Transmission and other charges we owe have been set off ie this is a net amount and the gross CTC is much larger- on the order of $900MM. Decision to use or not is not final in Enron keep confidential. The potential witness would be Wanda Curry. Thanks Ray ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: We will discuss at the next Staff meeting. Thanks for bringing it up. Any= feedback from the floor meeting yesterday would be appreciated. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: For those who attended the FERC meeting yesterday can anyone elaborate on the reference in the Energy Daily article today that said Pat Wood remarked at the meeting that the Barton RTO language is balanced and that he likes it. I am working on our own and helping EPSA with their comments on the Barton language which is as we know a retrenchment from current law and FERC's plans on RTOs. But if Pat Wood likes it and thinks it is balanced that undercuts our position. Since the trade press is not always accurate I thought I would first check with those of you who were there. Thanks. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please 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] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: These were the messages in your voicemail: 1. 10/18/01 - Margaret Allen ....needed your advice on whether her sister should take job with Cal-Pine or Kinder Morgan 2. 10/19/01 - Adrianne Engler ....regarding candidantes that you were suppose to phone interview. (you have sent her an email since this) 3. 10/23/01 - Bob Shults(X3-0397)....they met with Nymex last week and are getting ready send the proposal ont eh document you saw last week. He wants to make sure that you are okay with this and dont have any issues. [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Baby I'm going to San Francisco on Aug 14?(Sunday) returning Wednesday. Wanna go?? [/INST] Category: Purely Personal

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I need to get the form to show compliance but I cannot get it online--I cannot remember all my passwords. Can you get this form for me? Thx. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

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

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

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

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: -Larry Jester(mid yr-superior and yr end-strong)-Reports to D. Gilbert-Smith .Real time trader great job looking for career advancement possibilities -Keller Mayeaux (mid yr-strong and yr end-satisfactory)-He was disgruntled at yr end and as a result he asked to get out of agreement and leave Enron now he w/d like to stay at Enron. Jester is preferable to Mayeaux. Other groups are recruiting Jester. [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: The quotes are accurate but I did not say California does not have a supply problem. Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/19/2001 06:04 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron Subject: Press Clipping - Germany (Enron Mention) Steve - FYI and presumably they misquoted you on the problem (at least in California) not being a function of indaequate capacity (it is one of the root causes we have been pointing to over here among others). mcs ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: There are now two House hearnigs tomorrow not just one. In the morning there is a panel on reliability siting and incentive pricing for transmission. Jim Steffes is the EPSA witness. The RTO-related hearing originally scheduled on a separate day will be in the afternoon tomorrow. Peter Esposito of Dynegy is the expected EPSA witness. I am checking on the final list of other panelists and will advise. Finally Andy Black of Chairman Barton's staff advises that they will release draft RTO language as early as today. We expect that this draft will not be to our liking. Barton thinks FERC is moving too quickly and with too much force. We expect his proposal to set a deadline of something like 12 months for utilities to join an RTO. The key is in part whether he allows FERC to continue to decide what constitutes an acceptable RTO or whether he will try to grandfather in some fashion those RTOs that have been proposed by utilities to date. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Balboa and PGE filing - Cancelled for the time being - per Vanessa Bob - They'll call us when he gets back [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Rick -- I'm so sorry to hear about this but I'm glad the outlook is good. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help. From: Karen K Heathman/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/17/2001 02:38 PM To: Richard Causey/ENRON@enronXgate Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT Jeffrey McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate Rebecca Carter/ENRON@enronXgate Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate John Sherriff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Rick Buy Status Sent this out to my direct reports but I wanted you to be aware as well. Rick Buy [/INST] Category: Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)