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: looks good. Rosie you may want to include this in ken's file for the toronto trip Eric Thode 03/16/2001 08:56 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Proposed Ad for the Ontario Market I sent this to Rick Shapiro and Mark Palmer as well. This is an ad created for use in the Ontario market and would include the logos of the signatory companies (rather than individual signatures).Aleck Dadson worked with GPC on its creation. It is part of the total plan which includes Ken Lay's visit to Toronto April 4 to meet with media and government leaders. Give me your thoughts. Eric ----------------- [/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: Has this gone to Ken yet. If not please send. Maureen McVicker 06/21/2001 02:55 PM To: Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Last FINAL version Lora: This is the new Final version. The difference from the earlier version is - a few slides were taken out and the order of the remaining slides were rearranged. Please get a copy of this new Final to Ken Lay. Thanks. [/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: Attached below are the Enron comments submitted to NERC and the other parties involved in the NERC-led discussions on reliability legislation. The comments indicate that Enron does not support the final version on which comments were requested by today. The comments as submitted were reviewed by Jim Sarah and Charles and reflect their suggested changes. Thanks to them for their assistance. [/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: EB 4712C Ext. 3-1586 [/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: Here are Barton talking points per our conversation last night. We will separately send a favorable Washington Post article on FERC's meeting yesterday as it relates to RTOs. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Attached is Enron North America Corp.'s suggested revisions to your pro forma confidentiality agreement. Please review and let us know if the suggested revisions are approved. Thanks for your help Ruth Concannon Telephone: (713) 853-1667 Fax: (713) 646-8453 e-mail: ruth.concannon@enron.com [/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 read and follow below: 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: Tell him we are sending his note on to the appropriate person. MARY CLARK 04/03/2001 03:23 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Computers Steve I need your help in responding to this question. 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: Thanks I will attend. 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: When we talked about me speaking at the conference in Nov. Enron's management conference had not yet been scheduled. Now it has and of course it conflicts... it also conflicts out just about every other senior person at Enron. I will take care of finding a substitute but wanted your thoughts on a couple of candidates: how about Seabron Adamson Richard Tabors or Scott Magrane(sp?). The latter is at Goldman Sachs and last time I talked to him was working on Transcos. Let me know what you think and let me know who you were working with at FEBA so I can take care of the problem. 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: Please respond to vkaminskiThis article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by vkaminski@aol.com. /-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\ Looking for better IT solutions? Toshiba is uniting digital mobile and network innovations in a bold new vision of Information Technology for today and tomorrow. Take a closer look at life in the new Digital Age. And imagine how good IT can be. Visit Toshiba.com for more details. The Real Wolf RECKONINGS By PAUL KRUGMAN ecently I received a letter from an economist I respect chiding me for my Naderite columns on the California energy crisis. He just didn't believe that market manipulation by power companies could possibly be an important issue it sounded too much to him like the sort of thing one hears from knee-jerk leftists who blame greedy capitalists for every problem be it third-world poverty or high apartment rents. The left has cried Wolf! so many times that sensible people have learned to discount such claims. But now a bona fide wolf has arrived whose predatory behavior is doing terrible damage to our most populous state - and nobody will believe it. True California would be heading for a summer of power shortages even if it had never deregulated. And even if there was workable competition in the wholesale electricity market prices in that market would spike during periods of peak demand transferring billions of dollars from either taxpayers or consumers to the generators. But the evidence is now overwhelming that there isn't workable competition in California's power market and that the actions of generators gaming the system have greatly magnified the crisis. The key fact is that California has somehow remained in a state of more or less continuous power shortage and very high wholesale prices regardless of the level of demand. A rash of outages has kept the electricity market conveniently - and very profitably - short of supply even during periods of low demand when there ought to be lots of excess capacity. As Frank Wolak the Stanford economist who also advises the state's power grid has pointed out an outage at a power plant is a lot like an employee calling in sick. You can't tell directly whether he is really sick or has chosen to take the day off for other reasons but you can look for circumstantial evidence. And such evidence has convinced Mr. Wolak that generators use forced outages strategically to withhold capacity from the market - a view shared by a growing number of other researchers. Which brings us to the latest move by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. On Wednesday the commission apparently decided to offer California some relief and put new price caps in place on the California electricity market. I say apparently because the more you look at the plan the less likely it seems to be any help at all. Indeed the measure was passed on a 2-to-1 vote with William Massey - the one commissioner who has been sympathetic to calls for price controls - voting against it on the grounds that it would be ineffectual. What's wrong with FERC's plan? First it caps prices only in emergency conditions - ignoring the fact that electricity prices have stayed at hard- to-explain levels even when there is no emergency. In effect the plan is laid out as if the electricity market were really competitive in spite of all the evidence that it is not. Second even those emergency price caps are full of loopholes offering extensive opportunities for what Mr. Wolak calls megawatt laundering - selling power to affiliated companies that for one reason or another are exempted from the price controls (for example the controls do not apply to imports from neighboring states) then selling it back into the California market. Severin Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute adds that because the allowed price depends on the cost of generation at the least efficient plant generators will have a clear incentive to produce inefficiently: I predict we will find some plants we never heard of before that are suddenly operating again and they will be pretty inefficient. The general verdict seems to be that this is not a serious plan. There are serious proposals to mitigate the crisis out there - indeed last fall Mr. Wolak submitted a proposal that was well received by other experts - but FERC has ignored all of them. The charitable interpretation is that FERC still doesn't get it that it just can't bring itself to believe that this time the wolf is real. The uncharitable interpretation is that last week's action was meant to fail. The Medley Report an online newsletter calls the FERC plan a grand exercise in posturing without substance . . . a very clever temporary move by the Bush administration to deflect any political fallout from the looming disaster. Whatever the explanation the plain fact is that FERC and the administration have yet to offer California any significant relief. Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the most authoritative news coverage on the Web updated throughout the day. Become a member today! It's free! http://www.nytimes.com?eta HOW TO ADVERTISE For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web please contact Alyson Racer at alyson@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Lydia McGowan (Chairman Frisbee) 410 767 8072 Christa Donahue (PFI in North Carolina -- 2024672778) Greg Piper Carol Dillon 503-464-8536 Kathleen -- Providence Gas (Mike McCall) Linda Clemmons -- MIT forum at MIT [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Felicia This is a merchant asset which we currently own 100% but plan to sell down in the coming months. It absolutely has separate HR functions from Enron -- they do not participate in Enron benefits and we are working hard to prevent any claims that we could be a joint employer with it. Thoughts? Michelle Enron North America Corp. From: Felecia Acevedo @ ENRON 11/02/2000 08:56 AM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys Michelle who is GSP? Are they a legal entity? Are they on our payroll? If they are we filed EEO-1's for them. Below is the criteria to file an EEO-1 report: Standard Form 100 must be filed by - A. All private employers who are: (1) subject to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972) with 100 or more employees EXCLUDING State and local governments primary and secondary school systems institutions of higher education Indian tribes and tax-exempt private membership clubs other than labor organizations OR (2) subject to Title VII who have fewer than 100 employees if the company is owned or affiliated with another company or there is centralized ownership control or management (such as central control of personnel policies and labor relations) so that the group legally constitutes a single enterprise and the entire enterprise employs a total of 100 or more employees. B. All federal contractors (private employers) who: (1) are not exempt as provided for by 41 CFR 60-1.5 (2) have 50 or more employees and (a) are prime contractors or first-tier subcontractors and have a contract subcontract or purchase order amounting to $50000 or more or (b) serve as a depository of Government funds in any amount or (c) is a financial institution which is an issuing and paying agent for U.S. Savings Bonds and Notes. All multi-establishment employers i.e. employers doing business at more than one establishment must file: (1) a report covering the principal or headquarters office (2) a separate report for each establishment employing 50 or more persons (3) a consolidated report that MUST include ALL employees by race sex and job category in establishments with 50 or more employees as well as establishments with fewer than 50 employees and (4) a list showing the name address total employment and major activity for each establishment employ-ing fewer than 50 persons must accompany the consolidated report. All forms for a multi-establishment company must be collected by the headquarters office for its establishments or by the parent corporation for its subsidiary holdings and submitted in one package. For the purposes of this report the term parent corporation refers to any corporation which owns all or the majority stock of another corporation so that the latter stands in the relation to it of a subsidiary. The OFCCP has always held that subsidiary companies that do not have direct govt contracts must comply with AAP regulations if the parent company or other subsidiary companies benefit from government contracts. Their line of thought is that the subsidiary without government contracts benefits indirectly from the contract as well. If GSP is completely free standing and they do not participate in Enron's benefits abide by our policies or procedures participate in our bonus process that may partially or wholly be funded by Enron Corp. etc. they may have some type of argement not to comply but I doubt it. If we own them over 51% I don't see a way they could not file EEO-1's and have an AAP. We do all the AAP's in Corporate so if this is a freestanding Business Unit I need to know. Thanks! Felecia Michelle Cash@ECT 11/01/2000 07:49 PM To: Felecia Acevedo/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys Felicia Does this sound right to you? Just wanted to confirm. Thanks. Michelle ----------------- [/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: As we discussed. ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: 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: Thanks. I'm on top of it. Christian Yoder 09/11/2000 08:06 AM To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Request Confidential Information by FERC Since Mary has been handling the ISO investigation I am assuming she is the point person for this one too. ---cgy ----------------- [/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: Congratulations! ----------------- [/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: Maybe Kathleen for Gas and Steve or Rick for Electricity. Fiona Grant is primary contact Kim Chandler is backup contact. [/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 attended both the House and Senate energy committee hearings today. House hearing was in the Barton Subcommittee (Energy & Air Quality). Senate hearing was on last week's FERC order on a soft price cap and related issues. The House witnesses were dominated by California officials: Cal Energy Commission Cal Air Resources Board Chairman of Gov Davis Generation Implementation Task Force. In addition there were witnesses from the Western Area Power Admin and Bonneville PA. The Senate witnesses were the three FERC commissioners. HIghlights Chairman Barton said it is still his intention to try to mark up the Barton bill H.R. 1647 next week (many on and off the Subcommittee doubt this will happen we are gathering political intelligence on those prospects and will report back with more information and conclusions once that is done) Chairman Barton also said he may go to California next week. There was considerable emphasis at both hearings about the alleged role that higher natural gas prices into California play in the electric power rate increases several witnesses focused on difference in alleged transportation costs for similar differences between California and non-CA states FERC at the Senate hearing said that today the commission announced a staff technical conference for later this month on all aspects of the natural gas market as it relates to California a House member from Southern Illinois coal country attacked California for using only natural gas in its new power plants. The House witnesses primarily BPA but also the California witnesses attacked the negawatt provision in sec. 102 of the Barton bill the criticism was that BPA would be forced to purchase power on the open market at a high price since it is short sell it to the DSIs under contract let the DSI sell it at market rates and capture the difference BPA witness said that thus sec. 102 would make it difficult if not impossible to implement their strategy to avoid as much as a 200 percent rate increase on 10/1/01 BPA testimony will make it tough for Members of Congress from that service region to support sec. 102. Both hearings also touched on how difficult it would be to actually devise a price cap at the House hearing none of those advocating a price cap among the witnesses could answer excellent questions about exactly how this could be done the witnesses just said cost plus a reasonable profit and said leave the details to FERC at afternoon Senate hearing Chairman Hebert had the staff bring in 15 boxes from one FP&L case to show how a price cap would take too long to bring any relief to California this summer he said last week's soft price cap is much better. Also on the price cap Rep. Walden (R-OR) got the Cal Energy Comm chair to admit that if the price caps had been in place earlier California would NOT have taken the conservation and new generation steps that it has taken recently. The interplay among the FERC commissioners was much more contentious than it was a House hearing on Tuesday although it could have been worse when Senate Chairman Murkowski (R-AK) said that help is on the way in the form of the nominees for the two vacancies Sen. Dorgan (D-ND) made a comment that suggested that the confirmation process will not be smooth the same concern came from the interplay among the Senators which was also somewhat contentious at times. Please advise if you have any questions or would like further details. [/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 have looked it over. I think they would do a good job. Another idea: Dick Foster (advisor to Enron's Board and Senior Director at McKinsey) has a great book out: Creative Destruction. I was on a panel with him recently where he shared some of his research. He is a very good presenter he knows Enron well and his work is first rate. He might be a good addition. I have an idea on the breakout sessions. It needs some work but I'd like to talk it through with you. TERRIE JAMES@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 07/05/2001 01:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Funky Business Steve Have you had a chance to look at the book Funky Business and to give any thought to having Jonas present at the Management Conference? I know you have a thousand other things on your plate not the least of which is California so I understand if the answer is no. However they've been contacted by someone else about the date so we may be forced to decide rather soon. On a related subject I'm contemplating another topic for the conference. I'd seen an article in Fortune several months ago titled Managing for the Slowdown. It talked about new challenges managers face in light of the economic downturn. (Most young managers have never experienced anything but boom times.) The article also outlines a dozen or so things companies should be thinking about now. (Use the downturn as a new opportunity to evaluate people. Overhaul your budget process. Don't stop communicating. etc.) I think it would be beneficial to address similar strategies and ideas with our managers. I'd love to get your thoughts on this idea. (Is it appropriate for Enron or am I just seeing the world through bleak-colored glasses?) Terrie James Sr. Director Corporate Communication Enron Broadband Services 713-853-7727 (phone) 713-646-8887 (fax) terrie_james@enron.net [/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: =09Are there any plans for either Enron or Dynegy (or both) to initiate inf= ormation dissemination to Capitol Hill as is usually =09done in these situations? This is what I have experienced when on the H= ill and when representing companies either =09being acquired or doing the merger/acquisition. Our friends on the Hill= will wonder where we and they have been =09particularly if as is likely we may need them later on. Better to get= in with them on the ground floor. I know there is a =09lot going on but it would be beneficial to the merger approval process = to at least have informal contacts starting this week =09before they leave for Thanksgiving. =09Thanks for the conference calls to keep us up to date and for being cand= id in doing so. =09John [/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: Congrats Linda Robertson 07/19/2001 09:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron mark s palmer/enron@enronXgate@Enron cc: Subject: California Amendments DEFEATED! John Shelk will provide a more thorough report in a later Email but I just wanted you to know that the Waxman price cap amendment was just defeated in full Committee markup and the Eshoo refund amendment was defeated. Both by sizable margins. [/INST] Category: 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: Sue Mara Lance McCarthy 37141 [/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: 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: Looks like a full slate you're off to a great start. Maureen -- please put times and locations on my calendar as an fyi. Sarah Palmer@ECT 01/05/2000 02:24 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: 2000 eSpeak Schedule Steve: Attached are the eSpeak events currently scheduled for 2000. Please review at your convenience. Have a great day! The eThink Team [/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: Attached are three documents (cover memo draft settlement proposal settlement procedures timeline) comprising SRP's formal proposal to resolve five pending dockets RP99-507 (Indicated Shippers' Complaint) RP00-336 (Order No. 637 Allocation and Pooling Issues only) RP99-139 (ONEOK Complaint) RP01-484 (Indicated Shippers/California Complaint) and RP01-486 (Texas New Mexico and Arizona Shippers' Complaint). We appreciate the suggestions received to date and believe that while an uncontested settlement may be unlikely a sufficient nucleus is forming around the elements of this proposal that will lead to the filing of an Offer of Settlement and ultimate FERC approval as in the public interest. We encourage your active participation in this process. Note that while Advisory Staff present at the July 18 Technical Conference is aware conceptually that SRP will be distributing a settlement proposal this proposal has not been distributed to the Advisory Staff. This proposal has been sent to Rick Miles Director Dispute Resolution Services for informational purposes only at this time. Joel L. Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com <<SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc>> <<SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc>> <<Proceduralschedule.doc>> - SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc - SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc - Proceduralschedule.doc [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Let's ask Jeff Hines(?) our opinion research guy to put a few short questions together and send it out. We may also want to include a link so people can view the commercials again before answering. Also I was talking with Beth Tilney today about our website (and the fact that every business unit now feels free to go do their own thing). We thought it would be a good idea to add this topic to the brand conference (perhaps as part of an existing segment). ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Looks good. I think you implicitly say this but I think you should make it more explicit: The continued growth of the new economy is threatened by our electricity infrastructure more than anything else. The high tech industry requires market driven solutions to reliability and pricing not the old style command and control regulated monopoly approach. Let's start getting the word out! Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 09/26/2000 02:06 PM To: skean@enron.com Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON mpalmer@enron.com Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: First Cut at High Tech Messages Attached is a first rough cut. Work continues but wanted to distribute for feedback. All is welcome and appreciated. [/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 forgot to email myself the brief to track changes but here are my changes in writing: p. 1: Para starting focusing on the latter that sentence change get creative to be innavotaive in its approach. p. 2: 1st full Paragraph Second sentence change uniting to common and there is a typo on line5 reduction n consumption. Should be of page 6: We need the RR for PG&E. Under Part VII Rate Design can we insert a sentence that our proposal unlike the others does not arbitrarily allocate costs to peak period. We told Scott we wuold insert the arbitrariness of other proposals several times in the brief. We also need ro insert discussion about relation of peak to offpeak prices as a 3:2 ratio which is not what other parties have proposed. page 8: 2. Derivation of Threshold Usage: first sentence delete between in first sentence. page 9: Second full paragraph begining Again the UDS's Second sentence sited should be cited p. 12: First full paragraph beginning A primary component Insert a sentence after the second sentence to mention again the arbitrariness of proposals allocatin costs between peak and offpeak. Second full parag beginning Enron's proposal can stick a sentence about arbitrariness in there too. And change more necessary goal in 4th sentence to more critical goal I don't have the email I sent out about what we agreed to insert with Scott so if you have a chance check it to make sure we did everything we agreed to. I am going to try to come into the office very early tomorrow and will check email again but my son has an appointment with the neurologist here in Houston at 9:20 am tomorrow and that is where I will be when you have the 9:30 call (we made this appointment months ago). But I will communicate with Harry and everyone else before then. Thanks. [/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: BY MARK GOLDEN A DOW JONES NEWSWIRES COLUMN NEW YORK (DOW JONES)--THE CALIFORNIA SENATE IN SACRAMENTO PASSED A WINDFALL-PROFITS TAX ON SALES OF ELECTRICITY INTO THE STATE'S WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY MARKET MONDAY AFTERNOON AT 4:50 P.M. PDT. AT ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME TIME CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR INITIATED ROLLING BLACKOUTS FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE MARCH. COINCIDENCE? PROBABLY BUT THE CONNECTION SHOULDN'T BE IGNORED. THE POLICY DECISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED IN CALIFORNIA TO DATE HAVE ACCELERATED AN ALREADY SERIOUS MARKET COLLAPSE SAID A HARVARD UNIVERSITY STUDY OF CALIFORNIA'S ENERGY CRISIS LATE LAST MONTH. THIS WEEK'S WINDFALL-PROFITS TAX BILL IS THE LATEST BLUNT INSTRUMENT WIELDED WITH POTENTIALLY DISASTROUS RESULTS. GOV. GRAY DAVIS WANTED IT AS A STICK WHEN (CONT) MEETING WITH EXECUTIVES FROM THE STATE'S MERCHANT POWER COMPANIES WEDNESDAY. THE MANEUVER WAS LESS THAN ADROIT AND THE GENERATORS WEREN'T IMPRESSED. AFTER THE MEETING WITH DAVIS RELIANT ENERGY'S (REI) JOHN STOUT SAID THAT IF THE TAX WERE IMPLEMENTED IN CALIFORNIA IT WOULD INSTANTLY BLACK OUT ALL THE GENERATION IN THE STATE. THE STATE'S LEADERS MIGHT KEEP IN MIND WHO WIELDS THE BIGGER STICK AT THIS POINT. CALIFORNIA SET UP A MARKET IN WHICH SELLERS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CHARGE VERY HIGH PRICES FOR ELECTRICITY SINCE SUPPLIES STARTED GETTING TIGHT A YEAR AGO. SELLERS SAY THEY HAVE PLAYED BY THE RULES THEY WERE GIVEN AND NOBODY HAS PROVED OTHERWISE WITH THE ONE EXCEPTION OF A FINE PAID BY WILLIAMS COMPANIES (WMB) FOR ONE PARTICULAR INSTANCE OF VIOLATING A CONTRACT. IT'S LIKE SOMEBODY INVENTED A NEW GAME INVITED YOU OVER TO PLAY AND THEN CHANGED THE RULES A COUPLE OF TIMES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GAME. THEN AFTER YOU BEAT THEM THEY INSIST YOU CHEATED SAID ONE WESTERN ENERGY TRADER. ALMOST EVERY ATTEMPT BY THE BUY SIDE - THE UTILITIES THE ISO AND NOW THE (CONT) STATE TREASURY - TO LOWER PRICES HAS RESULTED IN HIGHER PRICES OR BLACKOUTS OR BOTH. THE WINDFALL-PROFITS TAX IDEA IS THE MOST RECENT EXAMPLE BUT THOSE WHO INSIST ON PRICE CAPS SHOULD KEEP THIS IN MIND: THE ISO HAS HAD PRICE CAPS SINCE IT BEGAN OPERATION MORE THAN THREE YEARS AGO. OBVIOUSLY PRICE CAPS HAVEN'T WORKED JUST AS THEY HAVE NEVER WORKED EXCEPT DURING WARTIME. IN FACT PRICE CAPS HAVE BEEN A QUESTIONABLE MEDICINE PRESCRIBED FOR THE WRONG DISEASE. AT BEST PRICE CAPS MIGHT RESTRICT PRICE SPIKES. CALIFORNIA'S PROBLEM IS PERPETUAL HIGH PRICES. IT CAN'T AFFORD THE GOING RATE AT NIGHTTIME LET ALONE THE HIGHER MARKET PRICES DURING THE AFTERNOONS IN A HEATWAVE. CALIFORNIA MUST FIGURE OUT HOW TO PLAY BETTER THE GAME IT INVENTED. THE INSANELY COMPLICATED COMPUTER-BASED PURCHASING OF POWER ENDED A FEW MONTHS AGO AFTER THE CALIFORNIA POWER EXCHANGE WAS CLOSED DOWN BY FEDERAL REGULATORS AND THE ISO LOST ITS FINANCIAL ABILITY TO BUY POWER. THE MATCH BETWEEN THE PROGRAMS AND THE ENERGY TRADERS WASN'T EXACTLY IBM'S BIG BLUE VERSUS GARRY KASPAROV. ALMOST EVERYONE IN THE MARKET AGREES THAT THE UTILITIES' HUMAN TRADERS COULD (CONT) HAVE BOUGHT NEEDED POWER FOR BILLIONS OF DOLLARS LESS THAN THE PROGRAMS THAT THE UTILITIES WERE REQUIRED TO USE BY STATE LAW. SINCE THE DEMISE OF PROGRAMMED PURCHASING THE COMPUTERS HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY HUMANS BUT WITHOUT MUCH BETTER RESULTS. THE TEAM ASSEMBLED TO BUY TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF SPOT POWER EVERY DAY CONSISTS MOSTLY OF FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE POWER EXCHANGE AND ISO AS WELL AS EXPENSIVE CONSULTANTS WITH NO ENERGY TRADING EXPERIENCE. ONE OF THE LEADERS OF THE TRADING TEAM FOR EXAMPLE IS A FORMER PUBLIC RELATIONS DIRECTOR FOR THE POWER EXCHANGE WITH NO TRADING EXPERIENCE PRIOR TO THE CURRENT JOB. AS ONE ISO EMPLOYEE WAS WONT TO SAY: IT'S LIKE WATCHING A FOOTBALL GAME BETWEEN NOTRE DAME AND ST. MARY'S SCHOOL FOR UNWED MOTHERS. AND THE SIGNING OF TENS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF FIVE- AND 10-YEAR CONTRACTS IS BEING EXECUTED MAINLY BY FORMER EXECUTIVES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON - PEOPLE THAT LEFT THE UTILITY YEARS AGO TO BECOME CONSULTANTS AND ALSO DON'T HAVE TRADING EXPERIENCE. GOOD IDEAS MEANWHILE HAVE LANGUISHED. (CONT) WE ARE GOING TO INSTALL METERS IN EVERY MAJOR COMMERCIAL CONCERN IN THE STATE THIS SUMMER AND GO TO REAL-TIME PRICING DAVIS TOLD WALL STREET ANALYSTS ON FEB. 28. THAT PROPOSAL WAS GREETED BY MANY OBSERVERS AS THE MOST CONSTRUCTIVE IDEA FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO DATE. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO REAL-TIME PRICING FOR CALIFORNIA'S BIG BUSINESSES SINCE THEN? NOTHING. THE PROBLEM IS THAT EVERYBODY IN CALIFORNIA IS 'SPECIAL' SAID STANFORD ECONOMIST AND CALIFORNIA ISO CONSULTANT FRANK WOLAK. EVERY INDUSTRY FROM OIL REFINERS TO INTERNET SERVER FARMS HAS HAD LOBBYISTS IN SACRAMENTO SUCCESSFULLY SECURING EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE. MY POINT HAS BEEN THAT IF WHAT THEY DO IS SO VALUABLE THEN THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE HIGHER PRICES. BUSINESSES WITH ABOUT 10000 MEGAWATTS OF LOAD HAVE REAL-TIME METERS. EVERY ONE OF THEM SHOULD BE GETTING MARKET PRICES SAID WOLAK. (CONT) ONE OF THE GREATEST ADVANTAGES THAT SELLERS OF ELECTRICITY TO CALIFORNIA HAVE HAD IS THAT CONSUMERS HAVE FIXED PRICES SO DEMAND IS INFLEXIBLE. SELLERS KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH ELECTRICITY THE UTILITIES MUST BUY BASED ON TEMPERATURES AND THE TIME OF DAY WOLAK SAYS AND THEY SIMPLY SUPPLY THE MARKET JUST ENOUGH POWER AT HIGH MARGINAL PRICES. REDUCING OVERALL CONSUMPTION THROUGH HIGHER RATES WILL HELP THE STATE SOME BUT MAKING 25% OF DEMAND FLEXIBLE BASED ON PRICE WOULD GIVE THE STATE A FIGHTING CHANCE IN THE MARKET ACCORDING TO WOLAK. BUT THAT APPARENTLY IS TOO COMPLICATED OR POLITICALLY DIFFICULT. PRICE CAPS A WINDFALL-PROFITS TAX AND POLITICAL PATRONAGE JOBS FOR BUYING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF POWER MAY NOT SAVE THE STATE FROM BANKRUPTCY BUT THEY ARE EASIER TO SELL - OR SLIP THROUGH - IN SACRAMENTO. -BY MARK GOLDEN DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 201-938-4604 MARK.GOLDEN@DOWJONES.COM [/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: Sherrie and Rosie: Jeff and Ken both received notes from Tom Delay about designating portions of their contributions for use in Texas. Mr. DeLay would like them to make that designation using the letter below (note that it will need to be modified to be from each individually rather than a joint letter). It is of course up to Ken and Jeff whether to make the designation. ----------------- [/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: Joe Hartsoe to handle. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please post on internal site [/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: [Dan Sponseller 412 355 8650 -- called Brian Barrington] Laura Houston x3366 is contact 9:30 - 10:00 Regulatory Update gas and electricity positions that we've taken initiatives and events that they should be aware of retail perspective if there is something they should know about Audience is Amanda's team approx. 100 people. Can use overheads or slides. We need to let Sheila Hatten know what you'll use. [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Late this morning the House Energy and Commerce Committee adoped the committee print as amended of an energy package that addresses conservation clean coal renewables hydro nuclear and boutique fuels. The vote was 50 to 5 to report the bill. Other committees -- Ways and Means Science and Resources -- also moved their energy bills this week. Thus the House is on track to consider a merged package before the start of the August Recess on August 3rd. As to electricity during the several days of debate this week both Chairmen Tauzin and Barton reaffirmed their intention to next move to electricity issues. Mr. Barton's staff advised me this morning that the subcommittee he chairs will hold a hearing on Friday July 20th on all electricity issues other than transmission. While Mr. Barton has publicly held out hope of marking up an electricity bill this month sources on and off the committee do not see this timetable as realistic. On the Senate side the majority staff is working on an electricity white paper that may be circulated for comment next week. Below is a recap of action on amendments of interest to Enron: 1. Last night on a largely partisan vote (with Democrats Hall Green and John voting with the Republicans) the Committee rejected an amendment by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) (that was to have been offered by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA)) that would have retroactively amended the FERC refund date and essentially ordered refunds regardless of amounts owed to power sellers. 2. First thing this morning the Committee again on a largely partisan basis (with Democrats Hall Green John and Towns) rejected a Waxman amendment to impose cost-of-service rates on all power in the West (other than generation added after 1/1/01). (Originally Mr. Waxman was going to offer amendment to impose cost-of-service rates only on those who do not supply all available power during an emergency but he ended up offering basically what he had pursued in subcommittee on the old Californa Only bill.) 3. The Committee adopted an amendment by Rep. Shadegg to amend the Natural Gas Act to make it clear that a natural gas transportation facility shall not be added to the National Register of Historic Places until FERC has abandoned the facility. Apparently there have been some instances of old pipelines being considered as historic places under federal law. The House Resources Committee added a similar amendment to its package yesterday. 4. By voice vote the Committee rejected a Waxman Amendment to require the president to propose and implement a plan to bring U.S. greenhouse gases down to 1990 levels. There was strong opposition voiced by many Republicans and Democrats to this amendment. 5. By mixed vote of 24 to 29 the Committee defeated a Waxman Amendment to set cost and performance goals for renewables including wind power and authorize federal funds to assist with commercial project costs (up to 50 percent). [/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: Dirkson Senate Office building room 628 3:00 - 4:00. Same sort of briefing as when you did the House Staff Briefing same people will be presenting with you. Same people as last time except Ricardo Byrd of Nat'l Assoc. of Neighborhoods they'll try to find a replacement for him. [/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 love you baby. Study hard. Kean_Nora <Nora_Kean@Duchesne.org> on 05/04/2001 01:09:47 PM To: 'skean@enron.com' <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Hi Daddy Hi Daddy. I love you!! - Nora [/INST] Category: Purely Personal

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, 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 Washington DC. Get Des to set up appointments [/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: Add Mona Petrochko peggy mahoney and Rob Bradley Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/25/2000 04:55 PM To: joe Hartsoe@ENRON Sandra McCubbin@EES Susan Mara@EES Paul Kaufman@ECT Karen Denne@ENRON Jeff Dasovich@EES Mark Palmer@ENRON James D Steffes@EES Richard Shapiro@EES Elizabeth Linnell@EES Jeannie Mandelker@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark A Schroeder@ENRON Peter Styles@ECT cc: Subject: California Power Issues Database We have developed an intranet site/database for information tracking purposes for the California Power Issue. The intranet site will be placed on the home.enron.com webpage by Tuesday morning for all Enron employees to access. However today this comprehensive database is available to you for your California Power Issue needs. The database has been populated with the latest information that I have received concerning this topic and has been broken down in three categories: California Power Issues National Power Issues and Secured Documents. It has then been broken down further into subcategories. The secured documents sections will only be accessible to those that are receiving this e-mail. Please let me know if you believe others should have access to this information. The secured document section contains all the information that I have received that Luntz Consulting has helped us develop i.e. principals statements speeches and facts as well as talking points and other statements developed internally. These documents can be easily switched to open access to all Enron employees if you believe that these documents should not be restricted. To access the intranet site you must be logged on to the network and then go to this link: (It is best if you copy this link and paste it in your internet Explorer or Netscape browser.) Once you are at this site you will be able to access all articles and information that I have collected/received concerning the California Power Issue. You can navigate the site by using the links on the left hand side of the screen. While navigating this site keep in mind that the actual interface will be changed before we go live on Tuesday morning. To access the secured documents click on secured documents and type in your user name which is the same as if you are logging onto the network and then type in your password which is the same as if you are logging onto the network. However if you have difficulties entering this site you will need to change your Lotus internet password. Which is very simple to do and which you will need to do regardless if you decide to use this site or not it is all part of the current computer migration. To change your internet password go to this link and then hit the edit person key. Go to the last field that says internet password and type in whatever password you would like preferably your current network login password. (In the internet password section you will see a bunch of numbers and letters delete those and enter your new network password.) There are still some bugs that will be worked out by Tuesday but I thought since this is such a fast moving issue it was best to get this tool out so it could be used when needed. If you have any questions please call me at 713-853-4382. Thanks Gavin [/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: There is also a california update call (used to be daily now weekly). Marcia Linton (Jim Steffes' assistant) can give you the call in information and add you to the distribution list. [/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 my interview I stressed that a big part of the communication problem is the narrow and impermanent nature of the information about what's going on at Enron. Narrow because for every significant activity there are only a few who are in the loop and impermanent because very little information is committed to writing (most of it is exchanged in person or over the phone). This is I believe what lies at the heart of complaints about cross-department communication. We now have some solutions emerging -- software that enables more people to record and post information in HTML format on company intranet sites. I suspect that using such tools will face two obstacles: learning how to use them (ie there's a huge need for training) and making it part of our culture as a knowledge/learning organization Richard Amabile 08/18/2000 05:20 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON James Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON Jan Johnson/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON David A Terlip/Corp/Enron@Enron Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON Craig Childers/HOU/EES@EES Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES Kirk Kathleen A John Keith James C Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES Joseph W George Wasaff/NA/Enron@Enron Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Scott Yeager@ees Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON John Thompson/LON/ECT@ECT Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications robert.jones@enron.com Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT Scott Janie willie.williams@enron.com Scott Tim O'Rourke/Corp/Enron@Enron Miguel Padron/SA/Enron@Enron Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT Ranendra cc: ksargent@cognitivearts.com Subject: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative - Response Reminder for Feedback This is a reminder that we would like your feedback/input on the items mentioned below regarding the Computer Based Communications Training Initiative. Please respond by the close of business Monday August 21 otherwise we will need to move ahead with the responses received by that time. Dick Amabile ----------------- [/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: Want you to speak from 10:15 - 11:00 ** Will be sending a letter this week (3/19/97) Flew to Austin on company plane [/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: Kevin Enjoy your vacation. 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: This note is to report on two electricity legislative developments: the Aug. 2nd introduction of an anti-RTO bill (or at least anti-mandatory RTOs) and on a meeting I had yesterday afternoon with Andy Black the policy coordinator for Chairman Joe Barton on the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee to discuss their intentions with respect to electricity legislation this Fall. 1. H.R. 2814 (Reps. Tom Sawyer (D-OH) and Richard Burr (R-NC)) On Aug. 2nd (the last day Congress was in session before the August Recess) the above named members of the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee introduced H.R. 2814 the Interstate Transmission Act. The legislation is bad because among other things it requires FERC to establish transmission pricing policies that provide incentives for voluntary participation and formation of RTOs with language prohibiting policies that have the effect of forcing transmitting utilities to join RTOs. Also objectionable is that the bill would limit pancaking but at the same time require FERC to establish a reasonable transition mechanism or period for additive charges. The legislation prohibits FERC from conditioning any order upon a transmitting utility being required to transfer operational control of jurisdictional facilities to an ISO or RTO. The bill would require that participating transmitting utilities must approve the form structure and operating entity of any RTO. In addition to the RTO language the bill has the old version of the NERC reliability legislation in it. The bill also has a PUHCA exemption for RTOs repeals Federal Power Act sec. 203 on the disposition of property and includes the tax changes that IOUs seek for transfers of property to an independent transmission company. Barbara Hueter advises that First Energy has its hq in Rep. Sawyer's district. Rep. Burr is from North Carolina so perhaps Duke had its utility hat on in working with him. I am checking into where Duke is on this issue. Rep. Burr is the Vice Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and close to Chairman Tauzin -- so his support for this legislation is significant (see Andy Black comment below). 2. Andy Black Meeting Andy is meeting with various trade associations this month to discuss electricity legislation. He is only meeting with a few companies on a one-on-one basis -- Enron Reliant Dynegy and TXU. His timing is to have a legislative draft for Chairman Barton to review when Congress returns after Labor Day. If Chairman Barton approves or makes changes the draft will be circulated to members of the subcommittee and the public for further comment. The intent is to mark up an electricity bill this Fall so that if the Senate acts on electricity in its comprehensive energy bill the issue will be ripe for consideration in a House-Senate conference committee. Here is a run down of my comments and Andy's comments on specific issues. a. RTOs Chairman Barton supports RTOs. At a minimum the draft will affirm FERC's authority as the commissioners have requested. Andy is considering going beyond that to mandate RTO participation. Not sure he can hold that position in the subcommittee. He is looking to Enron and others to help them explain and build support for RTOs. Informed him of our initial informal coalition steps. However Andy asked me to look at sec. 3 of the Sawyer-Burr referenced above which I realized after the meeting is the part that deals with incentive rates and negotiated rates to expand transmission and voluntary RTOs. I have a call in to Andy to reconcile these statements since the Sawyer-Burr bill is based on voluntary RTOs. Hopefully he is thinking of using the incentive and negotiated rate language and NOT the objectionable voluntary RTO aspects. I will strongly encourage him to do the right thing in that regard. b. PUHCA The draft will use the Pickering bill (H.R. 1101). Told Andy about our concerns with the record keeping provisions of that bill. Will send him our legislative language to clarify these provisions so that they do not open up all of Enron's records -- even those unrelated to transactions with a regulated utility affiliate. c. PURPA Prospective repeal. On back up power they are thinking of requiring that rates for back up power be just and reasonable until there is retail competition in the state. d. Interconnection They have received a proposal from Trigen that Andy says we will like. I am contacting EPSA to get the details. e. Net Metering They are likely to include the Inslee bill to require net metering. I explained our concern that the bill's mandate applies to all retail energy suppliers -- including EES -- even though this should only apply to utilities with an obligation to serve that it does not make sense to mandate it on service providers like EES (per Jim's helpful comments yesterday). I need to get more information to Andy. f. Transmission Jurisdiction Thankfully Andy is NOT going to use those portions of the bill as reported by subcommittee in the last Congress that gave use heart burn on jurisdiction. Specifically the draft will not say FERC does not have jurisdiction over the transportation component of a bundled retail sale -- the draft will not get into the bundled/unbundled issue at all. The draft will bring munis co-ops and PMAs under the FERC umbrella for transmission jurisdiction purposes. g. Siting On siting Andy is thinking of some type of mechanism that would give a State one year before federal eminent domain attaches. h. Reliability On a negative note Andy intends to use the latest NERC reliability language because NERC's version has strong support among the Members of the subcommittee and no other alternative has emerged with political support (i.e. not PJM). I explained our concerns. He said our best bet is for DoE or FERC to come forward to seek something other than the NERC version. He said Members eyes glaze over on reliability with everything else on the plate. i. Negawatts I raised the absence of negawatts on his issue list. He said he is open to considering it again but that there was left over political baggage and unresolved issues from when this was attempted during consideration of the California bill earlier this summer. Your questions and comments on the any of the above are most welcome. [/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: Once again today I participated in the discussions on possible electricity legislation held in the offices of Majority Whip Tom DeLay with other interested parties including industry segments public power and state regulators. The other congressional participants were staff to Reps. Steve Largent and Chip Pickering. After meeting all week (except Wednesday) the group was unable to reach an agreement or even a provisional consensus on what could be placed in an electricity title that could be added to the comprehensive energy package that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will begin to process next week. Congressional staff will report to their bosses on the status of the discussions as of this afternoon and from there the Members will determine whether to proceed further. There is a general perception that committee leaders will elect NOT to take up electricty legislation at this time and in the context of the broader package in the absence of broadly supported legislation. In the end the discussions did not bear fruit because divisions remained over the usual issues and along most of the usual fault lines. As the drafts progressed during the week we succeeded in deleting the original language that would have had Congress weigh into the bundled/unbundled and federa/state jurisdictional rules at the very time that likely adverse action in Congress could in turn adversely impact the Supreme Court case. A last minute attempt was made by the congressional staff to stitch together a minimalist electricity title that would have included reliability (with the understanding that the NERC discussions could produce modifications more to our liking) PUHCA repeal PURPA reform interconnection language and federal siting. However in each instance there were one more politically relevant interest groups not willing to go along. Cong. DeLay's staff also tried to link PUHCA repeal to those who had joined an RTO. There was also an attempt to strip it down to reliability interconnection and siting (eminent domain) -- but again there was either disagreement on the details or objection from those who favorite subject was left out of the minimalist package. There was one rather interesting discussion when the public power folks floated language on market power that included a sentence that would have made the filed rate doctrine inapplicable to antitrust challenges to market rates. Needless to say I strongly objected as did EPSA and others. As noted the lack of an agreement reduces our exposure when the mark up occurs. In the absence of an electricity title refund price control and other issues should not be germane to the package that the subcommittee will take up on Tuesday and the full committee next Friday. That package will have five issues addressed: conservation clean coal hyrdo nuclear and reformulated gasoline. Details to follow once legislative language is released. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Looks good to me. ----------------- [/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 No problem. I shall spend Friday working on reviews. 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: I think this is a fine attempt but I continue to believe that a pure relative ranking offers the most flexibility and is more like the way the process works in practice. A separate list of desired behaviors criteria etc can be used to guide discussion but I believe the ranking itself should remain purely relative. Gina Corteselli 09/14/2000 06:04 PM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: PRC cluster descriptors - draft All Aattached are a draft of the PRC cluster descriptors which we discussed several weeks back. I has sent a first draft to Michelle and Dick and both had some suggestions which I have tried to incorporate. I am still awaiting Dick and Michelle's impressions of the below but also look forward to your impressions and input. Likewise I would appreciate your input on whether or not we need to change the ratings on the feedback forms to numerical ratings 1-5 to mimic the clusters. look forward to hearing from you Many thanks Gina ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: FYI - this email will go out to employees tonight. The Enron Corporate Policy Committee introduces Expertfinder. Expertfinder allows you to locate people within the Enron community by organization structure skills reporting relationships languages school attended and prior work experience. Expertfinder is a secured HR application that is available upon completion of your Certificate of Compliance. Expertfinder can be accessed on the Enron Intranet by typing the following URL at the Internet Explorer command line and Log In using the HRGIS Id provided below: https://hrglobal.enron.com Your HRGIS Id: Your Password: Date of Birth (Format YYYYMMDD) *Current users of the Global Launch Zone will maintain the same password. If you don't remember your password click on Forgot ID/Password below the Log In button. Should you have any questions regarding access or data issues in Expertfinder contact the HRGIM Line (HR Global Information Management) at 713-853-5666. Expertfinder is only as good as the data provided. Does your personal data need updating? Go to eHRonline.enron.com or (Eastern Hemisphere only) to update your data today. Or contact your HR Generalist for business unit related updates. [/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: PFI -- Clement TVA 2024672778 Christa Donahue Cong BURR NC 202 383 2260 Maya Weber Mcgraw Hill Martin Wenzel [/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: 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: Phil-- Enron is currently evaluating the possibility of installing an NGL peaking facility with appurtenant storage and rail facilities near Needles California. Ideally the plant would inject / vaporize normal butane at the rate of 18750 gallons per hour into a high pressure natural gas transmission system. Current gas pipeline specs are as follows: Operating pressure - 850 - 1000 psig worst case 750 normal range 800-900 Gas Volume - 650000 - 750000 MMBtu/day Expected normal butane (GPA spec) requirement - 450000 gallons/day (18750 gal/ per hour) My questions are: 1) Is anyone currently using butanes for peaking service and if so where? 2) Do we need to blend with air (how much) or can we inject straight normal butane? 3) At what line pressure point do the butanes re-liquefy further downstream of the injection point as the pipeline pressure falls? 4) Is this peaking plant configuration feasible and if so at what price (ball park here don't go way out of your way)? (If it's not what would your suggestion be for a design). I will fax you the normal butane specs as soon as I get them (please email back your fax number). As always we're on a pretty tight time frame. After you've had a chance to review the above I'd like to get together and discuss this with you. I can meet you in Ohio if it fits your schedule better just let me know. Thanks for the help and I look forward to talking with you soon. Kevin Hyatt 713-853-5559 kevin.hyatt@enron.com [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I believe we should back Massey as well. Who do we weigh in with now? Joe Hartsoe@ENRON 08/15/2000 08:27 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Bill Massey Steve/Rick/Jim --- Talked to John Anderson yesterday. He had just gotten off the phone with Massey. Massey believes Linda B. is spending time at the White House lobbying to be Chair. Have we decided whether to back either and if so which? I would prefer backing Massey. Thoughts? JOE 202.466.9150 ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: the price might be a bit stiff particularly in light of the following: I don't think we need the DC grass tops component. we have an effective set of messages contacts consultants and lawyers. Perhaps we could use Charlie as a fresh set of eyes on that stuff but I think that asking him to develop such an effort would be duplicative of what we have done with AAE Paxson Fleischman-Hillard Divall etc. I do think the other aspects of what he proposes would be useful however (and should be less resource intensive and at least a little less costly). Richard Shapiro@EES 08/21/2000 05:12 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Charlie Baker What do you think? ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Please update my bio to include Human Resources and add some boilerplate on Enron. ----------------- [/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 for the note. I am forwarding it on to our analyst and associate recruiting program leaders. We may have already filled the summer spots (we also cut down the number a bit this year to ensure a higher quality experience) but we will be out looking for a large number of permanent hires in the Fall. Severin Borenstein <borenste@Haas.Berkeley.EDU> 03/31/2001 06:00 PM To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com> cc: James Bushnell <jimb@IEOR.Berkeley.EDU> Subject: Job candidates for Enron Dear Steve: Jim Bushnell and I are teaching a course called Energy Market Strategies and Policies this semester. The course is cross-listed between the Haas School of Business and the Energy & Resources Group at UC Berkeley. The syllabus for the course is attached. We have 43 graduate students in the course most pursuing a masters degree in business or energy & resources though there are also a few PhD students. These are very smart students -- many of whom already have experience in the energy industries -- and we believe the course puts them in a position to immediately contribute to any energy-related organization that they would join. Many of these students are interested in either summer or permanent employment starting as early as May. If Enron has openings that you would like to advertise to these students please send me the job description (or the URL for it)and I can forward it to the class list. Jim and I think this is a very strong class and many of the students are interested in making a career in either the business or the public policy side of the energy industry. We're hoping to provide the connections to help make sure they find the best job matches possible. Sincerely Severin Severin Borenstein E.T. Grether Professor of Business Administration and Public Policy Director Haas School of Business U.C. Energy Institute University of California 2539 Channing Way Berkeley CA 94720-1900 Berkeley CA 94720-5180 (p) 510-642-3689 (p) 510-642-5145 (f) 707-885-2508 http://www.ucei.org Email: borenste@haas.berkeley.edu WWW: - EnergyMarketsSyllabus.pdf [/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: Attached are my edits. From: Rebecca Carter on 05/24/2001 04:42 PM Sent by: Kelly Johnson To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Board of Directors Meeting - February 13 2001 Please provide comments the attached minutes by June 1 2001. If you approve as written please let us know. Regards Rebecca CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any review dissemination or copying of this email or its attachments if any or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank you. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, 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'll have the usual macroeconomic update from Larry Lindsay and Gavyn Davies the domestic political update from Bill Kristol and some presentations from Gary Hamel and others focussing on Enron NetWorks. James M Bannantine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/10/2000 02:30 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Enron Advisory Council meeting Steve What is the agenda for this advisory council meeting? Jim ----------------- [/INST] Category: Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I realize you have pushed these guys already but the attached letter would be better if not sent at all. It doesn't address the real underlying problem -- that a reliability bill on a stand alone basis doesn't fix the problem. Instead the letter implies that the reason for opposition is merely a political consideration -- ie that it may reduce Congress' appetite for action next year. If possible it would be better not to have the letter go out at all. From: Cynthia Sandherr 08/22/2000 04:29 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON dwatkiss@bracepatt.com cc: Subject: MidAmerican Draft Documents Per my first e-mail here's MidAmerican's position letter on the stand alone Reliability measure. Seems the best we can do with the utilities who have been supporting our position is to have them take a no position stance on the stand alone bill. - reliabilityonly.letter.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: I have opened a new Lotus file California - working group where I am keeping the contact information but I am assuming you have picked everybody up already. If in doubt check out the file. 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: One minor point: the response to the first data request implies that all employees went through the PRC process in 2000. I am not sure this is accurate. It's fair to say that most did but I believe that the field employees who are organized into self-directed work teams do not go through the PRC process. [/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: To make sure that Enron is not missing any opportunities to make our points on competition we need to develop some key message points and facts. My understanding is that the key story line is that COMPETITION IS WORKING AND SHOULD BE PUSHED FORWARD. We need to be able to give examples of what is happening - deregulation customers are winning. For example our CSU customers are just fine even with higher energy markets. I think that are some key questions that we need to consider when we put these together: Who is the audience? My answer - California policymakers key stakeholders FERC federal government. Can we use this in the FERC Investigation on Markets? My answer - we have to California is too big and important not realize that California will play a role in FERC's discussions. What is the timing of message? My answer - Wherever and whenever needs to be coordinated. This CA legislative process (next 2.5 weeks) may be a possibility. FERC Investigation. Taking the story nationally is good if we have the facts from CA. Who will deliver the message? My answer - Everyone on the Enron team needs to have the same message all of the time. We can't let any opportunity pass us by. Do we demonize the utilities? My answer - if necessary we just need to make sure that we have as many facts to prove our points if we do attack. How do we prove that rolling back to regulation is ridiculous? My answer - retain LEGC to develop the hypothetical of what would have happened? NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED INTERNALLY - LEGC MAY NOT BE THAT FRIENDLY. Next Steps: Jeff Dasovich needs to put out first cut based on our earlier notes and any incremental information from our analysis teams (e.g. TCA McNally / Temple). Thanks 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: Here it is. Peggy Mahoney@EES 09/12/2000 11:19 AM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: testimony Can I plez have a copy of Steve's testimony from yesterday in San Diego? Thanks Peggy [/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: Do what you need to do the system has to work. The only question I have is: why doesn't IT just take care of this without a charge? This is not an extraordinary item or special request. This ought to be something IT simply takes care of without us having to get involved or pay extra. Am I missing something? From: Aaron Brown/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/16/2001 09:41 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: New Computer for Handling Stock Awards Steve The IT group put it like this...Justification: Current Server is PL1850 and has reached it's capacity and is non-redundant. That means that our current system: (1) has a slow processor (2) is nearly out of memory for stock award administration (3) doesn't have a real-time back up in case the hard drives fails (4) needs to be upgraded The IT group has quoted about $19000 for a new system that brings this server up to Enron's current server standards and takes care of the above issues. Let me know if this expense is a problem and whether you need to be involved with these types of decisions in the future. Thanks Aaron [/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: Jennifer: Here is the latest CA for Jerry to review. Please send him this e-mail asap. Thanks! Ben Rogers [/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 will be in a Managing Director PRC that day - not sure if he will be out in time for a 5:30 event. Maureen From: Lexi Elliott/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 01:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Rice Happy Hour Steve: I am considering scheduling a Rice team/intern happy hour on July 24 (5:30 - 7:00). Would you be available on this date or should I try to reschedule? Thank you! lexi 3-4585 [/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: Lorraine here are a few notes from my review of the Val Verde contract and my initial impressions. Let's talk more about how to approach the issue after we meet with Ron tomorrow about MAOP. 12/31/92 Interconnect Agreement: Sec. 1.3 specifies pressures and states that unless there is an agreement to provide firm compression service TW will accept up to 200000 on an interruptible basis. Sec. 2 states that the Blanco Hub MAOP shall not be exceeded. Sec. 4.2 limits damages (no consequential damages). The contract also has a fairly standard force majeure clause. 2/18/93 letter amendment: Sec. 3 obligates TW to provide firm compression service in order to accept 200000 into TW's system (provided MOGI has pressure of at least 650 and quantity of at least 140). Acknowledges that this is an agreement to provide firm compression in accordance with Sec. 1.3 of 12/92 agreement. 9/25/95 letter amendment: Increases quantity to be received at the interconnect to 250000 once the San Juan expansion is effective. My initial conclusions: It is pretty clear we have an obligation to accept 250000 on a firm basis provided that Burlington complies with the pressure requirements. Probably the only way we can avoid this obligation is if accepting 250000 would cause us to exceed the hub MAOP. In that case we can argue impossibility of performance. Also we could avoid the obligation because the summer heat above certain temperatures constitutes force majeure. This argument is strengthened by the fact that temperatures seem to have gotten hotter over the years. The fact that we entered into our most recent agreement with Burlington in January of this year weakens the credibility of our arguments (they will say we should have known by now). Burlington might try to argue that we have an absolute obligation to comply with the agreement even if it means expensive system modifications. That argument is not a very strong one because the agreement contains no such affirmative obligation and in fact quite clearly describes the facilities that are the subject of the agreement. [/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: Got a voicemail from Rob Walls. They are (have been) looking into 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: Wade Thanks for your help. Krishna advised me of the conversation he had with you. Vince [/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: The amendment was defeated Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/14/2001 11:11 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Chip Schneider/Enron@EnronXGate Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment [/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: Mark: Per my voice mail. Jeff [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: As discussed. ----------------- [/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: Please be advised that the CalPX has received a subpoena from the California State Senate Select Committee to investigate price manipulation of the wholesale energy market. The subpoena is posted on the CalPX Web site and is available through the link below. The subpoena seeks confidential information including materials that are confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the CalPX tariff. Confidential materials provided by the CalPX in response to this subpoena will be treated by the Senate Select Committee in accordance with the terms of the May 15 2001 letter from Senator Joseph L. Dunn that is also posted on the CalPX Web site. The date for production by the CalPX of the requested materials has been extended beyond the May 18 2001 deadline stated in the subpoena and letter. If you desire to assert a claim of confidentiality or privilege you should direct your written statement by Tuesday May 22 2001 to the name and address below: Larry Drivon Special Counsel to the Select Committee Office of Senator Dunn State Capitol Room 2080 Sacramento CA 95814 Tel: (916)445-5831 Fax: (916)323-2323 E-mail: You may also deliver a copy of your statement to the CalPX as follows: Lisa Urick Managing Attorney California Power Exchange Corporation 200 South Los Robles Avenue Suite 400 Pasadena CA 91101 Tel: (626)537-3100 Fax: (626)537-3159 E-mail: lgurick@calpx.com Thank you. [/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: Late yesterday afternoon EPSA's legislative affairs committee (about 10 of us) met with Chairman Barton and staff to discuss his draft RTO language. Meeting lasted 45 minutes. Interestingly no one was there from either Reliant or El Paso. We had what the diplomats would call a frank exchange of views. Can't say we moved Barton very much if at all except we did have a chance to go over the staff to point out specific flaws in the draft even based on his view of how RTOs should come about (I gave several very specific examples like the 40000 MW provision and other limits on FERC discretion on size and scope as well as procedural rights for transmission owners but not the rest of us etc.). Chairman Barton's fundamental view is that Congress not FERC should determine how RTOs come about. And that the market and the industry should determine how RTOs are shaped etc. not FERC. He bristled at one point and said he had more faith in us than he had in FERC or we had in ourselves to determine how RTOs come about going so far as to saying that under his draft they would be our RTOs -- meaning those of us present. I pointed out this is wrong because under his draft the transmission owners particularly those least likely to join up would have all the leverage. I said that the basic flaw in the draft is that it assumes there are only two parties to the transaction -- FERC and transmission owners -- forgetting the rest of us including consumers. He said we could become transmission owners if we wanted to!!! On the 40000 MW size minimum he said many experts had advised them this is the correct number. We said that putting a number in to the statute ran counter to his oft-stated desire for a fair process to produce RTOs driven by market forces not regulators. The two elements of good news -- Barton reconfirmed that a markup this year is very unlikely AND he expressed that he would not spend too much time on electricity next year if it started to crowd out other issues like Clean Air Act Amendments and nuclear waste legislation. This suggests a strategy possibility in terms of running out the clock. He said he has the votes by a wide margin to report the RTO draft but will entertain some changes. He said the only reason he has not marked up the bill is that the Sept. 11th terrorist attacks have taken attention away from the issue and subcommittee members are not engaged on the issue. He said those of us who support could roll the dice with them but that there are things that only Congress can do -- like getting all transmission owners into RTOs -- and that these statutory changes are so important that we should not oppose the draft. [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

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

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: I set up a meeting for next Friday in Washington with Ed G. and Ralph Reed starting at 7:30 am. [/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: ***Sent on behalf of Sandi Thompson*** To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the Attorney General for the State of California (AG) as part of an ongoing investigation of California markets has requested information that may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. Such information is detailed in the attached subpoena. The California Power Exchange will provide such information no later than Wednesday October 25 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the AG provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the AG as follows: Bill Lockyer Attorney General Attn: Richard Rochman Deputy Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue Suite 11000 San Francisco CA 94102-7004 Please deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received no later than Friday October 20 2000 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time to be included with any information delivered to the AG. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this inquiry. Thank you. (See attached file: calpxsubpoena1 AG 10-3-00.doc) (See attached file: AG Confidentiality Ltr 10-13-00.doc) - calpxsubpoena1 AG 10-3-00.doc - AG Confidentiality Ltr 10-13-00.doc [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Dan I need your help to make sure we get the appropriate evidence of these receivables into the record so as to offset refunds deemed to be due (if any after netting purchases and sales). As you will recall we submitted some documentation of the $40MM receivable to Judge Wagner. I expect that we will have to provide quite a bit (more) detail regarding this and the other receivables. Also who do you suggest for a witness on this or will affidavits be sufficient? Need your input on this since we may have to do additional research and now is the time to do it before the August 13 prehearing conference. 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: ----------------- [/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? ----------------- [/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: OPIC information. ----------------- [/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:NEMEC GERALD Email:gerald.nemec@enron.com - 7138533512 ? 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: Can you guys coordinate to make sure someone listens to this conference call each week. Tara from the fundamental group was recording these calls when they happened every day. Phillip ----------------- [/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: test [/INST] Category: Empty message

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, 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 kevinscott Jeff and Steve As you requested I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts for California. It is composed of professionals from an array of public private and non-profit backgrounds. I have worked in some capacity with each of these people and most I know quite well. Please call me for further background. Kevin 213-926-2626 Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: Washington DC. (Suite 419) you will need to dial x3360 (Louisa Asmar is his assistant) and she will meet you in the lobby area and take you upstairs. Jim and Rick will meet you there. 3:30 Meet with Dan Albert in Senator Bingaman's office (D-NM) - Hart Senate Office Building Room 703. Cynthia will meet you there. 4:00 - Meet with Representative Pallone #420 Cannon House Office Building. Cynthia will accompany you Rick and Jim will meet you there. Car will be waiting to take you to the airport. [/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: Yes. Maureen - please schedule. From: Michael on 07/06/2001 03:05 AM GDT To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: Meeting Request - July 25th Steve -=20 I=01ll be in Houston July 23-26 and would like to get together to bring yo= u up=20 to date on the latest developments in Japan regarding EBS and EGM as well= =20 as=01 energy markets.=01 Would you=01 have half an hour on the morning o= f Wednesday=20 the 25th? Thanks Mike [/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: For the call with Davis this am..... [/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 e-mail I was talking about. ----------------- [/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: And another..... [/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 do too but I think you should send it with the appropriate caveats (which I communicated verbally to her). Richard Shapiro 07/10/2000 05:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES cc: Subject: Job Description Thoughts? I continue to think this is an unproductive exercise. ----------------- [/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: Rosie - please print and have signed. (Note there is a typo in the second line of the last paragraph -- does should be do). thanks [/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: Jon -- Ricardo Charvel is pulling together the briefing for Ken so please share the EBS activities/ agenda with him. Thanks ----------------- [/INST] Category: Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])

<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body with you. Based on the text in the body, you need to classify the email in one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> Mail: It's fine with me. Mary Clark 09/27/2000 11:23 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Update -- Project 100 Steve our theme for the stock celebration is Oh The Places You'll Go which is the title of a Dr. Seuss book. Everyone on the team loves this idea because the messages in the book represent Enron thinking and culture. In case you aren't familiar with the book Beth Tilney has a copy. Our plan is to give every employee a book which will have a note of appreciation on the inside cover from Ken Jeff and Joe. We are contacting Random House (who will contact the Seuss estate) to see if we can purchase 20000 copies and to get permission to use some of the copy in our internal communication materials. The per unit cost is considerably lower due to the volume. We think employees will like this idea. What do you think? 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: We need another request for confidentiality. Please call me. ----------------- [/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: Joanie is booking a dinner in NY for this night. 9:00 shuttle to DC [/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: On the advice of my much esteemed spouse I would like to express great interest in this group. Thanks Gilbert R. Whitaker Jr. <grwhit@rice.edu> on 02/18/2000 04:09:37 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Steve - I made a mistake in my earlier email. Our Council of Overseers does not yet have a written charter. However it really is a key advisory group to the Jones School. gil [/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 think it starts off a bit too hot. I would pull up some of the arguments you make about the need for additional supply and the importance of electricity to our way of life. I'd then go into a discussion of the debacle in the West (and how they are now playing catchup - with loud polluting diesel generators ... as was reported today). Then I'd go into how our plants in Florida represent a very reasonable inobtrusive solution for Florida. From: Eric Thode/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/24/2001 09:07 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: DRAFT EDITORIAL: Enron is Committed to Florida's Energy Future In support of of our three power plant proposals in South Florida I have written an editorial for distribution to South Florida newspapers including the Sun Sentinel and Miami Herald. Additionally we would distribute it to a number of small city papers including the Pompano Pelican Deerfield Times Pompano Times Deerfield Observer etc. Needless to say no decision has been made regarding releasing it. I would like your input on the subject. If we decide to proceed our goal would be placement during the first week in June leading up to the next round of Commission hearings which are scheduled for June 6 8 and 12. Please provide comments to me at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions please call me at ext. 3-9053. Thanks. Eric [/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 saw your e-mail response. Did it go to Oxley too? ----------------- [/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: Oxley asked that I send you a few bullets on Tom Martin. Please see below and let me know if you need further info. Feedback from two exit interviews from voluntary terminations in regard to Tom is as follows: was treated as inferior by my manager was lied to and insulted by my supervisor Tom berates employees in front of others and blames underlings for his mistakes. Additionally he second guessed every position I put on sold me out of positions (which turned out good) and used all our allocated VAR for his own benefit. Tom has a reputation for not representing employees well in the end of year review process. I found this to be the case as well. Tom is difficult to communicate with Additionally we had an incident w/ an employee when Tom offered her an employment agreement. She felt that she was being forced to sign the agreement When she declined the agreement and turned in resignation she said that Tom said he would make it difficult for her to leave She said that she felt threatened by Tom Her boy friend called Tom and threatened him As a result Legal asked Tom not to have further contact with the employee. [/INST] Category: Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)