prompts
stringlengths
610
222k
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: UC/CSU press release Body:: fyi ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Enrons PaineWebber Service Body:: Thanks for getting on top of this. Please get the word out to the HR team leaders as soon as you know more. From: Aaron Brown/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 11:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Enron's PaineWebber Service Rocky Emery the Dowd family Kim Bowden and another 15 or so employees of UBSPaineWebber (our stock tracking provider...options restricted stock etc) left yesterday evening without any warning. They went to 1st Union. I've set up a meeting at 2pm today for us to go over to UBSPW and make sure they understand the special needs of Enron and to make sure our service will not be affected. I am reviewing the contract in place between PW and Enron to understand the affects of this move by Emery and his staff on the agreement. Also I'm going to see about getting 2 providers of the stock tracking service from the following list: (in case this happens again we'll have a solid back-up immediately) UBSPaineWEbber (our current provider) 1st Union (where Rocky Emery went) Solomon Smith Barney (way ahead of the competition from a technology standpoint...and has done the two provider thing before) Prudential (another option with internal connections) let me know if you think I should include any others or would like to discuss. Thanks Aaron What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enron Expatriates in India Body:: John Brindle David Cromley and others in the Corporate Business Controls group (formerly part of EBS) have been working over the last several weeks to make sure that we can get our people out of Dabhol if there are threats to their safety. While no plan is perfectly reliable (particularly during monsoon season) we believe that we are as ready as we can be. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Interview Request Body:: Thanks for the referral. We definitely want to get our story out to these guys. Just for future reference Meredith Phillipp is handling New Media for us. Thanks Janel Guerrero@ENRON 07/19/2000 05:52 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Interview Request Hi guys. My friend Polly Traylor is an editor at the Industry Standard in San Francisco. One of her colleagues -- Michelle Rafter -- sent me the email below requesting an interview for an Enron story she is working on. I have not spoken with this writer and am forwarding it to you for follow up. Hope all is well. Call me if you have any questions. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Idea Body:: If you think this is worth pursuing get in touch with Christie. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Body:: For you to add the wire instructions which are in my out box. Mark What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: EFET paper on acceleration of energy liberalisation in the EU Body:: Please forward to public affairs group. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Expertfinder - The Power of Who Body:: 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. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Job candidates for Enron Body:: 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 <[email protected]> 03/31/2001 06:00 PM To: Steve Kean <[email protected]> cc: James Bushnell <[email protected]> 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: [email protected] WWW: - EnergyMarketsSyllabus.pdf What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Proposed Ad for the Ontario Market Body:: 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 ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: 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 [email protected] What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: FW: expertfinder - The Power of Who Body:: I would'nt have it introduced by the corporate policy committee. I would say Enron is introducing or there is a new tool available to you. I am anxious to see how this goes over it's a great tool. From: Karen Moore/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/16/2001 05:34 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: FW: expertfinder - The Power of Who Karen and Steve Could you take a quick peek at this and let me know if you have any thoughts or concerns? Thanks Karen What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: DEnron Engineering and Operational Services - DRAFT Announcement Body:: Drop the first comma in the first sentence of the third paragraph. Otherwise good to go. Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate Sent by: Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate 03/16/2001 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES Barbara Keith Dodson/NA/Enron@ENRON Brian Stanley/EU/Enron@ENRON Subject: DEnron Engineering and Operational Services - DRAFT Announcement Please find attached draft announcement for your review and comment. I would like to release this on Monday (March 19th). Thanks Mark What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Body:: Palmisano left a couple of months ago to start his own business. Jeff Keeler (in our DC office) is covering John's issues. To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Thanks for the call this morning. The convention sounds interesting. On another note I was wondering is John Palmisano still works here? for you? I got a call from a conference organizer about an emissions meeting in Cologne Ger. and I think he has spoken at this gathering. I'll forward the email to you and to the emissions/coal group as well to determine our interest. Regards. Jeff What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Tax Review of California Assembly Bill No. 128 Body:: fyi ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: test What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: EnronOnline Management Report for August 1, 2000 Body:: more detailed information ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Camisea Body:: fyi ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: EPMI protests AEPs continuation of MBRs Body:: Isn't our primary problem with AEP's internal merchant function rather than with the marketing affiliate (I realize we have problems with the affiliate too)? Can we protest continued market based rate authority for AEP until they have surrendered native load priority? Christi L Nicolay@ECT 09/25/2000 09:16 AM To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: EPMI protests AEP's continuation of MBRs On 9/21 EPMI filed a protest (Below) against AEP/CSW's 3 year update request to continue market based rates for power marketing. The filing includes examples of discriminatory behavior on OASIS (for ATCs etc.) that potentially benefitted AEP's marketing side. EPMI has already protested Entergy's request for continuation of MBRs earlier this year and plans to protest other large utility-based power marketer MBR filings this fall. Let me know if you would like the list. Thanks. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Lous $50,000 Body:: Lou -- you may be maxed out on Franks now. Don't write a check for the August fundraiser until you have talked to Eliz Labanowski ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Interesting Idea for Enron? Body:: Interesting idea but hard to see any near term benefit. I would decline. Amy Lee@ENRON 08/02/2000 09:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Stacy Walker/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Interesting Idea for Enron? Steve - Cindy and I discussed this and we agree there is no interest to move forward from a Community Relations/HR standpoint. We wanted to pass this along to you to see if you had any interest. Thanks! amy ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Curve Validation Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Presidential Gala, May 22nd Body:: Stay in touch with linda ro the recommendation. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Agreement Revisions -- Rio Bravo Pipeline Open Season Body:: 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: [email protected] What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Body:: Thanks. Look forward to seeing you. Sorry I left Jimmy off the note I know he must be doing a good job. John Ambler@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 03/23/2001 10:11 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Steve Thanks for sending this note to Wade. I'm certain that the NYT story is infinitely better because of Wade's involvement. It was a team effort but you should know that Jimmy Mogal also was very involved. Of course Wade wants to avoid damaging the company and your note helps to keep him up for these risky/must do requests. Along these line I'd like to be able to give you a brief update on activities and issues. I'll check with Maureen about scheduling 15-20 minutes. John From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 03/20/2001 09:06 AM To: Wade cc: Johan John Subject: I just saw the NYT article. Nice job. It's nicely positioned as an issue about India's resolve to encourage foreign investment and live up to contracts. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: FYI. From today's Post. Davis seems to continue to put distance between himself and the contracts. Best Jeff Financial California Changes Stance on Refunds Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks Peter Behr 07/06/2001 The Washington Post FINAL Page E01 Copyright 2001 The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. We've made suggestions we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion. The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr. according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood Wagner told reporters. In the event we're unable to do that [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment. The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner FERC's chief administrative judge has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California 's largest utility drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative Michael Kahn chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high sources said. Wagner's settlement conference which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a joke that the parties might as well wear clown suits according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers led by Reliant Energy Inc. Williams Energy Services Duke Energy and Southern Co. for failing to make serious settlement offers these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California 's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California 's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile spot market prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer so did the state's electricity bills. In response Davis's aide S. David Freeman and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a refund because the deals were reached under commercial duress according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be said Michael Zenger California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a just and reasonable standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. It's not rocket science but it does require the regulators to regulate said Frank Wolak a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room billions of dollars apart as the talks approached their final weekend sources said. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS050901 Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Body:: I couldn't open link. I s this something new for me to sign or have I already complied? ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Gray Davis meeting Body:: I think the meeting is on Wednesday but if you can be there (Sacremento I expect) you should. As I mentioned in my voicemail I think the meeting will not be particularly substantive more likely it is a photo op for the governor to show how tough he is on the pirate generators. Based on your message below should we still plan to send somebody? I still think we should if we can manage the legal risk. Mike: would you be able to attend as well? From: Richard B Sanders@ECT on 05/06/2001 10:45 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Gray Davis meeting As I indicated in my VM I will be in LA early Tues morning. Would you like to talk about the isuues before your meeting--or would you like me to go? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Report On EPSA Legislative Affairs Committee Meeting Body:: The EPSA leg. affairs cmt. met today during the fall meeting. The speakers were Howard Useem Republican counsel to the Senate Energy Committee and Jimmy Glotfelty senior policy advisory to the Secretary of Energy. Useem said Senate Energy Committee Republicans were meeting later this morning to finalize their energy proposal. (We later learned that they opted against including any electricity provisions not even the PURPA PUHCA and reliability issues that Howard thought might be included when he spoke before the senators met this is good news since it makes it less likely that anti-FERC provisions will be added.) (Howard said now is the best time to legislative on electricity because the Supreme Court has not yet acted on the bundling/unbundling issue.) On RTOs in some what of a surprise Useem said that there is general support among Senate Republicans for RTOs including consolidating them into a few RTOs of large scope (surprising since this is not what we have heard in meetings with individual Senate offices). While he said that he also said that support is stronger in the abstract than in specifics. He said the biggest opposition was coming from very vocal state regulators (EPSA staff did a good job of pointing to state regulators mainly in the Midwest who support larger RTOs). Most importantly Howard said none of the senators on his committee take a not over my dead body approach to RTOs. Jimmy Glotfelty explained to several EPSA members who asked questions just why it is that the Administration wants Congress to be silent on RTOs. He said while they would prefer a sentence or two affirming FERC's authority they do not believe this is what would come out of the legislative process. They are not willing to run that risk. He stressed that the president wants to include other electricity issues. He said they were very close to an agreement with Western governors on regional transmission siting. Jimmy further said that the Administration also wants silence on incentive rates another issue where FERC can act now. They continue to talk to Barton and his staff in an attempt to get them to back away from the restrictive approach to RTOs in the Barton discussion draft. (He said Pat Wood spent several hours with Barton and other House committee staff yesterday.) Of concern Jimmy said something like could be 4 RTOs could be 8 RTOs what is important is getting standard design. He also said DOE will make sure that PMAs are included in RTOs. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Jim Noles Named CEO of Enron Wind Body:: Congratulations! ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enron Expatriates in India Body:: John Brindle David Cromley and others in the Corporate Business Controls group (formerly part of EBS) have been working over the last several weeks to make sure that we can get our people out of Dabhol if there are threats to their safety. While no plan is perfectly reliable (particularly during monsoon season) we believe that we are as ready as we can be. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: Electricity Crisis Cools Down a Bit in San Diego County, ... Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Body:: I doubt that this is worth the trouble (i.e. running it through a conflict of interest check ensuring no liability for actions taken on the advice etc). From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 10:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Steve we have no record of receiving the original invitation but is this anything you would recommend? Please advise. Thanks SRS What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: LEAK Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: AG letter - privileged and confidential: request for legal advice. Body:: The letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility an= d then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why t= hat makes sense? Specifically the New Jersey restructuring law like most= efforts of its kind in other markets is designed to separate the competit= ive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic reg= ulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the = business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relie= d upon to regulate the behavior of monopoly asset owners such as distrib= ution utilities. Therefore regulators continue to be called upon to set p= ricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a = great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for = lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign c= ontributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policie= s simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. = The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relativ= ely low barriers to entry multiple competitors etc.). These components of= the power and gas business can be regulated by the market with respect t= o rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any = more than grocery stores department stores appliance sellers or other re= tailers (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Com= petition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices a= nd terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of = service for such sellers there is no reason to be concerned about campaign= contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed the legislation and the = legislative history clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer I certainly understand the value of pleading= in the alternative. But I question how certain of our arguments woud be = perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents h= ave a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's clai= m of ignorance or mistake or the fact that we pled for the favorable exer= cise of prosecutorial discretion. I suggest that we add whatever we feel= is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument not make specific = reference to ignorance or mistake and not plead for the favorable esxerc= ise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item perhaps we co= uld suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a = claim under such circumstances. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: pipeline aftermath Body:: In case you had not heard Lou Pai has done some fundraising for Franks and both he and his(Lou's) sister know him fairly well. Keep it in mind if at some point we need to get in to see him. From: Jeffrey Keeler 08/23/2000 03:44 PM To: Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON David L Johnson/OTS/Enron@ENRON Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: pipeline aftermath Clayton: Here are some preliminary answers to your questions (and I have copied GPG and Government Affairs folks as well to share this information): 1) I am currently assessing the situation regarding pipeline safety legislation. This week has been very quiet on Capitol Hill as all of the members are back in the states on August recess running for re-election and it is a big vacation week for staff...but here's what I am hearing: As you may or may not know we have been been very active this year trying to temper pipeline safety legislation that was fairly reactionary in the wake of last summer's liquid pipeline accident in Bellingham WA. SENATE: In June Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Slade Gorton (R-WA) led the charge to pass a pipeline safety bill (S. 2438) out of the Senate Commerce Committee and that bill is awaiting floor action in the Senate. Because of the hasty way in which S. 2438 was drafted and passed there was a realization by both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate that the bill could not make it to the floor for a vote until some serious changes were made -- mostly things that were deal breakers for industry. Enron and El Paso were leading the charge and we had a number of Senators backing our efforts to negotiate changes including Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) John Breaux (D-LA) and Sam Brownback (R-KS). From what I've learned since the accident these Senators are not changing their strategy and are still asking for the same improvements. Fortunately most of the changes we were looking to make were fairly technical and not the types of things that would be seriously compromised by the accident. Industy was already in the position of having to accept a number of things they never would have if not for he Bellingham incident...the El Paso incident just reinforces those. The biggest potential effect I see from the El Paso accident is an increased effort to pass something before the Congress adjourns in early October. The New Mexico Senators are already calling for a floor vote on the McCain/Gorton legislation and I there will certainly be greater pressure on leaders to wrap up negotiations get agreement from all sides on a bill and move it unanimously through a vote on the Senate floor. HOUSE: The House is moving a bit more slowly but again I'd expect the El Paso situation to expedite things somewhat. There were several bills introduced in the House that were not moving anywhere including an identical copy of the McCain legislation introduced by Rep. Bob Franks (R-NJ). Franks is now anxious to move legislation as he is running for Senate and would love to take credit for helping out on an issue of national visibility. Before the accident House Tranportation Committee leaders on both the Democrat and Republican side were working on a consensus bill that they could introduce in early September and move quickly through the Committee and to the House floor. I'm told that negotiations on that legislation are moving forward and a draft bill will be produced shortly. Unlike our experience in the Senate we have had significant input into the bill in advance and expect something that we can live with -- and something more reasonable than the McCain bill. With that said there may be an effort to expand the bill in a few areas because of the El Paso accident so we'll have to see what kind of hand we're dealt in the next few weeks. Overall I'd expect pipeline safety legislation to be given higher priority when Congress returns after Labor Day. In the absence of this accident I would have given it slim odds of passing in the few short weeks until adjournment with appropriations bills taking up most of Congress' precious time. Now there will be greater pressure to come to consensus and move bills through by an expedited process so that everyone running for election in November can show that they've done something about this terrible tragedy. With that said there's still not that much time to get legislation through so I'd say that there's still a chance it may not get done this year. If I had to attach a number to it I'd say that the El Paso accident improves the chances of legislation going all the way to probably 50-60%. 2) Gas supply to California: I'll have to do some more checking in this area and get back to you. All I've heard so far is that the safety questions that remain may slow the speed of restarting flow on the line notwithstanding that El Paso thinks it can have things running again fairly quickly. I'm sure the power crunch in California will put some counter-pressure on but I just don't have good intelligence on this yet. With all this said I'm on vacation this week and parts of next week finishing up some leave I've taken for the birth of our new baby daughter so I may not have an additional report for you until early to mid next week. If you have questions please respond by e-mail or leave a message on my voice mail at 202-466-9157. Regards Jeff Keeler From: Cynthia Sandherr 08/23/2000 09:48 AM Sent by: Allison Navin To: Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: pipeline aftermath Jeff Keeler in our office handles pipeline safety issues and I am copying him on this e-mail so that he may reply to you directly. Also Cynthia is out of the office through the end of the week but will be reachable tomorrow and Friday. Thanks. Allison Clayton Seigle@ECT 08/22/2000 06:29 PM To: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: pipeline aftermath Hi Cynthia: The commercial officers here are very concerned with the El Paso pipeline explosion in New Mexico. We would love to get some input from your group on the following questions if possible: 1. What is the status of pipeline safety legislation on the Hill and what is the outlook for action between now and the end of the year? 2. What are people from California saying about the added pressure on gas supplies and what are people from New Mexico saying about restarting the flow of gas while safety questions remain? These questions come straight from the top and any information you could provide would be very helpful. Please write me back or call and let me know if/when you think we might be able to get some initial answers. Thanks very much! Clay What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: I love you. Call me. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Purely Personal <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process Body:: see below. Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus Chronicle Staff Writer=20 Wednesday July 4 2001=20 ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle =20 URL: 01/07/04/MN186091.DTL =20 Officials in California and Nevada after months of lobbying for federal re= gulators to cap Western power prices warned yesterday that the newly impos= ed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat of bla= ckouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling black= outs yesterday afternoon and one day after the first-ever rolling blackout= s in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains and reduc= e air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revis= ions that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during s= hortages.=20 We need some clarity to this order said Oscar Hidalgo a spokesman for t= he California Department of Water Resources which is spending billions of = dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 Generators need to be held accountable he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages yet = power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the ex= pense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that electrici= ty must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps said= Gary Ackerman executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum an e= nergy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price cont= rols are in effect.=20 This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t having enough Ackerman said. It increases the threat of blackouts.=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when = power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert ab= out an hour later after finding additional supplies.=20 Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts said Stephanie McCorkle = a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator which oversee= s the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time prompting= heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their li= ghts.=20 Don Soderberg chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission said tha= t the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that th= ey are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had= in exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 We're looking very closely at this he said. There seems to be a potenti= al for unintended consequences.=20 Specifically Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older less= - efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking if not vanishin= g under capped prices.=20 We're going to see how the caps might have played into this he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states excluding California is about $9= 2 per megawatt hour. In California a 10 percent surcharge is added because= of the state's credit risk bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials however said that they still have faith t= hat price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federal= regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot wit= hhold output.=20 The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan)= said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months federal r= egulators refused to impose price controls preferring instead to let suppl= y and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k on output Monday California officials immediately dialed the hot line nu= mber provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emerge= ncies.=20 No one answered he said. They were closed.=20 State officials tried again yesterday and this time were told that the com= mission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for wh= en the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected] .=20 ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 1=20 Out-of-state generators pull plug over uncertainty on price controls By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published July 3 2001)=20 Confused by the federal government's new controls on electricity prices ge= nerators withheld so much power from California on Monday that the state wa= s nearly plunged into rolling blackouts state officials said.=20 The confusion began when the state's electric grid operators declared a Sta= ge 1 power alert in the early afternoon triggering the price caps for the = first time since they went into effect June 21.=20 Out-of-state generators pulled about 1500 megawatts of electricity off the= table at midafternoon enough to power about 1.1 million homes because of= uncertainty about how much they could charge under the new Federal Energy = Regulatory Commission pricing system said Oscar Hidalgo spokesperson for = the state Department of Water Resources. The department buys electricity fo= r the state's financially distressed utilities.=20 They didn't understand what they were going to be paid there was confusio= n over the FERC order Hidalgo said. We saw 1500 megawatts disappear.= =20 The problem was exacerbated by a heat wave across the West which forced Ca= lifornia to compete with other states for scarce electricity he said. Roll= ing blackouts hit southern Nevada.=20 Most California officials credit the FERC system which is based on a varia= ble price cap with reining in what had been a runaway wholesale power mark= et. But power generators have complained that the price caps by limiting p= rofits could discourage the production of critically needed electricity. A= nd as Monday's episode suggested even the uncertainty about where the cap = will fall could lead to unexpected shortages.=20 That's the risk that you run (with price controls) said Arthur O'Donnell= editor of the newsletter California Energy Markets. People want any kind= of certainty at all.=20 Hidalgo said the state avoided blackouts only because of last-minute import= s from the Bonne=07ville Power Administration the federal agency that mark= ets government-produced hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest. The s= tate went into a Stage 2 power alert the next-to-last level before blackou= ts are ordered. The alert was canceled in late afternoon.=20 The blackouts would have been the first in California since May 8.=20 FERC imposed a round-the-clock ceiling on power throughout the West. The pr= ice fluctuates and is tied to the production costs of the least-efficient p= lant operating in California during a power alert declared by the Indepen= dent System Operator which runs the state's power-transmission grid. When = there's no alert prices can't exceed 85 percent of the cap that was establ= ished during the latest alert.=20 Until Monday the maximum price held steady at about $101 a megawatt-hour i= n California. But when the ISO declared a Stage 1 power alert in early afte= rnoon signifying that reserve supplies had dwindled to less than 7 percent= of demand confusion set in Hidalgo and others said.=20 Because of a steep drop in the price of natural gas which fuels many Calif= ornia power plants suppliers knew the cap would fall. But no one knew by h= ow much until the price was posted by the ISO.=20 The ceiling for California fell to about $77 at 3 p.m. but was back up to $= 98 in two hours according to the ISO. Those prices include the 10 percent = premium that sellers can charge California because FERC said there's a cred= it risk in selling to the state.=20 O'Donnell said it's likely suppliers will pull back from the market every t= ime the ISO declares a power alert.=20 In-state generators have to operate their plants if summoned by the ISO. Bu= t out-of-state suppliers can withhold supplies and on Monday it was the ou= t-of-staters that were pulling back Hidalgo said.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or [email protected]= m .=20 Power Sales Halted by New Pricing Curbs=20 Electricity: Confused suppliers unsure what they will be paid refuse to s= ell to state which asks FERC for a ruling but doesn't get it.=20 By NANCY VOGEL Times Staff Writer=20 SACRAMENTO--Confusion over new federal price restrictions prompted sev= eral electricity sellers to back away from sales to California on Monday af= ternoon pushing the state closer to blackouts energy officials said. The state lost sales that would have provided enough electricity to su= pply more than 1 million homes said Ray Hart deputy director of the Calif= ornia Department of Water Resources which has been buying much of the stat= e's electricity since January. At least five companies producing or marketing power are telling us t= hat since they don't know what they're going to get paid they're not going= to take the risk and so they're not going to sell the energy Hart said. The electricity sales fell through after power consumption soared in s= ummer heat and grid operators were forced to declare a Stage 1 emergency m= eaning reserves had dipped below 7%. It was the first such emergency since = May 31. Under a June 19 order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission inte= nded to bring down wholesale electricity markets across the West a power e= mergency in California triggers the setting of a new price limit that appli= es to power plant owners from Washington to Arizona.=20 The new price is supposed to be based upon whatever it costs to run th= e most inefficient expensive power plant selling electricity to California= grid operators during the first full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. But much uncertainty remains about exactly how and when the new price = is supposed to be established under the commission's order and that appare= ntly drove away sellers Hart said. Shortly after the state issued the Stage 1 alert at 1:30 p.m. putting= the old price limit of $90 per megawatt-hour in question companies that h= ad committed to provide the state electricity hour by hour Monday afternoon= backed out Hart said. The companies include TransAlta Energy Marketing of= Oregon Constellation Power of Baltimore and Sempra Energy Trading a unit= of the San Diego-based energy conglomerate. Forced to dip even deeper into the state's power reserves and declare = a Stage 2 emergency water agency officials called the federal energy commi= ssion's hotline for clarification about what the new price should be and wh= en it should take effect. They got no answer. Hart said commission officials reached at home promised to try to clar= ify their order today. One outstanding question is what obligations power s= uppliers have to deliver electricity to California in an emergency. Both buyers and sellers in the market agree that the new price when i= t is set will probably be lower than $90 per megawatt-hour because the pri= ce of natural gas the main fuel in California power plants has dropped la= tely. Temperatures soared several degrees higher Monday than grid operators = had anticipated. But they said they expected to avoid rolling blackouts in = part because the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland Ore. had agr= eed to provide several hundred megawatts of Pacific Northwest hydropower ea= ch hour in exchange for a return of electricity from California later this = summer. Bonneville is giving us emergency power to get us through Hart said= .=20 Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To:=09Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc:=09Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Linda R= obertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enr= on@Enron Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron Ray Alvarez/N= A/Enron@ENRON Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON [email protected]=20 Subject:=09ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Proc= ess The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to = Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain = confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as = Monday am. Jim =20 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Granite Update Body:: What are our chances of final approval at FERC at the JUly meeting. Jeff still thinks this is a third quarter close. Do we have any chance of making that happen? ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission Body:: Ed I am sure I shall screw up sooner or later (given my aging brain and amount of work). This guy will have to change his name to Ed Krapels to stay employed. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: FREETRIAL - Enron Corporation News Alert: KEANSTEVEN_J_ENRON_COPORATIONS 9 new stories. Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 Body:: It's hard to formulate a position without more of the specifics but I think our message should generally be: We support providing immediate rate relief to small residential customers. We believe that relief is best provided by giving San Diego the ability to procure power on a fixed price basis from the market. San Diego has offers in front of it now those should be evaluated and the legislature and the commission should give San Diego the flexibility to accept one or more of them. This is sounder than running huge deferrals (deficits) to be later recovered from consumers. Rate relief should be accompanied by real reform. Rate caps have bad long term consequences: they cause shortages. Combining short-medium term rate relief with expedited siting of new facilities will address the near term problem while laying the proper groundwork for a long term solution. Bruno Gaillard@EES 08/24/2000 11:08 AM To: Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES David Parquet@ECT [email protected] SF Directors Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mary Hain@Enron Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 This email reflects today's events in Sacramento. The information provided is subject to change because of constant flux. However it is important for us to provide this information for feedback and to caution as to new regulations that may affect some deals in the making . Governor Davis Assembly Women Susan Davis and Senator Alpert had a press conference. They will introduce a rate/bill stabilization plan for SDG&E and an expediting siting bill. There is no language as of yet. Although there is no specific language the following elements may be included: The stabilization plan will be applicable to residential and probably commercial customers in SDG&E The bill cap may be set at $68 for residential. The cap will be in place until the end of 2002 There will be language on expediting siting for generation plants Sam Wehn and Sandra McCubbin have been talking with the CEC executive director and several legislators about the siting portion of the bill. Any comments as to the bill cap proposal? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Revised Enron Comments on NERC Bill Body:: Attached is revised draft of Enron comments on the NERC bill. The helpful editorial revisions came from Charles and Sarah. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: calendar ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: From Michael L. Kirby, Esq. Body:: Bonnie: Please forward to Michael Kirby. I think the draft looks good. Could you also prepare a draft of the letter we discussed yesterday to convey the proposal to the committee? Bonnie Hugyez <[email protected]> on 07/17/2001 12:34:20 AM To: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> cc: Subject: From Michael L. Kirby Esq. Attached is a draft Nonwaiver Agreement per our telephone conferences of yesterday after the meetings with Senator Dunn. I am available in my office for a conference call to discuss this. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify Kathryn A. Pugh at [email protected] and immediately delete this message from your system. - 289271_1.WPD What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: request to CERA Body:: Your understanding was correct. In light of recent changes in the California regulatory environment (eg the recent rate order) I don't think it makes sense for us to distribute the document at this time so you can ignore the request. Thanks Peter Augustini <[email protected]> 03/29/2001 06:18 PM To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> cc: David Gibbons <[email protected]> Subject: request to CERA Steve: Thanks for your note sorry I missed you. From your message I think there may be some miscommunication between your PR guys and us. We understood that your PR people wanted to reprint the Op-ed and redistribute it to as-yet-undetermined people along with various Enron material. They also wanted to post it on Enron's public web site. But your message seemed to indicate you just want to post the op-ed on your intranet - for educational use only for your internal folks. If this is correct we would have no problem with it. In fact we have posted the op-ed on the CERA web page - which is theoretically available to every Enron employee for internal use only. If you want you could just post a link to the CERA web site so your people could get direct access to all our research on the topic. If I misunderstood you and you do want to redistribute the piece to third-parties -- that is a much bigger issue because it involves our intellectual property and branding issues. Obviously we would need to talk some more about this. I hope this helps. On a somewhat-related note we are also getting sucked more and more into the California vortex and being asked to help in areas that are not our traditional business such as expert witness testimony and policy issues. While we are not afraid to take a point of view (as you know!) we must maintain a neutral and independent posture. This is sometimes a difficult path to navigate but we are exploring two areas that may also interest Enron: 1. We have examined Joskow and FERC's analysis on the price gouging issue and we believe there are several major flaws in their methodologies. We are considering how best to broadcast our assessment without impinging on our core business or becoming an expert witness. We think a workshop similar to the Monday event at CERAWeek could work where we would present our findings and issue a report. 2. We are also looking into the economic impact of power outages in the West - especially linked to the overall fragile state of the US economy. This would be a collaborative effort with a major economic forecasting firm or university. Again the reults would go to our clients but could be released to a wider audience and a workshop might help highlight the release. Please let us know if either topic would be of interest to Enron. We would need to raise funding from various clients to help underwrite the effort but the work would be CERA's independent research and we would stand fully behind it. Hope all is well. ...Peter . What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Public Policy Contacts for California Body:: 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 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Protecting Confidential Information: New European Restricted List Procedure Body:: As you probably all know we are on the verge of launching credit derivatives trading in Europe and North America both on Enron Online and off-line. This will involve quoting prices for buying and selling bankruptcy protection in respect of reference entities many of whom are our counterparties in a variety of different commercial and financial contexts. This exciting cocktail of credit derivatives and Enron Online raises significant novel legal risks for Enron. Probably the most significant risk arises where Enron has confidential information about a reference entity and wrongfully uses that information in pricing the credit derivative on that entity. This could well result in legal proceeding against Enron. In practice an allegation of misuse of confidential information can be very difficult indeed to defend without adequate procedures in place to safeguard that information. Against this background is the ever-present risk of insider dealing. This crime - which carries a maximum prison sentence of 7 years and an unlimited fine - is committed where a person (or member of their family etc) deals in the securities (shares or bonds) of a listed company on the basis of unpublished (confidential) price-sensitive information. In addition SFA rules require the safeguarding of confidential information the misuse of which is a serious disciplinary matter. In order to ensure the success of this new business we are now introducing new policies and procedures (attached) which include a simple Restricted List procedure. In essence they require you - to take prudent steps to safeguard confidential information within Enron to notify Michael Brown Mark Elliott or myself if you become aware of confidential information (or circumstances) about a counterparty which you think might make it appropriate for that counterparty to be placed on the Restricted List. To make life easier numerous examples of the types of information which might be relevant are set out in the attached procedures so please familiarise yourself and anyone else in your group you think appropriate with them. As you will see you are not expected to make difficult determinations about whether an entity should or should not be added to the Restricted List just to let us know if you think there is a possibility that it should be added. We will also provide quick briefing sessions to ensure that each of you is comfortable with these new procedures. Many thanks for your co-operation. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Performance Review-Washington Office Support Staff-Germain Palmer Body:: Fine Richard Shapiro 07/21/2000 10:43 AM To: Gwendolyn Petteway/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Performance Review-Washington Office Support Staff-Germain Palmer Can we change- I'm not opposed ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: California Power Issues Database Body:: 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 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Meet with Skilling in his office. Project Body:: Balboa and PGE filing - Cancelled for the time being - per Vanessa Bob - They'll call us when he gets back What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: SMethodist Presentation Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: So you will know . . . Body:: Thanks I hope we get there soon. Mary Clark 09/26/2000 01:55 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: So you will know . . . Steve I'm leading a team with Beth Tilney that will roll out communications to employees worldwide after our stock price closes at $100. We will keep you posted on our plans as they materialize. Mary What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott Body:: Confirming 1:00 p.m. meeting on June 12 at the Venetian Resort in Las Vegas. Thanks Joannie Williamson 713-345-7774 Kevin Scott on 04/25/2001 04:46:18 PM Please respond to To: Jeff Skilling <[email protected]> cc: Sherri Sera <[email protected]> Subject: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott April 25 2001 Dear Jeff Thank you for setting aside time to meet with me. I have attached my resume to help bring you up to date on my career. As you will see I have been providing advisory services since 1995. During these years I have done some of my best work. I am proud of the service that I have rendered as an independent consultant. Now I feel it is time to move to a new chapter in my career. I look forward to sitting down with you to think through ways to apply my experience intellect and energies to new professional challenges. I respect you tremendously and wherever the next part of my career may lie I know that my search and choice will benefit significantly from your perspective. Finally I am attaching the recommendation to HBS that you wrote in 1981. I found it during a profoundly challenging period in my life. Your historic words of support helped me keep fighting and successfully moving forward. If you would like to reach me before our meeting please call (213) 926-2626 or email [email protected] . Thank you again. Sincerely [IMAGE] Kevin Attachments (2) - image001.png - image002.gif - Resume of Kevin Scott.doc - Skilling HBS Recommendation.doc What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: FERCs marketing affiliate conference Body:: I heard you were a big hit. Leslie Lawner 03/20/2001 08:45 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: FERC's marketing affiliate conference Becky and I attended FERC's gas marketing affiliate conference last week. Non-affiliated competitors continue to build straw men and describe abuses with no real evidence to back them up (the funny money argument and capacity hoarding are two examples. The funny money argument assumes marketing affiliates will bid above market rates for capacity because they excess payment is going to the corporate bottom line. Hoarding capacity to drive up price may be an issue but it is not a marketing affiliate issue as anyone can do it). FERC staff did not seem terribly sympathetic to the points made but at least one FERC staffer seemed to believe that one solution would be to require the pipelines to offer capacity in smaller blocks to let smaller entities put together bids. FERC also indicated they were in fact auditing compliance but in a non-public way. There were some concerns voiced which I agree with and there is an opportunity to file additional comments on Apr. 30. I would like to put the following in these comments: Evidence of affiliate abuse/preference is just not there. The best folks can do is make up stuff. We welcome FERC monitoring if that is needed to bring confidence to the marketplace that abuse is not occurring. But the issue is really whether we do have a crisis of confidence or merely a bunch of disgruntled competitors who are just seeking to neutralize the affiliated competitors). The FERC rules and the information reported (with a caveat) under those rules are adequate for detection and enforcement and deterrence. That said the definition of marketing affiliate should be expanded to include affiliated electric generators who are siting plants along affiliate pipelines. The pipeline 637 reporting and internet systems should allow users to download and manipulate transportation related data which is not currently the case. We also need to address a deal on Northern where ENA took capacity at a discount albeit after other parties had an opportunity to match our bid. This was a deal brought up in the conference. Let me know how this sounds. Thanks. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA Body:: Linda - as we discussed adding a sentence on open access is key. Also I would delete the sentence about the transmission system not being designed for the way it's being used today. Richard Shapiro 04/02/2001 04:23 AM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron Subject: Re: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA It would be nice to get a one sentence mention made of open access just to show they care....I say this in part because of Scott Miller's e-mail pleading for more focus on this issue. Thanks. Linda Robertson 03/30/2001 12:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA 1. I am faxing to you a bootleg copy of the draft talking points Ed received this morning at the White House energy messaging meeting. These are very close hold. Ed asked that we not circulate these to anyone. Ed asked us to give him feedback of any concerns we have with the talking points (he will be giving them comments). After glancing at the TPs the obvious missing point is open access. However I am not sure we should be alarmed about that. There really isn't any policy in the TPs. This is a typical WH message document. Let me know if you think it is imperative to insert open access. Also Ed would like to position us as the coalition leader of the White House outreach effort. Any thoughts? 2. I am faxing to you EPSA's summary of the generators meeting with Secretary Abraham. I am glad I did not attend this meeting. As you will see from the summary there were three parts to the meeting: a) an exchange of policy views both long and short term b) discussion of how to maximize generator output in Calif and c) a request that industry participate in a DOE reliability group. I don't see any follow up for Enron outside of our normal course of activities and independent interchange with DOE officials. Let me know if you have additional thoughts. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Translation - Nikkan Kogyo 5/21 (Enron Mentioned) Body:: I think we need to keep the pressure on. I liked the way our basic message= =20 was evolving over the course of last week. As you pointed out the Japanes= e=20 utilities view us as just another annoying US company who is going to come= =20 in bang its head against the wall for a few months and then leave. We nee= d=20 to continue to reinforce the message that not only are we not going away w= e=20 are starting other businesses here to keep us going while we continue to=20 agitate for reform in the electricity sector. Nicholas O'Day 05/21/2001 04:37 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT Vance=20 Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT Mika=20 Watanabe/AP/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: Translation - Nikkan Kogyo 5/21 (Enron Mentioned) To date reports on Enron's role in California have been limited to a repri= nt=20 of a Sacramento Bee article appearing in the Denki Shimbun - a limited=20 circulation publication sponsored by the Japanese utilities. Last Friday Mr= =20 Ohta President of Chubu Electric and Chairman of the Federation of Electri= c=20 Power Companies made some uninformed comments at a regular energy press cl= ub=20 briefing about Enron's commitment to its Californian customers . Ohta will = be=20 retiring from both positions in two weeks.=20 In the past both Chubu Electric and the Federation of Electric Power=20 Companies have distanced themselves from Mr Ohta's public comments which ar= e=20 generally considered to be ultra conservative and unsupported by facts. As = a=20 result we have tended to ignore his comments. However on this occasion I= =20 think we need to set the record straight on Enron's role in California. I= =20 would welcome your thoughts on whether we should let the comments pass or= =20 respond. Over the past few months we have received various statements from Houston= =20 (for both internal and external consumption) explaining Enron's role in=20 California. Most recently (May 10) we received from Peggy Mahoney (via Vanc= e)=20 an EES statement dated 1 February entitled Media Statement about EES=20 Resourcing California Customers. It would be helpful if there is a=20 comprehensive statement that has recently been put together that we could= =20 distribute here. If not we can put something together here tomorrow and=20 email it across to you for approval with the aim of getting something out= =20 Wednesday. As an aside we had a record 3766 visitors to the EJ website last Friday= =20 the day the Brattle paper appeared on the website. kind regards =20 ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Job well done Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: Congratulations on your appointment by Fox. That's great news. I continue to be impressed by the way Fox is handling things. Let me know what I can do to help. As you know we are looking for a replacement for the unreplaceable Ricardo Charvel. I know you and he have discussed some possibilities. Rick Shapiro has met several candidates and will be bringing two to Houston in the next week or so. Dr. Kean continues to improve her golf game while I slave away at Enron to cover the greens fees. Let me know when you are coming to town next. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Purely Personal <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Body:: Restructuring Today quotes Jeff at length on retail vs wholesale price caps. He does talk about protecting small customers with retail caps and highlights the more destructive nature of wholesale caps. If you need a copy let me know. [email protected] on 09/09/2000 11:39:55 AM To: [email protected] cc: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Subject: Re: Thanks Steve. The message we received was that Jeff had said he'd take retail price caps to avoid wholesale price caps. I know the press and listeners will distort things so I take the reports with a grain of salt. We just hope that you and Dasovich will find a way if asked to stress the right way to take care of small customers - enhance competition and create a robust retail market. I know we all want the same result. We just hope that with our roadshow beginning next week Gene doesn't have to explain away any other perceived Enron slams on retail competition. P. S. I can't think of two better spokesmen for the cause of competition than you and Dasovich. Steven J Kean@ENRON 09/08/2000 06:03 PM Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON To: [email protected] cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Got your message. I'm testifying at the Congressional hearing and Dasovich is covering FERC. I think Jeff's comments were taken out of context. He said policymakers do need to take care of small customers whose bills are tripling. Frankly we'd get slaughtered if we said anything else. But he also said there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. Enron and others had provided a market based answer by offering a fixed price deal to SDG&E (which would have enabled them to cap rates to those who had not switched. California elected instead to cap rates and deficit spend (ie create a deferral account). I don't think we can stand for anything that doesn't protect the small customers but we can continue to emphasize the market based solutions. One of the messages in my testimony will be: customers should be encouraged to choose. Those who did are doing fine. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Andy Zipper Body:: Andy Zipper What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Meeting with Debra- Rice Professor Body:: Anne I shall brief you on the meeting. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Meet with Ralph Reed in EB49c5 Body:: With Rick Mark Lou and possibly Hillings What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting Body:: I think I can recommend that the time be set aside but it would be helpful if we pointed out to Emerson that it must be clear that there is a clear opportunity for Enron before we schedule the meeting. Maybe you could use this to get some progress on a bundled outsource deal. Nate Ellis@EES 02/28/2001 03:05 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES Troy Henry/HOU/EES@EES cc: Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES Micah Hatten/HOU/EES@EES Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting Gentlemen: Situation: Emerson is aggressively seeking at least a three hour time slot for a meeting with Jeff Skilling in April or May 2001. Mr. Skilling's office is hesitant to allocate more than two hours without your recommendation. Emerson is being persistent. The key players from Emerson are David Farr newly appointed CEO and James Berges President and effectively the leader of Emerson's strategic development effort. It is anticipated that both would attend the meeting. Emerson execs want to (i) get to know Mr. Skilling and other senior management (ii) discuss mutual business opportunities and (iii) hold a discussion about the transformation of Enron from a pipeline company to its current form. The last point has to do with Emerson's continuing self-transformation effort and how Enron achieved its transformation. I need your advice and recommendation. Please respond by e-mail or telephone (x5-4040). Background: Emerson initiated this latest round of contact with Enron in November 2000 when Mike Train and Mark Proudfoot both Emerson VPs of Corporate Development visited the Enron building hosted by Steve Kean. I met them at that time. Since that initial meeting Emerson has aggressively pursued a business joint venture as preferred supplier with Martin Wenzel and the distributed power business I believe with promising results. My sense is that Emerson is uniquely positioned as EES' partner in that business. I am waiting to receive an update from Martin. Emerson is also interested in becoming a preferred supplier for EES's DSM business. While we generally support that idea we are pressing Emerson to reciprocate by becoming a customer of our bundled outsource business. Emerson is highly decentralized and our efforts to date have been unsuccessful. I want to use the meeting as an opportunity to press Emerson to consider a proposal from EES's bundled outsource business. Please let me know your recommendation on this matter. Thanks Nate ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Meeting w/Sempra Body:: sounds good. I think we should not talk about the conversations with the governor . . . I'd rather not prompt them to go to the gov (presumably to object to the gov talking to us without talking to them at the same time). Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/11/2000 02:54 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron [email protected] Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES [email protected] Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Meeting w/Sempra FYI. Recently Chris Calger has asked me to set up a meeting with Sempra. ENA's seeking deals with the two big CA gas IOUs (PG&E and SoCalGas) that would give ENA access to their assets. In short ENA wants to offer a complete outsource deal for the IOUs' core gas load (i.e. rez and small commercial customers). ENA would take responsibility for providing service for delivery at the city gate and in return would manage all of core's assets (upstream of the city gate). We're meeting with Sempra's Chief Regulatory Office (Bill Reed) and Sempra's CFO next Thursday to discuss. Given the fact that Sempra's primarily focused on electricity the plan is to lead off the meeting with a couple of electricity solutions as a bridge to the gas offer. For electricity the plan has two pieces: 1) a commodity offer that beats the 6.5 cent cap (i.e. nothing fancy) and 2) Deal Bench services with the intent of establishing a procurement mechanism for SDG&E that the California PUC could pre-approve (thereby eliminating some of the immense regulatory risk SDG&E now faces). Wanted to run this by folks to gauge reactions. We'll distribute the slides we're putting together as soon as they're drafted--hopefully by COB Friday. Best Jeff What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Electricity Issues Body:: Thanks. We are preparing a memo (John has seen it) to go out to each of our offices telling them about this incident (and the related ones that occurred the same day) and including some tips on how to handle such confrontations in the future. [email protected] on 05/23/2001 02:14:25 PM To: [email protected] [email protected] cc: [email protected] [email protected] Subject: Electricity Issues Steve/Mark I have looked into the demonstration by the ACORN group which occurred on 5/21 at our New York Office (780 3rd Ave). I believe you are well aware of the incident as the office there immediately contacted Mark Palmers group. I will respond to the building management to discuss security issues and to gain a better understanding of the security posture of the facility. If you have any questions or require further follow-up please let me know. - John P. John Presley Business Controls Enron Corp (EB4646) Ext. 58208 What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: EES QBR - in 30c1 Body:: Lunch will be served at 11:30 QBR starts at 12:00. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Im Leaving Enron Body:: Congratulations on your new position! This all came up rather suddenly at least as far as I can tell. If you have any interest I would like to talk to you sometime. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: followup to telephone conversation of 3-7-01 Body:: Excerpts by email are fine. Also as I mentioned I am very impressed with your background and accomplishments but I would like to have you meet a couple of other people in my group before making a final offer. Thanks and stay warm! Kim Amy <[email protected]> 03/09/2001 08:44 AM To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> cc: Subject: followup to telephone conversation of 3-7-01 Dear Mr. Kean: Thank you for your call. I am looking forward to working for you. I will be available as of June 1 2001. I will have the writing samples and resume ready for you on Monday March 1 2001. Should I fax it to you? Also my dissertation is quite lengthy. Would you like for me to forward you one chapter or just a couple pages? As discussed I will be available to come down to Houston between March 30 and April 6 2001. More snow (as in 6 inches) is expected today and tomorrow. I'm only 5'6. Pretty soon I will be buried in it since it's snow upon snow. HELP!! I look forward to seeing you again. Regards Amy What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: GREAT NEWS ****FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO Body:: See below. This would have presented a bigger problem than price caps. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: Ken Lay spoke with several California CEOs this morning and urged them to get personally involved in pushing for a comprehensive set of reforms. Three expressed willingness to help. Scott McNealy (Sun): contact person - Piper Cole ([email protected]) [email protected]. Mcnealy wants by close of business today a cheat sheet of the talking points to use with politicians (the 8 or 10 elements of the solution) with the expected comeback he may hear from the political leaders and our response to that comeback. He says he hasn't spent time working on issues in Sacremento so we may also want to include a list of suggested contacts. Kevin Sharer (Amgen): contact person - Sarah Jensen VP of Engineering and Operations (805.447.6785) [email protected]. Sharer wants the same information as McNealy and he and McNealy both indicated their willingness to call a meeting of other California CEOs. Sharer will also be having breakfast with Hertzberg one week from today. Robert Day (Trust Co of the West): said that he is very close to the mayor of Los Angeles. He urged Ken to call the mayor (mentioning Day). Ken would like some talking points for that call. Jeff - please put these items together. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: DRAFT Comments on Barton RTO Draft Body:: Attached for review and comment is a draft set of talking points on the Barton RTO discussion draft. I went through the testimony at the recent hearing and parsed the legislative language of the discussion draft. You will see that the talking points are designed to respond to two basic points being raised by our opponents: (1) that FERC is rushing and being heavy-handed and (2) that the only interests involved are those of the transmitting utilities (i.e. no mention of discrimination as being what RTOs will remedy). Please let me have your thoughts in the next few days. Once Capitol Hill is up and running again we will distribute the final talking points to our consultants and to members/staff of the Barton Subcommittee as we continue our efforts against the discussion draft's treatment of RTOs. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Body:: Frank Thanks. I have given your name to the employee Energy and Power Risk Management magazine who organizes Power2001 Conference in Houston (May of 2001). Vince Frank A. Wolak <[email protected]> on 11/28/2000 09:04:42 AM To: [email protected] cc: Subject: Vince Sorry about the delay in responding. It's the end of the quarter and I'm teaching 3 courses so things are very busy plus I had to work on a response to the FERC Proposed Order for California. Here is my student's CV. Please let me know if you need more information. Frank Wolak - jmyan_cv_new1.pdf What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group Body:: Marshall: Thanks for responding so quickly. I have scheduled the following intervie= w: Wednesday December 6 - 1:00 PM Houston time. It will last approximately 1 hour. We will call you at (605) 497-4045 unless otherwise instructed. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 713/853-5290. Best regards Shirley Crenshaw Jingming 'Marshall' Yan <[email protected]> on 11/28/2000 12:59:55 PM To: [email protected] cc: [email protected]=20 Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group Ms. Crenshaw Thank you very much for the message. I am very interested in the opportunity to talk to personnel from the Research Group at Enron. Between the two days you suggest I prefer Wednesday 12/6. Considering the two-hour time difference between California and Texas 11:00 am Pacific time (1:00 pm your time) seems to be a good slot. However I am open most of the day on 12/6 so if some other time slot is prefered on your end please let me know. Thanks again. I look forward to talking to you and your colleagues. Jingming On Tue 28 Nov 2000 [email protected] wrote: > Good afternoon Jingming: > > Professor Wolak forwarded your resume to the Research Group and > they would like to conduct a telephone interview with you sometime next > week at your convenience. The best days would be Tuesday 12/5 or > Wednesday 12/6. > > Please let me know which day and what time would be best for you and > they will call you. Let me know the telephone number that you wish to be > contacted at. > > The interviewers would be: > > Vince Kaminski Managing Director and Head of Research > Vasant Shanbhogue Vice President Research > Lance Cunningham Manager Research > Alex Huang Manager Research > > Look forward to hearing from you. > > Best regards > > Shirley Crenshaw > Administrative Coordinator > Enron Research Group. > 713-853-5290 > > > Jingming Marshall Yan [email protected] Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) Stanford CA 94305 358C Economics Bldg If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it then what is there to repine about? -- Confucius _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O?> What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Request Submitted: Access Request for [email protected] Body:: I cannot access the system to approve the request. I get a message that the page is not available on-line. Vince Kaminski What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL Body:: And another..... What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Body:: Frank Thanks for your message. What about a meeting on Tuesday September the 4th. We could meet at your office let's say at 4 p.m. We would be delighted if you could join us for dinner later in the evening on the same day. Vince What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Test Body:: testing What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Empty message <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: eBiz article on Bush energy plan Body:: Looks good to me. I'm glad you had the chance to work with Linda. Jeannie Mandelker@ECT 05/23/2001 03:31 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: eBiz article on Bush energy plan Linda thanks for making time for me today. This is the eBiz article we'd like to run Friday. I need your comments by noon tomorrow. You can e-mail them back or reach me at 3-6305. Thanks Jeannie What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Stella Chan /Project Summer transfers Body:: How are we handling these now? Last time I talked to Jeff we weren't going to lift the restrictions until next week (assuming we do lift the restrictions). Any word? ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: <<Concur Expense Document>> - Robert L Bradley Jr Body:: ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Energy Issues Body:: Please see the following articles: AP Wires Thurs 3/22: Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.= 5=20 billion Dow Jones Newswires Thurs 3/22: Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sel= l=20 Pwr To Calif Sac Bee Thurs 3/22: Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell t= o=20 California San Jose Mercury News Thurs 3/22: State falling short on pacts that provi= de=20 low-cost energy Contra Costa Times Thurs 3/22: Crisis saps state surplus Sac Bee. Fri 3/23: Bill to pay small energy firms stalls Sac Bee Fri. 3/23: House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? Sac Bee Fri 3/23: Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic San Diego Union Fri. 3/23: Report says power wholesalers overcharged=20 state $6 billion San Diego Union Fri 3/23: Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm San Diego Union Fri. 3/23: Outages darken economic outlook in state so= me=20 say San Diego Union Fri. 3/23: Out-of-state generators question power=20 regulators' authority San Diego Union Fri. 3/23: Allegheny Energy makes big California=20 connection LA Times Fri 3/23: Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract SF Chron Fri 3/23: Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills' SF Chron Fri 3/23: Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills SF Chron Fri 3/23: Grid Operators Push to Prevent Overcharging=20 They say regulators must be aggressive to stop billing abuses=20 Mercury News Fri. 3/23: State's bill for energy could double this year Mercury News Fri. 3/23: Plan for alternate power plants stalls --- --- Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 DON THOMPSON Associated Press Writer Thursday March 22 2001=20 2001 Associated Press=20 (03-22) 11:41 PST SACRAMENTO Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers have= =20 overcharged California more than $5 billion since May by manipulating the= =20 energy market according to a report prepared for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator will file the findings with federal=20 regulators and ask for a refund ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said.=20 The state auditor also said Thursday that the state's 1996 deregulation law= =20 encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to ``manipulate wholesale= =20 prices to their advantage'' by underestimating supply and demand.=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls ``a complex combination'' of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 According to the ISO report five in-state power suppliers and 16 importers= =20 frequently offered electricity at prices higher than it cost them to produc= e=20 -- effectively withholding supplies -- or didn't bid at all when they were= =20 able to generate power.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= =20 conference in Berkeley last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up scrutiny of power companies' behavio= r=20 during California's power crisis asking suppliers to justify $124 million = in=20 sales during the first two months of the year or refund the money. Critics= =20 claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being challenged.= =20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities the state's largest have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus.=20 Since the state started making emergency power buys the surplus has fallen= =20 from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the power buys saying Gov. Gray Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison spokesman for the state Department of Finance and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law.=20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information'' Harrison said.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said the administration has released the=20 financial information it can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-ter= m=20 power contracts with wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday a federal judge ordered a major wholesaler Reliant Energy= =20 Services to continue selling power to California despite its fear that it= =20 will not be paid.=20 The ISO buys power from companies like Reliant on behalf of utilities in=20 attempts to fend off rolling blackouts like those that hit the state this= =20 week and during two days in January.=20 --- Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sell Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) said Thursday it will= =20 immediately file with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in= =20 response to a federal judge's ruling late Wednesday that the company contin= ue=20 selling power to California regardless of whether it is paid.=20 U.S. District Court Judge Frank Damrell granted California's Independent=20 System Operator which makes last minute power purchases in the spot market= =20 a preliminary injunction against Reliant saying Californians were at risk = of=20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the state. The ISO manager of the state's electricity grid said the judge's ruling= =20 will allow the agency to keep the lights on in California.=20 Reliant which is owed more than $300 million from the state's cash-strappe= d=20 utilities supplies California with about 3000 megawatts of electricity fr= om=20 power plants it owns in the state.=20 Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley said the state Department of Water=20 Resources the agency that buys California's bulk power needs on behalf of= =20 PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Edison International (EIX) un= it=20 Southern California Edison and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas &=20 Electric should back the ISO's last minute power purchases.=20 In a filing with the Securities and Commission Reliant said it is owed $10= 8=20 million by the DWR for last minute power purchases the ISO made during the= =20 six weeks prior to the agreement Reliant made with the DWR.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's claim saying he does not have the authority to= =20 force the DWR to pay for that power.=20 We're going to immediately appeal Judge Damrell's order Wheatley said.= =20 Clearly the judge understands the implications of his order. We are requir= ed=20 to do business with creditworthy entities. Unfortuantely the judge did not= =20 force the ISO to post a surety bond which would allowed us to do business= =20 with the ISO.=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state is not responsible for the last minute= =20 power purchases the ISO makes despite a law passed authorizing the DWR to= =20 buy power on behalf of the utilities.=20 Wheatley added that the company will also seek relief on the issue at the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Damrell's ruling remains in effect=20 until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Separately Wheatley said a short-term power supply contract that Reliant= =20 signed with the DWR expired Monday and the DWR has not renewed the contract= .=20 A spokesman for the DWR would not comment on the issue.=20 -By Jason Leopold Dow Jones Newswires 323-658-3874=20 [email protected] --- --- ----------------------- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California Updated: March 21 2001 - 8:23 p.m.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear= =20 that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.=20 Had the decision gone the other way one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers Dynegy AES and Williams who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 Spokesmen for Reliant Dynegy AES and Williams were out of the office=20 Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Pre= ss=20 seeking comment on the ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r=20 requiring the sales but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant which provides about 9 percent of the state's power worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time the state has faced a tight electricity supply due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts. State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health. Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a rainy day fund she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison spokesman for the state Department of Finance and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances he said. At some point we're going to run out of money.= The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism. Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday a report by Davis' chief power negotiator appears to show= =20 that as much as 75 percent of the state's power purchases will have to be o= n=20 the expensive short-term market this summer said Sen. Debra Bowen D-Marin= a=20 del Rey chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee.=20 The prices may be phenomenol she said particularly given predicted=20 hydroelectric shortages due to drought in the Pacific Northwest.=20 The report by David Freeman who is negotiating the state's long-term power= =20 contracts shows California has finalized 19 contracts and has 25 agreement= s=20 in principle. Freeman said DWR is continuing to negotiate other contracts. Bowen said FERC should impose short-term price caps or let generators to=20 charge enough to make a reasonable profit or we could be subject to enormo= us=20 price-gouging this summer.=20 -- Associated Press --- State falling short on pacts that provide low-cost energy=20 Published Thursday March 22 2001 in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY CHRIS O'BRIEN AND JOHN WOOLFOLK=20 Mercury News=20 The state has signed low-cost contracts for just a third of the energy it= =20 needs this year raising the prospect that California could be forced to bu= y=20 much of its electricity this summer on the expensive spot market.=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis conceded Wednesday that the state will be i= n=20 trouble without more contracts but insisted California will meet its needs= =20 through conservation and additional long-term deals for cheap electricity.= =20 The state according to a report released Wednesday has fallen far short o= f=20 the governor's goal of filling almost all its electricity needs through suc= h=20 deals. In fact the state has lined up contracts for about half the amount= =20 Davis had projected earlier this month.=20 If the state has to rely heavily on the volatile spot market where the pri= ce=20 of electricity this summer could reach five times the state's contract pric= e=20 pressure could mount to raise the cap on the electricity rates consumers pa= y.=20 But Steven Maviglio the governor's spokesman said ``The governor has sai= d=20 he's committed to work this in the existing rate structure so that's the= =20 plan.''=20 In the report sent to state lawmakers the state Department of Water=20 Resources indicated that it had secured just more than 20 million=20 megawatt-hours for this year leaving it far short of the 60 million=20 megawatt-hours needed.=20 ``This is just a progress report'' Maviglio said. ``They did all this in= =20 three weeks which is pretty amazing when you think about it and we have a= =20 lot more to do.''=20 The state got into the power buying business in January supplying it to th= e=20 state's nearly bankrupt utilities.=20 The state negotiated long-term contracts with generators to supply that pow= er=20 at a reduced rate. Based on the report the state will pay an average of $6= 8=20 per megawatt-hour over the next 10 years -- significantly less than in=20 December when prices spiked higher than $300 per megawatt-hour but not as l= ow=20 as the $55 Davis hoped to reach.=20 Most of this power however won't be delivered until 2004. From 2004 to=20 2006 the Department of Water Resources estimates it has enough power unde= r=20 contract. Until then the amount falls short.=20 In 2001 it appears the state has about one-third of the power it needs. Th= e=20 gap closes to about half in 2002 and two-thirds in 2003.=20 At a news conference in Los Angeles two weeks ago Davis said the state wou= ld=20 have to buy only 30 to 45 percent of the power it needs this summer on the= =20 open market.=20 At the time critics said with only two-thirds of the power under contract= a=20 rate increase was almost inevitable. Even Davis' chief negotiator S. David= =20 Freeman offered a bleak assessment for the summer saying that all availab= le=20 electricity has already been sold.=20 ``We'll be subject to extremely high prices'' said Frank Wolak a Stanford= =20 professor who sits on a market committee for the Independent System Operato= r=20 the agency that runs the state power grid.=20 Wolak said there are two main hopes for avoiding a price increase this=20 summer: Federal officials could cap the wholesale price a step they've=20 resisted or Californians can conserve an unprecedented amount of power. --- --- ----------------------- Crisis saps state surplus POWER CRISIS=20 Controller moves to block a transfer of funds saying the $8.5 billion=20 surplus has been cut more than half since January=20 By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER=20 The energy crisis has bled California's once-touted budget surplus by more= =20 than half since taxpayers began buying electricity two months ago leading = a=20 top state finance official Wednesday to order an audit of the power purchas= es=20 and block Gov. Gray Davis' plan to transfer funds into a reserve account.= =20 A booming economy last year produced a budget surplus that totaled $8.5=20 billion in January. But that figure now stands at about $3.2 billion=20 according to Controller Kathleen Connell.=20 We started this year with a generous budget surplus Connell said in a=20 statement announcing her decision to block what Davis administration=20 officials described as a routine transfer of surplus money. The energy=20 crisis has taken much of that away and this transfer on top of the=20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.=20 Meanwhile the Davis administration released a report by David Freeman the= =20 governor's chief negotiator on power purchases on the progress of executin= g=20 long-term agreements meant to stabilize the power buys.=20 According to the report only about 40 percent of the electricity needed fr= om=20 the open market this year has been lined up. That means the state could be= =20 forced to continue buying a substantial amount of power on the highly=20 expensive spot market and further drain its coffers.=20 And a key regulatory panel is scheduled next week to issue a ruling that=20 would determine how quickly state funds will be replenished when it decides= =20 what portion of electric bill payments should be allocated to the state=20 treasury a decision that could include a rate increase to fully repay=20 taxpayers without further crippling the state's two largest electric=20 utilities.=20 The Public Utilities Commission also will consider whether it will force th= e=20 utilities to pay alternative energy producers whose shutdowns this week=20 contributed to blackouts.=20 Connell's action underscores a growing nervousness over the sheer volume of= =20 money that is being poured into energy buys despite the fact that state=20 officials plan to replenish the treasury with up to $10 billion in loans th= at=20 will be repaid by electricity consumers.=20 The state has committed to spending $4.2 billion to date to keep lights on= =20 since taxpayers were forced in mid-January to take over electricity buys fr= om=20 the financially crippled utilities Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Tax money is going out at a clip of about $50 million a= =20 day.=20 High prices already have brought PG&E and Edison to the brink of bankruptcy= =20 and now the state's surplus is at risk according to Connell.=20 In addition to requesting an audit and announcing her intention to delay th= e=20 transfer to the reserve account Connell said she wanted the administration= =20 to send her office more information about the electricity purchases.=20 Davis' representatives questioned Connell's authority in trying to block th= e=20 funds transfer which they called a routine accounting procedure and accus= ed=20 her of making political hay.=20 It is not helpful to the taxpayers or ratepayers or the people who just wa= nt=20 to keep the lights on it isn't helpful to have the situation muddied like= =20 this said Sandy Harrison a Finance Department spokesperson. We're sorry= =20 it came up in this manner.=20 Connell and the administration have butted heads in recent weeks. The=20 controller wants to post details of the state's electricity purchases on he= r=20 Web site a plan that have been delayed under pressure from Davis because o= f=20 the governor's concerns that releasing those details will allow power=20 generators and traders to sell at higher prices.=20 Harrison said administration officials believe Connell lacks the authority= =20 either to block the funds transfer to a reserve account or to audit the sta= te=20 water resources department.=20 Two days of widespread blackouts this week show how vulnerable the power gr= id=20 is to financial glitches. Although several factors combined to produce the= =20 blackouts state power officials say the outages could have been avoided if= =20 the utilities were paying their bills to alternative energy producers.=20 Many of those producers including clean-burning natural gas power plants= =20 wind solar and geothermal energy developers shut down enough production t= o=20 spell the difference between grid reliability and blackouts Monday and=20 Tuesday.=20 Davis called the utilities' failure to pay bills to those producers known = as=20 qualifying facilities immoral. The QFs were either unable to buy gas fro= m=20 their suppliers or were frustrated with the utilities' failure to pay them.= =20 The utilities hoarded billions of dollars since November without paying an= y=20 money out said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. They've got the money --= =20 we're pulling the trigger to make them pay it.=20 The utilities however say they are doing all they can to conserve enough= =20 cash to continue operating. Together they owe the QFs about $1.5 billion.= =20 Next week the PUC is scheduled to consider whether to force the utilities = to=20 heed Davis' demand to pay the QFs and it might also decide how much of=20 ratepayers' bill payments will be used to refund taxpayers for power buys.= =20 PG&E says that under a formula proposed by the administration the water=20 resources department would receive about 40 percent of the money collected= =20 from ratepayers for power purchases.=20 The rest of that money about $240 million would have to be divided among= =20 QFs existing power contracts operating PG&E's nuclear and hydroelectric= =20 plants and what hour-by-hour purchases the utility still must make on the= =20 spot market according to PG&E spokesman John Nelson.=20 There isn't enough to do that he said.=20 That is making it increasingly likely that electric bills will be hiked=20 according to a growing chorus of officials and experts.=20 Unless rates are raised Nelson said the only entity that can absorb a lac= k=20 of payment or a partial payment is the state treasury. Cutting off any othe= rs=20 will lead to electricity becoming unavailable and more blackouts he said.= =20 If they do it under existing rates -- given that the existing pool of mone= y=20 is not enough -- who doesn't get paid or who gets a partial payment? Nelso= n=20 said. What's the only entity left with wiggle room? The state.=20 Rate hikes are also a sticking point in negotiations to bail out the=20 utilities through purchase of their transmission lines and other assets=20 Maviglio said.=20 They want rate increases of significant magnitude and we're not going=20 there he said.=20 WE CAN TRIM STORY HERE IF NECESSARY BUT KEEP TAGLINES AT BOTTOM=20 About one-third the electricity needed by the customers of California's thr= ee=20 major utility companies is produced by the companies themselves one-third= =20 comes from alternative producers who use environmentally friendly technique= s=20 and one-third is bought on the open market.=20 The state stepped in to buy the one-third needed from the open market after= =20 the utility companies ran out of cash and credit in January to make the=20 purchases themselves.=20 But that electricity has proven to be enormously expensive and Davis has= =20 planned to lower those prices by committing to long-term purchases.=20 Freeman's report on the progress of those long-term purchases dated March = 15=20 but released this week said the state has finalized 19 contracts with seve= n=20 suppliers and reached 25 additional agreements.=20 Mike Taugher covers the environment and energy. Reach him at 925-943-8324 o= r=20 [email protected].=20 Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. --- --- ----------------------- Bill to pay small energy firms stalls By Kevin Yamamura Dale Kasler and Jim Sanders Bee Staff Writers (Published March 23 2001)=20 A quickly melded proposal that would assure payments for alternative energy= =20 suppliers whose money woes contributed to power blackouts this week stalled= =20 Thursday in a divided Legislature.=20 The state Senate passed the bill AB 8x but with Republicans balking it w= as=20 rejected in the Assembly along party lines. Assembly leaders said they may= =20 try again today.=20 For most of Thursday lawmakers scrutinized legislation they had overhauled= =20 the night before to include Gov. Gray Davis' plan to force utilities to pay= =20 solar wind and small gas-fired suppliers. Such providers called qualifie= d=20 facilities or QFs provide more than 20 percent of California's=20 electricity and their shutdowns were partly to blame for rolling blackouts= =20 Monday and Tuesday.=20 Under the Democratic governor's plan the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 would determine prices at which alternative generators may sell power but= =20 legislation is needed to authorize the PUC action.=20 Lawmakers faced time pressures Thursday. They wanted to pass the bill quick= ly=20 so the PUC could act next week and legislators could embark Monday on an=20 annual three-day lobbying trip in Washington D.C.=20 Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg D-Sherman Oaks said the Republicans'=20 rejection of AB 8x could jeopardize more than $4 billion the state has spen= t=20 or allocated for electricity during the energy crisis.=20 Hertzberg said producers of alternative energy which are owed more than $1= =20 billion have threatened to drag debt-ridden utilities into involuntary=20 bankruptcy if the Legislature failed to pass the measure.=20 They said it and I believe it Hertzberg said. If such bankruptcies occu= r=20 he added the state with its multibillion-dollar debt would become just=20 another creditor in a pile of creditors.=20 But Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park said the=20 finger-pointing is unfair. Passage of AB 8x would not necessarily prevent= =20 bankruptcies he said.=20 One alternative energy provider won a crucial court ruling Thursday that=20 staved off at least for a while threats by some creditors to haul one or= =20 both big utilities into bankruptcy court for nonpayment of bills.=20 CalEnergy Co. Inc. won the right to sell its geothermal power which was=20 contracted to Southern California Edison on the open market. CalEnergy sai= d=20 it is owed $45 million by Edison.=20 If the Imperial County judge hadn't ruled in CalEnergy's favor the company= =20 and seven other QFs were fully prepared to file an involuntary bankruptcy= =20 petition against Edison this morning said David Sokol chief executive of= =20 CalEnergy's parent MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. of Des Moines Iowa.=20 That is currently off the table.=20 An involuntary bankruptcy proceeding would take California's energy crisis= =20 into uncharted territory although a bankruptcy judge would have the leeway= =20 to reject the filing.=20 Freed from its contract with Edison CalEnergy will move to sell its=20 electricity to people who will pay for it Sokol said.=20 Besides calming the bankruptcy movement temporarily the ruling also could= =20 prompt other alternative energy providers -- hundreds of which have shut do= wn=20 because of nonpayment by Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. -- to foll= ow=20 CalEnergy's example and find other buyers for their electricity said Gary= =20 Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum an association of generators.= =20 Assembly Republicans said they felt the Senate's decision to package three= =20 important energy issues into a single bill was an attempt to ramrod=20 legislation through both houses.=20 We have to stand and say no Campbell said during floor debate.=20 Besides determining alternative generator payments the bill would change a= n=20 earlier law by capping the value of bonds the state may sell for power=20 purchases at $10 billion. It also would extend to large businesses an=20 existing rate cap in the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. service area.=20 And it would earmark a portion of rates paid by utility customers to fund t= he=20 state's ongoing power purchases. Within a week the state will have spent= =20 $4.2 billion on power since January.=20 Without the bill some legislators fear Pacific Gas and Electric and=20 Southern California Edison would be reimbursed before the state.=20 They have got (some) gall to go to the PUC and say they're going to go to= =20 court to keep our money -- to keep our money to pay off their creditors= =20 said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton D-San Francisco.=20 Most of the bill's controversy however centered on how the PUC would trea= t=20 gas-fired alternative generators.=20 The commission issued a revised draft decision Wednesday that would impose= =20 prices for qualifying facilities at $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year=20 contracts or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years.=20 But those producers that use natural gas -- representing about two-thirds o= f=20 the alternative energy providers in California -- spent Thursday arguing th= at=20 Davis' plan to rescue them would all but guarantee that they would go out o= f=20 business instead.=20 The plan -- ordering Edison and PG&E to pay them a fixed price for their=20 power -- would set rates well below the cost of natural gas they said.=20 Democratic lawmakers tried to assure such producers that the PUC would set= =20 prices that make business sense even obtaining a letter to that effect fro= m=20 Loretta Lynch who heads the commission.=20 Davis has vowed to fine Edison and PG&E if they don't pay alternative=20 producers for future deliveries. But Sokol said his company isn't convinced= =20 that Edison will pay.=20 Calling Edison a confrontive in-your-face nasty organization Sokol sai= d=20 the utility was sitting on $2 billion and not paying its bills. Edison i= n=20 a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday said its debts outwei= gh=20 its cash reserves by $722 million.=20 The Senate sent the Assembly two other bills that deal specifically with=20 supply and demand. The first SB 5x would spend about $1 billion on energy= =20 conservation and low-income assistance programs. The other SB 28x would= =20 streamline siting procedures for power plant construction.=20 In separate energy-related matters Thursday the Assembly approved:=20 AB 21x which would allow businesses industries or other electrical=20 customers to negotiate private contracts with energy providers.=20 Nine energy bills designed to generate or save 665 megawatts of electricity= =20 -- including 345 megawatts this summer. One megawatt is enough electricity = to=20 light about 1000 homes.=20 The state put power emergencies behind it after dropping out of a Stage 1= =20 alert late Wednesday. The California Independent System Operator which=20 manages the state's power transmission grid was predicting no further aler= ts=20 this week. It expected cooling temperatures and a regular dropoff in=20 electricity use on Fridays to lessen demand at the same time that more pow= er=20 plants were returning to service.=20 Bee staff writer Carrie Peyton contributed to this report.=20 --- House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 23 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- A key House panel wrapped up a series of hearings on the=20 California electricity crisis Thursday and now will decide whether to come = to=20 the state's aid with legislation.=20 But the panel's Texas chairman made clear that West Coast price controls=20 won't be on the table.=20 Caps will not be in anything I am submitting said Rep. Joe Barton=20 chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's energy and air qualit= y=20 subcommittee.=20 Some form of federal controls to hold down escalating wholesale prices this= =20 summer because of power shortages has been the most frequent appeal of=20 witnesses who testified before the panel during roughly 30 hours of hearing= s=20 over five days.=20 Such controls have been sought by the governors of California Oregon and= =20 Washington. As power shortages are forecast for other regions states like= =20 New York also have appealed for temporary price controls to halt gouging.= =20 But the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which is responsible for=20 enforcing reasonable wholesale rates under the Federal Power Act has refus= ed=20 to impose them and the Bush administration is bolstering that decision by= =20 opposing any legislation that would compel such action.=20 Barton in a brief hallway interview declined to say what other legislativ= e=20 remedies he might propose to address the worsening California situation.=20 He said he expects to submit a list of ideas to the White House today and= =20 after receiving comment on it sit down with other committee Republicans an= d=20 Democrats next week to see if any legislation is in order.=20 If we are going to do anything to help California or the West this summer= =20 we have to make it law within the next month or six weeks Barton said.=20 Even the panel's senior Democrat Virginia Rep. Rick Boucher was urging a= =20 careful and deliberate approach to the California crisis which he said w= as=20 largely of the state's own making.=20 There are steps Congress might take to provide some help to the West such = as=20 more money for conservation and relaxed federal regulation of air quality= =20 standards. That would permit older more polluting generators to operate=20 through a long hot summer when electricity demand could exceed supply by= =20 about 3000 megawatts roughly the amount needed to power 3 million homes.= =20 But Alan Lloyd chairman of the California Air Resources Board said power= =20 production already is being maximized without sacrificing air quality.=20 Simply put no essential electricity generation has been curtailed due to= =20 air emission limitations he said. California's programs to protect publi= c=20 health are not major factors in the electricity shortages experienced to=20 date.=20 The concern is that as shortages turn into more rolling blackouts wholesal= e=20 prices will jump even higher and steadily bleed the economies of California= =20 and the West Coast.=20 William L. Massey the lone member of the energy regulatory commission who= =20 supports price controls said at a Tuesday hearing that without them the We= st=20 Coast faces economic catastrophe this summer.=20 It was evident from the comments of some Republicans that they think their= =20 party could capitalize politically from a difficult summer.=20 If they had a bad summer it could show up in the polls said Rep. Charli= e=20 Norwood R-Ga. And sometimes that's not a bad idea.=20 One of the most dramatic exchanges during the weeklong hearings came Thursd= ay=20 with S. David Freeman the former general manager of the Sacramento Municip= al=20 Utility District who now heads the Los Angeles Department of Water and Powe= r.=20 He recently was named Gov. Gray Davis' chief negotiator with power generato= rs=20 for long-term contracts to stabilize future deliveries.=20 Don't feel sorry for California Freeman said. We're going to come out o= f=20 this stronger than ever.=20 But Freeman said it will be a year or two before all the fixes are in place= =20 and in the meantime the region desperately needs Congress' help to force th= e=20 FERC into controlling wholesale prices which witnesses said are likely to= =20 rise from $7 billion last year to as much as $70 billion or more this year.= =20 We recognize that the current administration and various legislators have= =20 their own opinion as to the California situation Freeman said. But my=20 personal plea is that if the federal government is not going to help us th= e=20 least it should do is refrain from legislation that attempts to tell us wha= t=20 to do.=20 Barton perked up at that idea.=20 Leave California alone huh? Barton said. That might be a good motto.= =20 --- --------------------- Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic (Published March 23 2001)=20 That choking sound you hear is California's political class shifting into= =20 near-panic mode as it realizes that the energy crisis is on the verge of=20 becoming a full-scale meltdown with utilities forced into bankruptcy and= =20 consumers hammered by severe and prolonged power blackouts and soaring=20 electricity bills.=20 The Legislature which had been content to allow Gov. Gray Davis to handle= =20 the crisis on his own suddenly came to life Thursday jolted by this week'= s=20 unexpected rolling blackouts and threats by creditors to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy court. Lawmakers quickly fashioned a basketful of legislati= on=20 aimed -- or so they hope -- at increasing power supplies promoting=20 conservation and relieving the financial pressure on utilities and=20 electricity generators. But it may be too little too late -- and Davis and= =20 other politicians are already pointing fingers of blame aware that a=20 political price will be paid if the apocalypse strikes.=20 While Davis chants his mantra that he inherited a fatally flawed utility=20 deregulation scheme from predecessor Pete Wilson Republicans are blaming= =20 Davis for moving too slowly after the crisis first surfaced last summer an= d=20 even some of Davis' fellow Democrats are distancing themselves from the=20 governor.=20 Deregulation was a product of a Republican governor a Republican author a= nd=20 a Republican PUC (Public Utilities Commission) that was unduly impatient= =20 Davis said at one point this week as the Capitol buzzed with private=20 negotiations and public posturing.=20 A day later however state Controller Kathleen Connell a Democrat issued= a=20 warning that Davis' power purchases running at $50 million a day had=20 already drawn down state budget reserves by nearly two-thirds and she=20 refused to authorize additional transfers. It was a direct shot by Connell = at=20 Davis an old rival and came just a day after the governor had endorsed a= =20 Connell foe Antonio Villaraigosa in the duel for mayor of Los Angeles.=20 Other Democrats didn't join Connell's direct challenge to Davis but there= =20 is nevertheless a growing concern among Democratic legislators that the= =20 power purchases are costing many billions of dollars more than the governor= =20 had projected and could place the state budget in jeopardy. They're nervous= =20 because Davis has refused to reveal even to legislators exactly how much= =20 power the state is buying each day and how much it is paying.=20 From the few details that have been disclosed it's clear that the state is= =20 spending about $1.5 billion a month which would wipe out the state's=20 reserves by midsummer. It's also becoming increasingly clear that Davis=20 probably can't make good on his promise to avoid major consumer rate=20 increases unless the state is willing to plunge deeply and semi-permanentl= y=20 into debt to underwrite wholesale costs or unless federal authorities orde= r=20 huge refunds from power suppliers.=20 Rates in areas served by private utilities have risen only slightly while t= he=20 costs first to utilities and later to the state soared. Data from the=20 administration and utilities when collated indicate that the state is in= =20 line to collect just 20 cents for every dollar it's spending on power=20 purchases and the gap will increase as summer heat drives up demand.=20 Privately some economists say that private utility rates will have to rise= =20 33 percent to 50 percent to cover costs of current power supplies plus=20 utilities' past debts to generators and the state's purchase of the=20 utilities' transmission system if that deal is made final.=20 It's ultimately going to break down and the ratepayer is going to pay for= =20 it one way or the other Republican Sen. Jim Battin said during one of=20 Thursday's many committee hearings on utility legislation. No one disagreed= =20 with him.=20 DAN WALTERS' column appears daily except Saturday. Mail: P.O. Box 15779= =20 Sacramento CA 95852 phone (916) 321-1195 fax: (781) 846-8350 E-mail: [email protected] Recent columns: --- Report says power wholesalers overcharged state $6 billion=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Electricity wholesalers have overcharged California more th= an=20 $6.2 billion by manipulating the energy market according to a report by an= =20 economist working for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator planned to file the findings with federal= =20 regulators Thursday and ask for a refund said ISO spokesman Patrick=20 Dorinson.=20 In a related development the state auditor said Thursday that the state's= =20 1996 deregulation law encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to= =20 manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage by underestimating both=20 supply and demand.=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls a complex combination of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 The ISO's filing came a day after the state controller complained that a=20 relentless energy crisis is jeopardizing California's financial future.=20 Since May the companies manipulated the market by bidding at excessive=20 prices effectively withholding supplies or by not bidding at all when they= =20 had generation capability available according to the ISO study.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= n=20 energy conference at the University of California Berkeley last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 In a burst of activity after weeks of delay both houses of the Legislature= =20 approved bills Thursday designed to ease the energy crisis.=20 The state Senate approved measures to encourage energy conservation and spe= ed=20 up power plant construction.=20 Topping that the Assembly sent the Senate 14 energy-related bills includi= ng=20 $455 million in loans and grants to encourage energy efficiency and=20 conservation and alternative energy projects by this summer.=20 One of the Assembly bills would require new energy plants approved by the= =20 state to sell their power within California before they offer it to other= =20 states.=20 The (California) Energy Commission says for every day we delay this bill= =20 there are 20 megawatts that could be saved that we're not saving said sta= te=20 Sen. Byron Sher D-Stanford as senators voted 28-10 to send his conservati= on=20 measure to the Assembly.=20 Senators also approved another Sher bill speeding up the siting of power=20 plants. It went to the Assembly on a 37-1 vote.=20 Meanwhile a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday orderi= ng=20 one of the companies named in the ISO filing Reliant Energy Services to= =20 continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not be paid.= =20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO which buys at= =20 the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fend= =20 off blackouts.=20 Such blackouts struck the state twice this week shutting off power to=20 hundreds of thousands of people from San Diego to Oregon snarling traffic= =20 and shutting down businesses.=20 The state remained free of any power alerts Thursday morning as power=20 reserves stayed above 7 percent.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= =20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 The utilities have been denied credit after amassing billions of dollars in= =20 debt paying high prices for power that the state's energy deregulation law= =20 prevents them from passing on to consumers.=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.=20 Had the decision gone the other way one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 In another development Wednesday state Controller Kathleen Connell=20 complained that the energy crunch is imperiling California's financial=20 health.=20 Connell said the state's power buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is gutti= ng=20 its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power buys in= =20 January the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion sh= e=20 said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power buying saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is also refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.= 6=20 billion into a rainy day fund she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power= =20 buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison spokesman for the state Department of Finance and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency he said.=20 Connell is a candidate for mayor of Los Angeles in next month's election.= =20 The ISO study meanwhile covered five major in-state power suppliers =01)= =20 Reliant Dynegy Williams/AES Duke Energy and Mirant as well as 16 power= =20 importers. All deliver power to customers of Edison PG&E and San Diego Gas= &=20 Electric Co. the state's three largest investor-owned utilities.=20 All overcharged but some excessively and some by moderate amounts said= =20 ISO's Sheffrin.=20 According to the report the overcharging took place beginning last May wh= en=20 the energy crisis began and continued through last month.=20 During that time according to the report energy suppliers commonly offere= d=20 their electricity at twice the amount it cost them to produce.=20 FERC member William L. Massey said he wasn't shocked to hear the amount=20 overcharged added up to more than $5 billion.=20 Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars he said.=20 Chuck Griffin spokesman for Atlanta-based Mirant said the company would=20 justify their charges to FERC officials.=20 I think we're missing sometimes just how basic the problem is in Californi= a.=20 Supply and demand are out of whack and some basic rules of economics kick i= n=20 when that happens he said.=20 --- ------------- Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Controller puts hold on transfer of $5.6 billion to reserve funds By Karen Kucher and Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERS=20 March 22 2001=20 The state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion from $8.5=20 billion since January largely because California's power purchases are=20 devouring the money state controller Kathleen Connell said yesterday.=20 Connell said she wants to see more documentation about state power spending= =20 before approving the transfer of $5.6 billion from the general fund to a=20 special reserve fund requested by Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Connell said the state would have to borrow $2.4 billion to cover the=20 transfer.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the (general) fund at risk Connell said in a statemen= t.=20 Her action came on a day when state power supplies improved. After two days= =20 of forced outages this week no rolling blackouts were ordered yesterday.= =20 Several power plants came back on line and imports from the Pacific Northwe= st=20 provided enough electricity to meet demand yesterday said Stephanie=20 McCorkle a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator=20 which manages most of the state's power grid.=20 Gradually more (electricity) generation comes on every day McCorkle said= .=20 By Monday we should see somewhere around 2200 megawatts back in service= =20 that was not on this Monday. That's if no other generation falls off.=20 Meanwhile Connell's move took some by surprise.=20 A spokesman for the state Department of Finance said Connell is denying a= =20 routine transfer that is required by law. It was just a routine accounting= =20 measure that we didn't anticipate becoming controversial Sandy Harrison= =20 said.=20 Connell announced the denial of the transfer a day after Davis endorsed one= =20 of her opponents former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa in the race= =20 for Los Angeles mayor.=20 Connell who monitors California's cash flow said she was deeply concerne= d=20 about putting the state's general fund in a deficit situation in light of t= he=20 energy crisis.=20 About two months ago the state began spending about $50 million a day to b= uy=20 power after Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison nearly= =20 went bankrupt. It is also purchasing power for customers of San Diego Gas a= nd=20 Electric.=20 The Davis administration said earlier this week it soon will begin spending= =20 an additional $500 million on power purchases bringing the total to $4.2= =20 billion.=20 As that staggering sum continues to grow the state won a court battle with= =20 an electricity supplier yesterday. A federal judge in Sacramento sided with= =20 the state and ordered the wholesaler to continue selling to California=20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable ha= rm=20 if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the Independent System= =20 Operator. The ISO acquires last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill= =20 gaps in supply to try to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for the power.= =20 Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly=20 last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E despite a law authorizi= ng=20 state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 Meanwhile those who manage the power grid say the forecast for power=20 supplies this week looks good although conditions can change quickly.=20 ISO managers continue to stress the importance of conservation. Utility=20 customers across the state conserved about 900 megawatts of power Tuesday= =20 which kept blackouts from being ordered that night.=20 As the power crisis worsened this week ISO managers wished aloud that they= =20 still could rely on business customers to shut down in exchange for lower= =20 energy rates.=20 Such interruptible customers saved as much as 2100 megawatts last spring= =20 a figure that dropped to about 1700 last summer and 1400 at the end of th= e=20 year. But in January the state Public Utilities Commission told utilities= =20 they could no longer impose fines on business customers who refuse to shut= =20 down when asked.=20 ISO managers realize the program was harming businesses with frequent=20 interruptions of service -- but they still miss having that option McCorkl= e=20 said.=20 It would have made an enormous difference but at the same time we=20 understand the impact it was having on businesses McCorkle said. --- -------------- Outages darken economic outlook in state some say=20 By Dean Calbreath? UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 March 22 2001=20 Until this week the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce was predicting= =20 that the county was well-insulated from the growing threat of economic=20 recession.=20 But that was before the lights went out in the chamber's downtown=20 headquarters Monday.=20 Working by window light in his darkened office chamber economist Kelly=20 Cunningham rapidly erased his previous projections for 3.5 percent growth f= or=20 San Diego County. Cunningham now feels the local economy could fall into a= =20 recession thanks to its shaky supply of energy.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 Blackouts are very disruptive to the economy Cunningham said. A busines= s=20 can absorb rising energy prices by cutting costs or raising its own prices.= =20 But an energy shutoff is much less predictable. It cuts into productivity.= =20 Those sentiments are being echoed throughout California as business leader= s=20 and economists worry that rolling blackouts will darken the state's=20 previously glowing economy.=20 At the University of California Los Angeles for instance leading financia= l=20 theorists will meet April 4 to discuss the question Can California grow in= =20 the dark? Although the topic was chosen before the recent string of power= =20 outages the blackouts have given the issue new urgency.=20 These blackouts are not just a single episode said UCLA economist Tom=20 Lieser. They are a bridge to what will happen this summer. If we don't fal= l=20 into a recession in the second half of the year we will fall pretty close.= =20 Tapan Munroe an economist formerly with Pacific Gas and Electric this wee= k=20 crossed out his projection for 2 percent statewide growth. After blackouts= =20 rolled toward his consulting offices in the Bay Area city of Moraga Munroe= =20 decided the state will be lucky if it manages zero growth.=20 I'm a pretty optimistic guy by nature but this has been sobering Munroe= =20 said. On Tuesday one restaurant alone in San Francisco lost $20000.=20 Multiply that by all of the businesses that lost power in the state and=20 you've got a serious problem.=20 Two days of blackouts in San Diego County have hurt businesses large and=20 small. Among the industries under threat is the local biotechnology sector= =20 which requires a steady supply of electricity to power areas of laboratorie= s=20 that must remain temperature-controlled and sterile.=20 Continued blackouts could have a huge impact not only in dollars but=20 multiple millions of dollars said Tom Oster vice president of operations= =20 for BioCom the leading trade organization for the more than 200 biotechs i= n=20 San Diego County.=20 Idun Pharmaceuticals a biotech near La Jolla Village Drive that has 67=20 employees had its power cut for about 40 minutes Tuesday. Though the compa= ny=20 has a back-up generator some segments of its laboratories and lab equipmen= t=20 were not supported by it. Chemists also had to turn off some sensitive lab= =20 equipment to avoid the possibility of a damaging power surge once the=20 blackout was over.=20 We're not in a position as a small company to back up the whole facility= =20 said Steven Mento Idun's chief executive. We haven't done a survey yet to= =20 determine whether we had losses either in experiments or equipment damaged= =20 -- but we're hoping because the blackout was so short that damage will be= =20 minimal.=20 Mento said rolling blackouts coupled with continuing high energy costs=20 could cripple many small biotechs -- and even take a bite out of bigger mo= re=20 established companies.=20 We generate new compounds in controlled environments on a daily basis and= =20 when power goes off you can lose samples because of contamination and other= =20 issues Mento said. We are fortunate that our losses would be in having t= o=20 repeat an experiment -- but this could be really critical for companies wit= h=20 drug manufacturing and issues of quality control.=20 The wireless firms along Sorrento Valley have not been immune from blackout= s.=20 The lights went out at Qualcomm early this week although executives declin= ed=20 to comment about the impact.=20 No blackouts hit the big shipbuilding operations on the waterfront this wee= k.=20 But the National Steel and Shipbuilding Co. -- one of San Diego's largest= =20 employers -- already experienced a voluntary loss of power this year its= =20 first since World War II. Since the shipyard does not have its own power=20 supply NASSCO executives fear the effect of unplanned outages.=20 Our average payroll totals half a million dollars a day said NASSCO=20 spokesman Jim Scott. When you have a day's work disrupted that can be=20 pretty serious. We're currently in discussions about the possibility of=20 buying from independent power suppliers or setting up a power plant of our= =20 own.=20 Small businesses which constitute the bulk of employment in San Diego=20 County were hurt by disruptions as well -- costing them vital revenue at a= =20 time when their power bills have skyrocketed.=20 At Fantastic Sam's a hair salon in Chula Vista Angelica Alcala estimated= =20 that business dropped 60 percent when the blackouts hit Tuesday. Among othe= r=20 things Alcala had to alter her planned haircuts because she was relying on= =20 scissors instead of electric clippers.=20 At the Family Fun Center in El Cajon the management gave vouchers or refun= ds=20 to the 15 or so video-game players who were in the midst of killing aliens = or=20 fighting ninja warriors as the power went down.=20 Papa John's Pizza estimates that it may have lost several thousand dollars = in=20 business after six stores were blacked out Monday and four others lost powe= r=20 Tuesday. Brian Mills who runs 23 Papa John's stores in the county said hi= s=20 main concern was shutting down the computers so they would not be damaged b= y=20 a power surge when the electricity was restored.=20 Paul Ecke III a member of the West Coast advisory panel for the Federal=20 Reserve said the potential impact of the energy crisis is worse than any= =20 downturn in the stock market.=20 Ecke who runs the Paul Ecke Ranch flower operation in Encinitas said the= =20 crisis could be particularly harmful for the state's agricultural sector= =20 since farmers need electricity to pump water and natural gas to heat=20 greenhouses.=20 What I'm really worried about is the energy thing is going to cast a shado= w=20 on California he said. If you're a business person thinking about moving= =20 to California right now you're probably not going to do it because you're= =20 not sure you're going to have your lights on this summer.=20 Besides the disruption to businesses the energy crisis is also hurting the= =20 pocketbooks of hourly workers who have been sent home during the crisis.=20 Under state law employers are free to send hourly workers home without pay= =20 during such emergencies although salaried workers must still be paid.=20 Susan Kemp an attorney with the California Chamber of Commerce said there= =20 are ways of minimizing the impact on hourly workers.=20 You have to look at what time it is when the blackout occurs and how long= =20 you think it's going to last Kemp said. If it's around a meal time you= =20 might send the workers out for a longer meal period if you think it's going= =20 to be an hour or hour and a half delay.=20 But the potential for losing wages doesn't sit well with the hourly workers= .=20 When you get sent home early and lose your wages you have even less money= =20 to pay your inflated energy bills said an hourly worker who was sent home= =20 during Monday's blackout.=20 --- ---------- Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) At least three major out-of-state electricity generators= are=20 challenging the authority of the California Public Utilities Commission to= =20 investigate whether they deliberately reduced power supplies to drive up=20 prices.=20 The PUC has asked for power plant maintenance records as it tries to=20 determine whether Duke Energy Dynegy Inc. Mirant Corp. and other=20 wholesalers have manipulated the energy market at California's expense.=20 At issue is who ultimately controls oversight of in-state plants that provi= de=20 most of California's electricity. The plants once owned by the state's=20 largest utilities were sold off as part of the state's 1996 attempt at=20 deregulation.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state some say=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 PUC President Loretta Lynch said the public deserves to know whether=20 generators have unnecessarily taken plants off-line to create artificial=20 shortages forcing the utilities and now state bureaucrats to buy much high= er=20 priced power on the spot energy market.=20 What I do know is we have historically high levels of outages across the= =20 board Lynch told The Associated Press. Dynegy and Duke have been fightin= g=20 the PUC in the PUC's quest to obtain documents about these outages.=20 The PUC has the authority to regulate facilities within its borders she=20 added. It doesn't matter where the headquarters of the company is.=20 Duke based in North Carolina says it does matter =01) and that since it a= nd=20 other wholesalers aren't headquartered in California the PUC can't require= =20 it to turn over the maintenance records.=20 We have not given them proprietary information because they do not regulat= e=20 us said Duke's spokesman Tom Williams.=20 Dynegy did not return calls for comment Wednesday.=20 The PUC also faces a new challenge in the legislature. A bill sponsored by= =20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden D-San Francisco which would have granted the= =20 PUC greater inspection authority over out-of-state generators was amended= =20 this month to grant the authority to Independent System Operator instead.= =20 The ISO has managed the delivery of energy through most of the state's powe= r=20 grid but historically has done little regulating and has had no policing=20 authority.=20 This board created during the state's 1996 attempt at deregulation was=20 redesigned in January. Now it has a five-member board appointed by Davis= =20 replacing a 26-member ISO board composed of utility executives marketers= =20 power plant owners and others.=20 The latest version of Migden's bill requires wholesalers to report monthly = to=20 the ISO about any plants that are off-line or working at reduced capacity= =20 and gives the ISO power to audit these reports.=20 But because the ISO board historically has made key decisions behind closed= =20 doors and is exempt from certain open-government regulations government=20 watchdogs are outraged by the switch.=20 The PUC's been no friend of ratepayers but at least under the constitutio= n=20 and state law they're required to conduct their process in the open and the= =20 public can intervene said Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation for Taxpaye= r=20 and Consumer Rights.=20 Davis ordered last month that the ISO take the lead among state agencies to= =20 ensure adequate energy supplies. Alan LoFaso an aide to Migden said the= =20 amendment follows Davis' lead.=20 Both LoFaso and the governor's spokesman Steve Maviglio downplayed the=20 change. I don't know if we have a preference as to which state agency get= s=20 the authority to continue the probe Maviglio said.=20 The challenge by Duke Energy Houston-based Dynegy Inc. and Mirant Corp. of= =20 Atlanta came in filings March 12 asking for a rehearing of the PUC's Februa= ry=20 resolution reasserting its legal authority to examine the books accounts= =20 memoranda contracts and records of generators selling energy to utilities= =20 already subject to PUC regulation.=20 Those utilities include Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison Co. which have been nearly bankrupted buying power from wholesalers= =20 as well as the financially troubled San Diego Gas and Electric -- Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22 2001=20 HAGERSTOWN Md. =01) Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to s= ell=20 $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency= =20 over the next 10 years.=20 The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1000=20 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western=20 generating plants through its new energy trading division Allegheny Energy= =20 Global Markets =01) formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets.=20 This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. I= t=20 provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to=20 stabilize prices in California said Michael P. Morrell president of the= =20 Allegheny Energy Supply division.=20 --- ----------- Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract=20 By KEN ELLINGWOOD and DAN MORAIN Times Staff Writers=20 ?????EL CENTRO--California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly= =20 Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal= =20 energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison allowing= =20 it to sell power on the open market. ?????The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a= =20 mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling=20 power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without=20 getting paid. ?????At the same time it may have staved off plans by a group of the small= =20 generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. ?????In Sacramento energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in= =20 the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to= =20 ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buyi= ng=20 on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric which say they lack the cas= h=20 and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that= =20 the small alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a=20 third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it= =20 saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. ?????The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County= =20 where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy the county's biggest property=20 taxpayer had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on= =20 notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The= =20 uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to=20 postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. ?????Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's=20 ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgrub= er=20 that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ?????That is great news Leimgruber said. ?????Within hours of its court victory CalEnergy had stopped transmitting= =20 geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy a=20 marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold = it=20 on the spot market. ?????Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state sa= id=20 they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas &=20 Electric. ?????We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties said Dean=20 Vanech president of Delta Power a New Jersey company that owns five small= =20 gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by= =20 Edison. ?????Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply=20 wanted the authority to sell its power to a credit-worthy company that in= =20 fact pays for the power. ?????An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling= =20 but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because=20 California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress just as= =20 it has placed utilities in financial distress. ?????Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and=20 other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnerg= y=20 had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain i= n=20 California but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state we=20 can't stop them. ?????Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the= =20 company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file = a=20 petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utili= ty=20 into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so= =20 and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve= =20 their plans. ?????Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity= =20 producers many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geotherma= l=20 steam solar energy or wind. ?????The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected = to=20 the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill spelling ou= t=20 how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers passed the= =20 Senate on a 27-9 vote the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled= =20 in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote well short of two-thirds. ?????When I was a citizen back in Lancaster I heard these stories about= =20 pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night that . . . were cu= t=20 and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature Assemblyma= n=20 George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. That's exactly what we have before us. ?????The alternative electricity generators including oil companies warne= d=20 that they would lose money under the Davis proposal while representatives = of=20 Edison and PG&E which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energ= y=20 crisis said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ?????There isn't enough money Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a=20 Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. It is a very simple question: Dollars= =20 going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in. ?????The bill AB 8X combined several proposals. First it sought to clari= fy=20 earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state= =20 all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been= =20 buying. ?????Additionally the bill would turn over to the California Public=20 Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy= =20 producers for their electricity. ?????Wind solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered= =20 by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers=20 including Chevron and British Petroleum use natural gas to generate=20 electricity through cogeneration a process of creating steam for both=20 electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high they contend= =20 they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. ---=20 ?????Ellingwood reported from El Centro Morain from Sacramento. Times staf= f=20 writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren Nancy Vogel a= nd=20 Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. --- ------------------- Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills'=20 Alan Gathright Chronicle Staff Writer Friday March 23 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N171303.DTL=20 Let history show that the rebellion against rolling blackouts started when= =20 the Central Valley town of Lodi defied PG&E and refused to unplug its=20 customers this week.=20 Like several cities that own their own utilities Lodi saw the energy crunc= h=20 looming last fall and spent millions for long-term power contracts in an=20 attempt to avoid blackouts.=20 Now Lodi and a Northern California municipal utility cooperative that=20 includes Palo Alto Santa Clara and Alameda are telling Pacific Gas and=20 Electric Co. that it's unfair to force their customers to endure blackouts= =20 triggered by the near-bankrupt utility's failure to pay its debts.=20 The problem is not paying bills so pay the bills said Alan Vallow=20 director of the utility serving Lodi's 58000 residents. I won't arbitrari= ly=20 screw my customers . . . so 5000 PG&E customers can turn on their lights= =20 somewhere else.=20 When PG&E relayed an order from state power regulators Monday and Tuesday f= or=20 Lodi to black out some of its customers a strategy intended to keep the=20 West's power grid from collapsing Lodi said no.=20 So far other cities in the Northern California Power Agency say they will= =20 continue to participate in rotating outages.=20 But in a letter last Friday to PG&E members of the agency and four other= =20 utility districts including Sacramento's warned they didn't believe long-= =20 standing agreements that allow them to use PG&E transmission lines to conne= ct=20 to the grid obliged them to endure rolling blackouts because of PG&E's=20 failure to pay its power obligations.=20 They say the agreements require them to reduce power demand only in respons= e=20 to natural disasters or malfunctions damaging power lines or plants.=20 The agencies asked for a meeting with PG&E President Gordon Smith before=20 anticipated summer blackouts hit to develop a more rational program for= =20 allocation of risks associated with (power demand) load shedding before you= =20 call on us to participate in load shedding again.=20 REFUSING TO SHARE BURDEN PG&E officials accused Lodi of selfishly refusing to share the burden of th= e=20 statewide energy crisis.=20 It is regrettable that after reaping the benefits of the (power grid)=20 interconnection contract for many years Lodi is suddenly unwilling to bear= =20 their share of the burden of the statewide energy crisis said PG&E=20 spokesman Ron Low. When cities like Lodi do not follow the (state=20 Independent System Operator's) order to curtail power it hurts all of=20 California and jeopardizes the entire power grid.=20 Low also disagreed with accusations that this week's blackouts were trigger= ed=20 by PG&E's failure to pay its bills noting that the ISO stated that 12000= =20 megawatts of power were offline because of plant maintenance.=20 But ISO spokeswoman Lisa Szot confirmed assertions by the municipal utiliti= es=20 that power generators had kept an additional 3000 megawatts offline becaus= e=20 they feared PG&E couldn't pay.=20 Lodi's Vallow said he was legally obliged to serve city customers. Lodi=20 residents are facing rate increases of as much as 15 percent under a power= =20 contract that the city secured in hopes of avoiding blackouts. The contract= =20 required Lodi to pay a $10 million premium above its typical $23 million=20 annual energy bill.=20 'THAT'S NOT FAIR'=20 I've been hearing (PG&E say) 'Gee that's not fair. Where's the equity if= =20 everybody is doing rolling blackouts and you're not?' Vallow said. Well= I=20 put my customers at financial risk to the tune of $10 million. And if they'= re=20 not going to get to use that power they paid for then by God give us that= =20 money back.=20 Vallow said he was willing to sell PG&E some of Lodi's power surplus knowi= ng=20 Lodi might not be paid.=20 But I'm not willing to turn off 5000 customers so 5000 customers=20 somewhere else can turn their lights on Vallow said. The objective here= =20 people is to keep as many lights on as possible.=20 Other city-owned utilities while annoyed with the rolling blackouts aren'= t=20 going as far as Lodi.=20 WEATHERING BLACKOUTS I certainly understand the frustrations of utilities like Lodi and actuall= y=20 share those frustrations in many cases said John Roukema assistant=20 director of Santa Clara's utility.=20 But he stressed that his agency had been able to weather blackouts without= =20 hurting residents or small business because 17 major industrial power user= s=20 had agreed to curtail demand during energy alerts.=20 The prudent thing to do at this time is to continue to do our share and=20 participate in rolling blackouts because a single problem could cause a=20 catastrophic failure in the statewide system Roukema said.=20 In Alameda residents endured blackouts this week despite the fact that cit= y=20 has secured reliable power supplies said Matt McCabe spokesman for Alamed= a=20 Power & Telecom.=20 It was in the best of interests of Alamedans to maintain the stability and= =20 integrity of the grid he said. Now if it becomes evident that the syste= m=20 is being jeopardized for financial reasons then we should not have to=20 subject Alamedans to rolling blackouts.=20 In Palo Alto which also had blackouts this week utility officials told th= e=20 City Council they were expecting a 30 to 40 percent rate hike this spring t= o=20 pay new contracts guaranteeing a stable power supply said Councilman Bern= =20 Beecham. The city hopes to avoid giving customers the double whammy of rate= =20 boosts and more blackouts with a program that gets industrial users to cut= =20 demand voluntarily during alerts.=20 When there's not enough generating capacity in the state to protect the=20 integrity of the grid that is in fact everybody's problem Beecham said= =20 but that doesn't mean Palo Alto is willing to endure blackouts to prop up= =20 PG&E's ailing finances.=20 We need to have some very frank discussions with PG&E about mutual=20 obligations Beecham said.=20 Energy Tips=20 With Californians facing electricity and natural gas shortages PG&E has=20 several tips to help conserve both:=20 -- Set the furnace thermostat at 68 degrees or lower health permitting.=20 -- Wash only full loads in a dishwasher. If operating instructions allow= =20 turn dishwasher off before the drying cycle and let dishes dry naturally.= =20 -- Use low-wattage or fluorescent lights.=20 -- Fix defective plumbing and dripping faucets which waste water and=20 increase the gas or electric bill for heating the water.=20 -- Plug gaps around pipes ducts fans and vents that go through walls=20 ceilings and floors.=20 -- Keep furnaces clean and clean or replace the filter regularly.=20 -- Turn heaters down when using a fireplace and close the damper when not= =20 using the fireplace.=20 -- On sunny days open drapes on windows facing south and let the sun shine= =20 in. At night close the drapes to retain indoor heat.=20 Source: www.pge.com=20 E-mail Alan Gathright at 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills=20 Greg Lucas Robert Salladay Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Friday March 23 2001=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N113351.DTL=20 Sacramento -- After several weeks of slow to no progress in attacking the= =20 state's energy mess the Legislature erupted yesterday into a frenzy of=20 energy activity.=20 The sudden action on a series of energy bills -- including one to let=20 businesses buy power directly from generators -- stemmed initially from the= =20 fear of bad publicity lawmakers might receive for a planned three-day junke= t=20 next week to Washington D.C.=20 When a key bill bogged down in the Assembly late yesterday Speaker Bob=20 Hertzberg D-Sherman Oaks announced the trip was canceled.=20 Another reason for the flurry of action was recognition that time is runnin= g=20 out.=20 Several alternative energy producers -- like wind farms and biomass plants = -=20 - said they were one day away from forcing the state's two biggest utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy because they were owed more than $1 billion.=20 The Legislature's action and a court ruling that could free alternative=20 producers from unpaid contracts.=20 This is triage members of the Senate said Sen. Jim Costa D-Fresno. Th= is=20 is crisis activity we're engaged in.=20 The Senate approved a bill aimed at helping state regulators get cash to so= me=20 alternative energy producers. Most of them have been paid little or nothing= =20 since November by the utilities they sell electricity to.=20 Senators passed a bill to help the Public Utilities Commission order=20 utilities to pay solar wind and other alternative energy producers who sig= n=20 lower-priced contracts with the utilities.=20 The bill failed in the Assembly because of GOP opposition fanned in part b= y=20 price concerns by the oil industry a major co-generation producer. The=20 Assembly is set to meet again today to try again pass the bill which the P= UC=20 needs to issue its final order.=20 The PUC's proposed order offers the first hint of financial relief for=20 hundreds of alternative energy producers known as ''qualified facilities = in=20 the energy industry who have been paid just pennies on the dollar by cash-= =20 strapped Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.=20 Lack of payments has caused many alternative generators to shutter their=20 operations.=20 The PUC's proposal which will be considered at the commission's meeting=20 Tuesday offers generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contract at= =20 $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt Davis said. The goi= ng=20 rate now is about $150 a megawatt hour.=20 The order does not address money already owed to the more than 600=20 alternative energy producers.=20 Under the order utilities would have to pay any generator who signed the n= ew=20 contracts within two weeks.=20 But PG&E said it might not be able to afford do that.=20 Operators of co-generation facilities say the contracts contemplated by the= =20 PUC don't cover their cost of producing energy because the sale price no=20 longer would be pegged to the the price of natural gas.=20 In a significant court decision affecting generators one geothermal energy= =20 supplier in Imperial County won a lawsuit yesterday against Edison allowing= =20 the company to escape a contract requiring it to sell electricity to the=20 utility.=20 A superior court judge said CalEnergy operator of the geothermal plant=20 could suspend deliveries to Edison and sell the 268 megawatt hours it=20 generated on the open market.=20 CalEnergy is owed $75 million by the utility.=20 The court victory may ease mounting pressure from some qualified facilities= =20 including CalEnergy to drive one or both of the utilities into involuntary= =20 bankruptcy.=20 The Assembly and Senate meanwhile rushed through a series of bills aimed = at=20 increasing energy conservation and rushing the building of new power plant= s.=20 Most significant for bigger residential and commercial utility customers is= a=20 measure passed by the Assembly to allow energy customers to buy power=20 directly from generators.=20 That right was eliminated in January when the state began buying power for= =20 the cash-strapped utilities.=20 The bill approved unanimously yesterday would impose a yet to be determined= =20 exit fee on customers who leave the power grid to help cover the state's=20 financial exposure.=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy use? Gov. Gray Davis' administration= =20 is offering rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June an= d=20 if you've got a strategy for conserving The Chronicle wants to hear it.=20 We'll be writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story.= =20 To get involved write to the Energy Desk San Francisco Chronicle 901=20 Mission St. San Francisco CA 94103 or e-mail [email protected]= .=20 E-mail the reporters at [email protected] and [email protected]= m.=20 2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 14=20 --- State's bill for energy could double this year=20 Posted at 9:34 p.m. PST Thursday March 22 2001=20 BY=20 STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 AND=20 JOHN=20 Warning that California is imperiled by the prices it is paying for=20 electricity a report Thursday said the state's annual power tab could wind= =20 up being 10 times what it was two years ago.=20 At the current rate of spending the report estimated that the total=20 electricity bill in California this year could hit $70 billion which is mo= re=20 than twice what it was last year and about 10 times what was paid in 1999 a= nd=20 1998.=20 ``The California electricity market has gone from being `dysfunctional' to= =20 precipitating a crisis'' according to the report from the Independent Syst= em=20 Operator.=20 It added that the price being charged ``threatens any semblance of just and= =20 reasonable consumer rates the financial viability of California's=20 investor-owned utilities the financial stability of California of its=20 neighboring states and of the nation.''=20 While power suppliers denied any wrongdoing the report said the state=20 appears to have been hit with ``excess'' charges totaling $6.87 billion sin= ce=20 May based on an assessment of the typical operating costs of power plant= =20 owners. Out of that total $6.2 billion appeared to be excessive charges=20 during times when power was not in particularly short supply the agency=20 said.=20 The cost of power has become a growing concern now that the state has stepp= ed=20 in to buy it on behalf of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison which claim to be so strapped for cash that they are on the verge o= f=20 bankruptcy.=20 In making public the report which was sent to the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission officials at the Independent System Operator were careful not t= o=20 accuse any power companies of price gouging. While the prices appeared to b= e=20 unreasonable they said the state needs to learn more about the specific= =20 operating costs of power plant operators before they could determine whethe= r=20 California was cheated.=20 The officials said they were considering asking the federal agency which= =20 oversees power wholesalers to order the suppliers to make refunds. In the= =20 past two weeks the federal agency has warned a number of suppliers that th= ey=20 may have to refund $135 million in apparent overcharges during January and= =20 February.=20 But many experts question whether the federal agency is serious about=20 demanding such refunds so California officials also are reviewing the=20 possibility of suing the suppliers or seeking criminal charges against some= =20 of them. ``We're working very closely with a number of agencies to review t= he=20 information we currently have to determine what remedies may be available'= '=20 said Charles Robinson the Independent System Operator's general counsel.= =20 The report's suspicions were partly bolstered by another study made public= =20 Thursday by the state auditor. It said California's market structure=20 encouraged bidding gamesmanship by both utilities and power sellers ``in an= =20 effort to manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage.'' But it stopped= =20 short of accusing power generators of profiting illegally.=20 ``There's clearly some evidence of market abuse'' said state Auditor Elain= e=20 Howle. Even so she added ``that's not to say it's anything illegal. We=20 hired consultants they looked at some of the bidding and they weren't=20 comfortable going that far.''=20 Although no power companies were named in either report officials with=20 several suppliers insisted they have done nothing wrong.=20 ``We've conducted our business legally and ethically'' said Richard=20 Wheatley spokesman for Reliant Energy which runs five major California=20 power plants. ``The ISO report appears to be nothing more than just another= =20 attempt to put blame at someone else's doorstep when there's been very=20 little action out of Sacramento to resolve the problems in the California= =20 marketplace.''=20 Duke Energy spokesman Jeremy Dreier said the company which runs plants in= =20 Moss Landing and Morro Bay sold most of its power last year and this year = in=20 relatively low-cost long-term contracts and was among the first to offer= =20 such deals to the state. He added that Duke increased production from its= =20 aging plants to meet surging demand.=20 ``The fact that we were among the first to bring long-term contracts to the= =20 table speaks volumes about how we're trying to serve this market'' Dreier= =20 said.=20 John Sousa of Dynegy Inc. which co-owns three major California plants add= ed=20 that ``given the market conditions the rates we charged were just and=20 reasonable.''=20 --- Plan for alternate power plants stalls=20 Posted at 10:03 p.m. PST Thursday March 22 2001=20 BY DION NISSENBAUM AND JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 SACRAMENTO -- The state's prospects for plugging a critical electricity gap= =20 dimmed Thursday when the state Assembly rejected a rescue plan for=20 alternative power companies and a state judge ruled that one such firm coul= d=20 stop selling energy in California.=20 Both actions threaten the plan Gov. Gray Davis announced just Tuesday to ke= ep=20 these companies running and stave off more blackouts. With the state's=20 troubled utilities failing to pay for their electricity many alternative= =20 energy plants have been shutting down.=20 The dual blows came on a day when tempers flared in the Capitol as lawmaker= s=20 jarred by back-to-back blackouts launched bipartisan attacks on Pacific Gas= &=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison which aren't paying wind sola= r=20 biomass geothermal and small gas-fired plants for their electricity.=20 After Republicans shot down the measure meant to keep alternative energy=20 companies in business Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg D-Van Nuys warne= d=20 that the restless companies might act on their threat to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy.=20 ``They said it and I understood them to mean it'' he said.=20 The failure overshadowed a burst of action in Sacramento where lawmakers=20 approved a host of other measures. The Senate approved two key bills: one= =20 that would spend more than $1 billion to encourage Californians to conserve= =20 energy and one that would make it easier to build power plants. The Assembl= y=20 approved 14 incremental bills.=20 Six votes short=20 But the Assembly fell six votes short of passing a hastily prepared bill=20 meant to help prop up the nearly 700 alternative energy companies many of= =20 which are now idle.=20 Those closings sapped California of energy this week and helped cause two= =20 days of rolling blackouts -- the first since January.=20 In response Davis and lawmakers cobbled together a plan to set new lower= =20 rates for alternative power and to fine the utilities if they refuse to pay= =20 these companies which supply up to a third of the state's power.=20 But Republicans refused to back the measure and said it contained too many= =20 complex parts that needed more time to analyze.=20 ``Everyone in this room knows that this piece of legislation has not had a= =20 good look'' said Assemblyman George Runner R-Lancaster.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley D-Santa Cruz castigated the Republicans and=20 implored them to accept an imperfect solution.=20 ``Ladies and gentlemen: Welcome to the NFL'' he said. ``Welcome to the wor= ld=20 where large complex issues don't have a simple solution.''=20 Approval is needed before state regulators at the Public Utilities Commissi= on=20 can vote on the fine points of the plan. That was supposed to happen Tuesda= y.=20 Much of the criticism focused on concerns raised by power plants that use= =20 natural gas to produce energy. Administrators from those plants said the=20 Davis price caps would make it impossible for them to break even.=20 The derailment came hours after the measure narrowly won approval in the=20 state Senate.=20 Hertzberg plans to search for a compromise today and canceled plans for the= =20 Assembly's annual trip to Washington.=20 Thursday's actions were highlighted by angry attacks on the utilities by=20 frustrated lawmakers.=20 ``I hope they do go bankrupt'' shouted Senate President pro tem John Burto= n=20 D-San Francisco during a debate on the energy crisis. ``Let them go belly= =20 up. I don't care any more.''=20 Legal decision adds twist=20 The legislative failure was compounded by a legal decision in Southern=20 California that further complicated the picture.=20 A Superior Court judge in Imperial County cleared the way for CalEnergy=20 Operating Corp. to break its contract with Edison and sell its 268 megawatt= s=20 of power on the open market. The judge concluded that Edison had breached i= ts=20 contract by failing to pay CalEnergy since November.=20 That ruling could pave the way for hundreds of others to follow suit and=20 drain off power California needs to prevent blackouts.=20 ``It's not good'' said V. John White director of the Center for Energy=20 Efficiency and Renewable Technologies. ``This is potentially going to chang= e=20 the dynamics of the situation and probably not for the better.''=20 Jan Smutny-Jones executive director of the Independent Energy Producers=20 Association said it was unclear whether other companies would sue.=20 ``I think this is a very significant development'' he said. ``We're sort o= f=20 at a period where the industry's reaching the end of the rope.''=20 The ruling did have one silver lining: CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol said= =20 his company and seven others had planned to force Edison into bankruptcy if= =20 they lost in court.=20 But he also warned ``You stick a sharp stick in enough people's eyes and= =20 they get pretty tired of it.''=20 The situation with generators supplying PG&E isn't as dire since the compan= y=20 has been making partial payments.=20 Kent Burton senior vice president for Covanta Energy Corp. in New Jersey= =20 said ``They've tried to be responsive.''=20 Mercury News Staff Writer Mark Gladstone contributed to this report. Contac= t=20 Dion Nissenbaum at [email protected] or (916) 441-4603 or Jennifer= =20 Bjorhus at [email protected] or (408) 920-5660. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Request for Confidential Information by the US GAO Body:: nan What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Enrons natural gas policy positions Body:: coule you get Jeannie copies of the slides or other write ups you have on this. Jeannie -- I don't know how far it is prudent to take a position on this as a co. It has already become a key battleground (garnering some discussion in the Gore-Lieberman debate). I think we stay away from it as a co. but we at least ought to put the information in front of anyone we are asking to do an oped so that they can make a reasoned judgement. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT Body:: I share your perceptions of Jose though I don't have as much contact as you do. I know also from some recent discussions with Rick (who has also had a fair amount of contact with Jose) that he has very positive views on Jose's work. I think we should make a concerted effort to get the feedback and have a good discussion about Jose at year end to ensure that he is properly ranked. James M Bannantine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/03/2000 07:13 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Employment arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Body:: Another agenda item I got a call today from Bob Pease Attorney with Market Oversight and Enforcement at FERC 202-208-0131 to invite Enron to a meeting called by Chairman Wood at the CAISO offices on 24-25 Sep 01. The purpose of the meeting is to try to get the FERC CAISO DWR and other market participants to work out issues related to reliability that have arisen in recent months. Issues include those that that affect operations and reliability such as the must-offer requirements ramping etc. He was not clear as to whether they would address creditworthiness issues. From the FERC staff non-decisional employees will attend. He invited solutions/proposals in advance of the meeting. Enron needs to decide who to send. Alan Comnes What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY WORK CLIENT PRIVILEGE ASSERTED Body:: Paul -- Can we have a phone call with our Reg team on Friday to make sure that everything is a-ok? I want one final run through. If yes please let me know by phone and I'll ask Linda Noske to set up the call. Also I owe you a call on Sue / Jeff. Are you in Thurs? Jim What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Report on Senate Energy Hearing Today Body:: Earlier today the Senate Energy Committee held the first of two days of hearings on Chairman Bingaman's white paper on electricity and the electricity provisions of other pending bills. The hearings will continue tomorrow with all of the five FERC commissioners as witnesses plus private sector witnesses. Today's hearing went well from our perpective with support for Super RTOs and general support for expanding the grid both physically and from an access view point voiced by Senators and witnesses. Sen. Craig Thomas even said four RTOs were too many -- there should be one national RTO to run a national grid. Today's witnesses represented the Dept. of Energy EPSA EEI NRECA APPA IBEW union Alliance to Save Energy ELCON NERC NARUC NASUCA and the State of New Mexico. We will provide a more detailed analysis after completing a review of the lengthy written testimony but a summary of the DOE testimony and the first panel of private sector witnesses follows. 1. DOE said they are working on electricity legislative language. Should be done soon. Chairman Bingaman said they needed to get it done in time for the Committee to consider it when the Committee takes up electricity as early as the second week in September. Deputy Sec. Blake implied that their proposal was or would soon be shared with other Administration agencies for review. 2. In response to questions Blake said that legislative action on jurisdiction questions (fed v. state) would be useful but he stressed that they view any new legislation as clarifying that FERC has authority they feel already exists. He said that while states have an important role to play Congress must recongize the interstate character of the market and the need for open access to the interstate grid. (In response to a question Blake later said that FERC had largely addressed the access issue or would do so.) 3. On reliability he was given a chance to say that DOE supports th NERC consensus language but instead repeated that the Administration favors enforceable reliability standards but wants to work with the Committee on the exact language. I took this as confirmation of what we have heard informally from DOE in terms of key players there not being enamored of the NERC consensus approach at least as it exists in its old long form. 4. Sens. Craig and Cantwell pushed Blake on why the Administration has not fully supported BPA's request for a debt limit increase to finance expansion of the BPA grid. Blake said they support the BPA expansion projects but that OMB feels BPA has enough borrowing authority through 2003. This did not sit well with Craig and Cantwell. I spoke with Sen. Craig in the hall following up on a conversation I had with him the other evening about BPA and he stressed that he is committed to getting BPA the debt limit it needs. As you know commercial has asked us to help BPA given matters pending between Enron and BPA. 5. On the first private sector panel even John Rowe the Co-CEO of Exelon and past EEI chairman (testifying for his company and EEI) said several times that there should be strong RTOs that each cover a wide idea. He said his board voted yesterday to sell its transmission assets IF a strong independent operator could be found. Rowe also said that RTOs should be encouraged (implying not mandatory?). The APPA witness was strong on RTOs saying that all entities will be part of RTOs even without legislation. NRECA said that co-ops would oppose federal jurisdiction over them and that they favor voluntary RTOs. EPSA made the usual case for competition open access RTOs etc. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Draft letter to Paul Joskow for Ken Lay Body:: I think this letter looks fine. For the hororarium I suggest we use whatever we paid Kudlow for his participation (I believe Ken also entered into a consulting contract with Kudlow but I'm referring only to the one-time payment for the advisory council meeting he attended). ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Economic Espionage Act Presentation - August 15th Body:: calendar -- FYI ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen Body:: Good idea. Is there a way to monitor usage of this folder is insure that everyone has read and complied with your message? From: Beth Apollo/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/10/2001 08:52 AM To: Shona Wilson/NA/Enron@Enron Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT D Todd Hall/ENRON@enronXgate Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT Brenda F Herod/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT Georgeanne Hodges/ENRON@enronXgate Vanessa Schulte/ENRON@enronXgate Bob M Hall/NA/Enron@Enron Leslie Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT Brent A Price/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info curves validations/stress tests etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the o drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT Body:: I agree that we need to add our customer contacts to the list. This gives them a great opportunity to look smart -- we went to the market and got price protection. On the messages we need to include Mark's top three: 1) price caps cause shortages (Rob Bradley: let's put some historical examples together) Mona L Petrochko 07/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Mark Palmer@EES Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Paul Kaufman@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT I have a couple of suggestions on parts of the draft. Media Action: In addition to doing behind the scenes editorial board meetings and the like I would suggest that we get our coalition lined up and ready to release statements for certain key events which are likely to occur over the next several weeks such as: 1. SDG&E's selection of the winning bid to their RFP. Even if Enron isn't selected as the winning bid the coalition should trumpet the market-based solution and the enormous market response to SDG&E's RFP. 2. The Commission vote on UCAN's Emergency Motion. We should be prepared to issue a statement whether the Cmmn votes with us or against us. With us the market can and did provide reasonable expedient solutions to SDG&E's customers and protection from price spikes. Against us despite the overwhelming market response the Cmmn chose to ignore the market solutions and impose more regulation. 3. Potential for ARM members to surface a Provider of Last Resort proposal within the next couple of weeks. 4. ISO Bd. Mtg-keep up pressure against reducing price caps. Coalition Members: Agree that those groups listed should be contacted although the CMA CRA CIU CLECA have been luke-warm in their advocacy. I would add our customers (UC/CSU (especially the San Diego branch) PacTel etc.) NewEnergy has indicated that Kroger/Ralph's grocery stores San Diego-based would give testimonials. I could solicit the members of ARM to identify a key customer contacts for interviews. We could check with our lobbyists and see who they would recommend (wine growers dairy industry etc.) We should also consider the water agencies and the rural counties and the City of Pittsburg. While the immediate message is responding to San Diego's situation this latter group of potential coalition members would go to the larger message (keeping benefits of competitive markets) from a state-wide perspective. What about the City of Pittsburg? Jeff Dasovich on 07/18/2000 10:07:00 AM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Steve Kean Mark Palmer Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Paul Kaufman@EES Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: Price Cap Media--DRAFT Here's a draft. Given sense of urgency I tried to develop a target for folks to shoot at rather than The Perfect One-pager. So please fire at will. In particular need PR to fill in Media Approaches and Key Message Points. Best Jeff What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Document editing/checking/collaboration <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: http://www.ssrn.com/ What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Personal but in professional context <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: May 15 conference Body:: Joe -- could you see if someone at FERC -- Hebert or Madden might be available -- or suggest a suitable alternative? What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Logistic Arrangements <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: nan Body:: You probably saw the announcement that Mike Mcconnell is now CEO of Enron Global Markets. EGM will be focussing on a number of new and existing markets (including coal LNG crude and products interest rates agricultural commodities equities weather etc). One of the markets Mike's group is actively considering is transport capacity. I mentioned your work in the area. He is anxious to see it and meet with you after he has had a chance to review it. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Report on Calif. Electricity Price Spikes by CPUC and EOB Body:: As we discussed. ----------------- What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>
<s>[INST] <<SYS>> You are reviewing an email using its subject and body. Based on the text in its subject and body, please categorize this email into one of the following categories: 1. 'Company Business/Strategy' 2. 'Purely Personal' 3. 'Personal but in a professional context' 4. 'Logistic Arrangements' 5. 'Employment arrangements' 6. 'Document editing/checking/collaboration' 7. 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)' 8. 'Empty message' Please provide only one category (e.g., 'Purely Personal'). <</SYS>> Subject:: Re: Privileged and Confidential Communication to my Attorney Body:: Hoyt If GSP LLC would assume the liability at the time of return why would it risk bringing them back for light duty work? Why not wait until they are fully released particularly if one of them is going to sue under workers comp scheme? Also Hoyt you need to be careful about revealing conversations with GSP counsel to MG -- I noticed you had cc'd someone from Media General in the prior email. We don't want to waive any privileges. Michelle [email protected] on 11/15/2000 06:10:00 PM To: [email protected] [email protected] cc: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Subject: Privileged and Confidential Communication to my Attorney Peter we have two long-term worker's comp cases whose accidents happened before Enron bought GSP. We would like to bring them back to do light-duty work to get them in the swing of working again and also to get some adminstrative work done. I am concerned that bringing these employees back to work on light duty will cause these cases to become an Enron liability rather than an MG liability. I discussed this with Pat McCarthy the labor and employment law attorney we are using in NJ and he said that the liability would typically not transfer to GSP just because we brought them back . . . it would still be an MG liability UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE HURT HIMSELF AGAIN. In which case GSP owns it. However Pat said that a lot of what determines the ownership of the worker's comp cases is written into the purchase and sale agreement. He said that there may be language that addresses an employee's return to work from worker's comp. I know that we have an ongoing dispute about worker's comp with MG at this point. What would be your recommendation on bringing these employees back to work? As a bit of additional info one of the two employees seems eager to come back . . . the other one does not. An employee told me that the second employee actually has a lawsuit filed against MG/old GSP about his injury. What should this email be categorized as? [/INST] Company Business/Strategy <s>