ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

Is there a settlement agreement here where we give up credits after 12/31
(assuming that they are minimal) in exchange for full payment through 12/31
(a lot of which I think has been paid)? More importantly, can something like
that be implemented by the CPUC in such a way (like some sort of binding
order with findings of fact and/or law) that we can argue to the Bankruptcy
Court that it is binding, or at least persuasive, on the PG&E situation? I
sense an opening here--any thoughts on how we can dig into this?


From: Harry Kingerski@ENRON on 04/10/2001 03:43 PM
To: Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki
Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, JKlauber@llgm.com
cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott
Stoness/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: SCE PX credits

Interesting bit from SCE's MOU (p. 31) -

"the CPUC Implementing Decisions shall include

Orders resolving the responsibility of SCE to provide credits to direct
access customers in respect of electricity deliveries after December 31, 2000
in respects which do not result in any material financial detriment to SCE; "

Translation: I suppose this means SCE is looking for an order absolving it
of any responsibility for PX credits after 12/31/00, but implicitly, that
seems to suggest they accept responsibility for PX credits before 12/31/00.
Do you agree?