Enron Mail

From:jeff.dasovich@enron.com
To:alan.comnes@enron.com, angela.schwarz@enron.com, beverly.aden@enron.com,bill.votaw@enron.com, brenda.barreda@enron.com, carol.moffett@enron.com, cathy.corbin@enron.com, chris.foster@enron.com, christina.liscano@enron.com, christopher.calger@enron.co
Subject:RE: PGE -- Securing gas suppliers issue
Cc:susan.mara@enron.com
Bcc:susan.mara@enron.com
Date:Thu, 25 Jan 2001 07:40:00 -0800 (PST)

----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/25/2001 03:17 PM -----

MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com<
01/25/2001 12:41 PM

To: "'James.D.Steffes@enron.com'" <James.D.Steffes@enron.com<, MBD
<MDay@GMSSR.com<, Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com, Travis.McCullough@enron.com
cc:
Subject: RE: PGE -- Securing gas suppliers issue

Hot Flash:

The ALJ in the case (Tim Kenney) just advised me that he is so busy that he
will not even read any responses to the PG&E petition for issuing a security
interest in accounts receiveables. Don't ask if this is due process--it's
not. The commission is clearly going to grant this authority at the
emergency meeting tomorrow at 1:30. In voice mails from Travis, he
recommended voicing some concerns so that we can raise the issue later if we
feel Enron's interests have been prejudiced by how PG&E implements this. I
also received the indication that EES and ENA were very concerned about
filing anything negative that could upset the present arrangments with PG&E
on DASR matters. I recommend not filing. I do not believe we need to
express any concerns to raise them later. We are not in a formal waiver
situation, and the commission is acting before any reasonable responses were
possible. Let me know by VOICE MAIL what you want to do. If you want
something filed, please also advise my associate, Jeanne Bennett who will be
monitoring this issue in the office today while I am in Sacramento. Her
direct line is 415-765-8449. Thanks, Mike Day

-----Original Message-----
From: James.D.Steffes@enron.com [mailto:James.D.Steffes@enron.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 5:26 PM
To: mday@gmssr.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; Travis.McCullough@enron.com
Subject: PGE -- Securing gas suppliers issue


To Be discussed on 10:30am call tomorrow.

Jim

----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 01/24/2001 07:24 PM -----


Travis

McCullough@EC To: James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron
T cc: Elizabeth
Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T
Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B
Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
01/24/2001 Subject: PGE -- Securing gas
suppliers issue
03:43 PM








Jim -- the following are our concerns about PG&E's proposal/possible points
to make in a response:

1. Enron would be one of the largest unsecured creditors in the event of
a PG&E bankruptcy; our claim may become even larger depending on the
extent to which we acquire additional claims against the utilities through
the PX or ISO. We are therefore interested in any action that would reduce
the pool of assets available to unsecured creditors.
2. This proposal may be to our benefit, or to our detriment. There is
not a great deal of detail in the proposal currently on the table, and
Enron needs additional information in order to evaluate the proposal.
Certainly, we need to evaluate this in light of other developments.

3. The proposal contemplates pledging "existing and future" receivables
to secure obligations owed to gas suppliers; PGE shows approx. $1.3 billion
in A/R as of 9/30; will that (or an amount of like magnitude) be pledged as
security under this plan? Granting gas suppliers security may be fine with
us, but we don't have a great interest in OVER-collateralizing their
positions. More current information on the current A/R balances and the
extent to which obligations to suppliers will be secured will be helpful.

4. Do they intend to extend this security to ALL gas suppliers, or only
those that are refusing to supply PGE under current circumstances?

5. Do they intend to secure obligations on a going-forward basis only, or
will they also secure their obligations with respect to payables that have
already accrued?

6. PG&E is scheduled to make a couple of large payments to ENE tomorrow;
what is PG&E's ability to make those payments for gas already delivered?

7. Given the extension of the DOE order, it seems that consideration of
this petition could be delayed for a few days to allow interested parties
sufficient time to evaluate its implications.

Give me a call with any questions.

In light of the DOE extension of the emergency gas supply order, there
should now be adequate time for PG&E to respond to these points and
clarify their proposal.

Travis McCullough
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street EB 3817
Houston Texas 77002
Phone: (713) 853-1575
Fax: (713) 646-3490