Enron Mail

From:robert.frank@enron.com
To:richard.shapiro@enron.com, james.steffes@enron.com,harry.kingerski@enron.com, vicki.sharp@enron.com, paul.kaufman@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com, sandra.mccubbin@enron.com
Subject:PG&E press call
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Fri, 6 Apr 2001 06:16:00 -0700 (PDT)

PG&E press call summary:

chose BK Court b/c concluded that BK venue was better than continuing in
State political process - the decision was made after listening to Gov's
speech last night and concluding that were getting only words, not actions.
No face-to-face meetings for over 3 weeks. Negotiations "going nowhere" and
state has "broken promises." Gov's negotiators said they wanted to deal w/
SCE before resuming talks w/ PG&E. The BK court is the fairest venue to
ensure that all creditors are treated fairly, will stabilize situation, and
best way to deal w/ power crisis.

notified State of impending crisis last summer - negotiations have been
ongoing since November

Reasons for filing: current rates not covering full net open position -
un-reimbursed wholesale power costs to ISO grown to $300 million/month; PUC
order obligates then to pay full QF costs but rates insufficient by $100
million/month; CDWR-related costs not quantified yet; mentioned "illegal
accounting procedures" ordered b y the PUC.

District Court case on filed rate arguments will go forward - believe they
will win and that all creditors will be paid.

Recent rate hikes ordered by CPUC will go into effect but BK court will have
to decide where the $$ goes. CPUC and BK "will probably have some
interesting conversations" about authority to set rates.

Top creditors are listed in BK petition

No change in service to customers

Doesn't anticipate more lawsuits against suppliers - FERC is proper forum for
those claims