Re: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least ,
 ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/04/2001 04:37 PM -----

	Vicki Sharp@EES
	01/04/2001 04:18 PM
		
		 To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Wanda 
Curry/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis 
Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Harry 
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Kevin Hughes, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT
		 cc: 
		 Subject: Re: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least 
Thus Far)

We just received a letter from the PX asking us to enter into an indemnity 
agreement with them or requiring us to post collateral for the full amount of 
the unsecured credit exposure.  We are researching this issue from the EES 
side.  Wanda and Don, we are sending this letter to you.  Can you determine 
what amounts we are talking about for EES?   This letter has also been sent 
to EPMI and Portland General and I assume will be reviewed by their legal 
team.  Bill Bradford, have you sent this on to Portland General.?
If I have missed someone that this memo should have been forwarded to, please 
forward it on. 
Jeff Dasovich, can you forward to Mike Day?


From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 01/04/2001 02:58 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly 
Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol 
Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, 
Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H 
Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, 
Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Donna 
Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas 
Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, 
Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, 
Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger 
Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G 
Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, 
James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James 
Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, 
Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe 
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy 
Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin 
Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, 
Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, 
Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael 
Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, 
Mike M Smith/HOU/EES@EES, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil 
Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard 
L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard 
Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert 
Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, 
Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott 
Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, 
skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha 
Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim 
Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, 
Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S 
Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Donna 
Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, mjackso7@enron.com, psmith3@enron.com 
Subject: Brief Summary of Today's Activities in California (at Least Thus 
Far)  

The Commission voted out the order 5-0, essentially as it appeared 
yesterday.  Three key changes:
They clarified that the surcharge applies to Direct Access customers (but the 
entire "rate freeze" structure remains intact for now).
The Commission reversed itself and chose not to adopt TURN's "netting out" of 
gen revenues and CTC collections, and said instead that the Commission will 
consider it as an option in the next phase (a move likely made in order to 
lower chances of a successful utility appeal).
The Commission added to the decision language saying that it will study the 
pros/cons of securitizating the utilities' power purchase costs.  They will 
submit a report on the issue to the Governor and Legislature.
On this last point, wire reports are rampant about the possibility that 
legislation will be introduced as early as today proposing to securitize the 
utilties' power purchase costs.  This action has reportedly been the result 
of discussions that occured through the night between the governor's office, 
the utilities and the ratings agencies in reponse to the fact that the 
decision issued by the PUC falls well short of what's needed to keep the IOUs 
credit worthy and solvent.  As a result of those wires stories, the 
utilities' stock has come back (Edison was down as low as 6.25 and is 
currently at 10 7/8; PG&E was at 8 7/8 and is currently at 11 7/8).  We're 
working with Sandi McCubbin, who heads-up our legislative activities in 
California, to get more info and will report back.
The hearing was dominated by highly charged anti-generator, anti-marketer 
rhetoric, which is likely to play a prominent role in the press accounts.  
Only FERC was demonized more.
Each of the Commissioners, including the most recent "interim" appointee,  
made strong statements regarding the undesirability of utility bankruptcy.
The Commission left open the possibility of "doing more" at their next 
meeting (two weeks from today), which means the negotiations with the 
utilities and ratings agencies are likely to continue. And if an agreement is 
reached, it could end up on the next agenda.
mday@gmssr.com