Message-ID: <13056706.1075840902720.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 20:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: kristin.walsh@enron.com
To: john.lavorato@enron.com, louise.kitchen@enron.com
Subject: California Update 4/9/01
Cc: jeff.dasovich@enron.com, chris.gaskill@enron.com, lloyd.will@enron.com, 
	steven.kean@enron.com, phillip.allen@enron.com, tim.belden@enron.com, 
	mike.grigsby@enron.com, tim.heizenrader@enron.com, 
	vince.kaminski@enron.com, rob.milnthorp@enron.com, 
	kevin.presto@enron.com, claudio.ribeiro@enron.com, 
	richard.shapiro@enron.com, james.steffes@enron.com, 
	mark.tawney@enron.com, scott.tholan@enron.com, 
	britt.whitman@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: jeff.dasovich@enron.com, chris.gaskill@enron.com, lloyd.will@enron.com, 
	steven.kean@enron.com, phillip.allen@enron.com, tim.belden@enron.com, 
	mike.grigsby@enron.com, tim.heizenrader@enron.com, 
	vince.kaminski@enron.com, rob.milnthorp@enron.com, 
	kevin.presto@enron.com, claudio.ribeiro@enron.com, 
	richard.shapiro@enron.com, james.steffes@enron.com, 
	mark.tawney@enron.com, scott.tholan@enron.com, 
	britt.whitman@enron.com
X-From: Kristin Walsh <Kristin Walsh/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON>
X-To: John J Lavorato <John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate>, Louise Kitchen <Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT>
X-cc: Jeff Dasovich <Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron>, Chris Gaskill <Chris Gaskill/Corp/Enron@Enron>, Lloyd Will <Lloyd Will/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Steven J Kean <Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron>, Phillip K Allen <Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Tim Belden <Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Mike Grigsby <Mike Grigsby/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Tim Heizenrader <Tim Heizenrader/PDX/ECT@ECT>, Vince J Kaminski <Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Rob Milnthorp <Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT>, Kevin M Presto <Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT>, Claudio Ribeiro <Claudio Ribeiro/ENRON@enronXgate>, Richard Shapiro <Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron>, James D Steffes <James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron>, Mark Tawney <Mark Tawney/ENRON@enronXgate>, Scott Tholan <Scott Tholan/ENRON@enronXgate>, Britt Whitman <Britt Whitman/ENRON@enronXgate>
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \ExMerge - Kitchen, Louise\'Americas\Regulatory
X-Origin: KITCHEN-L
X-FileName: louise kitchen 2-7-02.pst


Here is what we know so far with the recent announcement of a deal between Socal and the State for the transmission lines:

?	The deal may be enough to save Socal from bankruptcy.  This will depend on the payment terms as well as how soon Socal can receive a positive cash flow.
?	We are not sure if the State can really do a deal without PG&E or a deal for whole grid.  It was thought that a transmission asset deal was not possible without PG&E.  This may still be the case; the state may still be making the deal contingent upon the purchasing of PG&E's assets.  A generator source reports that the state is intending to put pressure on the bankruptcy court to close the deal on PG&E's lines quickly.  However, bankruptcy courts usually do not operate in this manner.  In most cases the court would have to hold open proceedings, have competitive bids, etc.
?	This purchase would need legislative approval, which is not guaranteed.  Previously the plan was for the state to purchase SCE's and PG&E's assets at a premium so that they would not have to finance power purchases - the utilities would be able to buy power for themselves.  Now they would have to purchase SCE's lines, but still finance power purchases because of PG&E.  Additionally, it is possible that Socal swapped the clause allowing then to raise rates in order to recoup past debt in favor for an additional book price.  If this any form of a utility bailout - it would probably no gain legislative approval.
?	The purchase would also need FERC approval.  As stated before, if FERC approves such a plan it would be with several conditions for California.