I have returned a call to Gary Gentile from the AP.  I gave him this 
statement and refused further comments on other issues, which included 1) 
"what is Enron's actual exposure?", 2) "what was Enron's opinion of Gov. 
Davis' speech last night?", and 3) "was this PG&E's only option?"  I did 
respond to one follow-up question, which was "what options were available 
months ago?"  My answer included the following 1) demand side solutions, 2) 
allowing long-term contracting for power supplies, and 3) expediting the 
siting process for new supplies.

Eric






Karen Denne
04/06/2001 01:17 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Vance 
Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff 
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula 
Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Ivers/NA/Enron@Enron, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT, 
Tracy Ngo/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Tribolet/Corp/Enron, 
Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark 
Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Response Statement to PG&E's Ch. 11 Filing

It's unfortunate that the state's largest utility was forced to turn to the 
courts for a resolution.  Solutions to the state's energy crisis have been 
available for months that would have avoided this scenario, but Gov. Davis 
and the Legislature lacked the bold leadership to take swift, decisive 
action. 

Enron's exposure to PG&E will not have any material effect on earnings or on 
our financial condition.

If pressed:  Any further comment would be speculative, as we have not yet 
seen the filing.