-----Original Message-----
From: 	Jonathan Thomas <jthomas@saybrook.net>@ENRON  
Sent:	Monday, September 10, 2001 8:59 PM
To:	'EFeo@milbank.com'; awirum@pillsburywinthrop.com; fallon_annamarie@jpmorgan.com; alafaire@exchange.ml.com; arlene.gibbs@chase.com; byoung@llgm.com; bgreene2@mail.state.tn.us; bholman@whitecase.com; bkrakauer@sidley.com; fishbcr@whitecase.com; ceklund@llgm.com; charles.wyman@pimco.com; clara.strand@bankofamerica.com; dan.faltermeier@dynegy.com; david.adante@davey.com; david.behenna@pimco.com; dcussen@gibsondunn.com; dnelsen@gwfpower.com; elizabeth.h.baird@bankofamerica.com; erosenberg2@exchange.ml.com; lengel@brobeck.com; grant_kolling@city.palo-alto.ca.us; gbaer@pillsburywinthrop.com; jlhuemoe@llgm.com; jwhite@brobeck.com; jbloom@whitecase.com; jpiassick@kilpatrickstockton.com; john.c.herbert@dynegy.com; jklauber@llgm.com; juhase_kathleen@jpmorgan.com; kcoleman@gibsondunn.com; ksmith@deltapower.com; krussak@pillsburywinthrop.com; Mellencamp, Lisa; Tribolet, Michael; mlurie@exchange.ml.com; mahrens@smrh.com; mhindus@pillsburywinthrop.com; Phansalk@pimco.com; nmillard@whitecase.com; pete.joost@bankofamerica.com; pwarden@pillsburywinthrop.com; raymond.kennedy@pimco.com; rriecker@gibsondunn.com; robert_b._lynch@chase.com; rblum@thelenreid.com; rkampfner@brobeck.com; srahman@deltapower.com; tponsford@smrh.com; tpatters@sidley.com; tmilne@mail.state.tn.us; wevanoff@sidley.com
Cc:	allison.m.young@us.pwcglobal.com; Dave Rodriguez; gerald.keenan@us.pwcglobal.com; james.drzemiecki@us.pwcglobal.com; Jeff Wilson; Jon Schotz; Jonathan Rosenthal; Jonathan Thomas; Kristina Stanier; freddie.reiss@us.pwcglobal.com; margery.a.neis@us.pwcglobal.com; michael.hamilton@us.pwcglobal.com; rocky.ho@us.pwcglobal.com; tom.lumsden@us.pwcglobal.com; PAronzon@milbank.com; DCain@milbank.com; DCreed@milbank.com; MDayen@milbank.com; SDemeo@milbank.com; MDiamond@milbank.com; vfleming@milbank.com; ygonzales@milbank.com; CGooding@milbank.com; SKramer@milbank.com; TKreller@milbank.com; KLockridge@milbank.com; AMarks@milbank.com; KMcspadden@milbank.com; RMoore@milbank.com; FNeufeld@milbank.com; LOliveira@milbank.com; BPassage@milbank.com; MSorochinsky@milbank.com; CUrquhart@milbank.com; KValentine@milbank.com
Subject:	RE: Current Fate of SB 78xx


Based on numerous discussions with members and  staff in Sacramento, the best speculation on the status of the SCE bailout  legislation is as follows.  The Senate is reviewing the amended SB 78xx  approved by the Assembly last Thursday.  They will not approve it as  is.  Instead, they will "hijack" one of a number of Assembly bills on  energy currently before the Senate for concurrence.  "Hijacking" means  gutting a bill and substituting in language on related but different  matters.  Hence, they would in this instance keep the energy theme but  change the bill in question to an SCE bailout bill, one that  largely resembles the Polanco-Sher bill approved by the Senate in July.   The hijacked bill will deal with the bailout itself (DCR for non-generator  creditors, etc.) and the conservation easements, but will strip out other  elements that differ from the Polanco-Sher bill like direct access,  renewables, lowering the rate payer base to 20 kwh, etc.  The direct access  and renewables elements might or might not be added on to some other energy  bills currently before the Senate.  The rate payer threshold will be  included in the hijacked bill and will likely be increased from 20 kwh to 125  kwh (note that the latter would be a reduction from the original 500 kwh level  in the Polanco-Sher bill).
 
The Senate will send the hijacked bill back to  the Assembly, probably on Wednesday.  The Assembly will have the choice of  taking it or leaving it OR calling for a conference committee to work it out  before session ends midnight on Friday.  The latter is the likely  alternative, setting up round the clock all nighters for the conferees through  Friday.  If the conference committee reaches consensus, the resulting bill  will have to be approved by both houses before sending it to the Governor.   If the conferees think there's a deal  there but they need more time, they can ask the Governor to extend the session  into next week.  That scenario seems unlikely.  The members  want to  either pass or reject the bill this week and get out of  Dodge.
 
If there is no hope of consensus this week, the  bill will likely die at that point and the bailout will be history.  The  Governor can try to prolong things to give him more time to persuade  members to pass the bill by either extending the session into next week or by  adjourning the session and calling for a Third Extraordinary Session next week  or at some later date.  The Senate and Assembly would be compelled to go  into session, but just as with a normal session, individual members would not be  compelled to attend.  If there were either (1) not enough members  present for a quorum or (2) not enough "yes" votes present even if there is a  quorum, the bill dies.
 
I emphasize again that this is all conjecture  at this point (albeit reasonably informed) and that things could change  dramatically at any time.  I'll keep you posted as things play out day to  day this week.  Please feel free to give me a call with any  questions.
 
JT