Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: portage who wrote (1094)	2/16/2002 2:32:20 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 1715

portage, Thanks for the TURN link. I first ran into them in 1994. Excellent and honest organization. Therefore excluded from policy-making. It is truly sad to see how the institutional interests have been able to box out the citizens of California. BTW, couldn't agree with you more about Glynn. Bryson at SCE is just as much a pirate. As they say about American business, the scum also rises. -R.

To: portage who wrote (1094)	2/25/2002 12:51:01 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 1715

PG & E DISPUTES PUC REORGANIZATION PLAN riskcenter.com February 25: Reputation Risk - PG&E Slams Proposed Bankruptcy Plan Location: San Francisco Author: RiskCenter Staff Date: Monday, February 25, 2002 Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) says the alternative bankruptcy reorganization plan submitted last week by the California Public Utilities Commission as "fatally flawed," adding that it overestimates the company's current cash and future income and understates the utility's debt by at least $4.5-billion. In addition, utility officials argued that the state's proposal is illegal because it would deny the company the ability to recover its costs and earn a fair return on past investments. PG&E filed its response with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Francisco, where Judge Dennis Montali has scheduled a Feb. 27 hearing to determine whether he will allow the PUC to file a detailed alternative plan. PG&E officials also said the term sheet the PUC submitted to the court outlining its proposal would fail to allow the company to receive an investment-grade rating, a condition that it must meet before it could take back from the state responsibility for buying wholesale power. California's Dept of Water Resources began buying power on behalf of PG&E in January 2001 and state officials plan to return the job to the utilities by year's-end. The state plan, a PG&E official said, "would likely relegate the utility's rating to junk status for some time to come ... the state would have to stay in the power business." PG&E said the PUC overestimated the utility's cash by at least $2-billion by including some $1.3-billion the utility owes in taxes and understated the company's outstanding debt by at least $2.5-billion. The PUC's plan would use $6.1-billion of cash PG&E has on hand and $1.75-billion from utility rates to repay the roughly $8-billion the company owes creditors, largely for wholesale power purchases it made beginning in 2000. The PUC plan also proposes to take $1.6-billion from suspended PG&E Corp. shareholder dividends from January 2000 through December 2002 to pay utility creditors. As the PUC pushes its plan, utility creditors are standing fast in their support of the PG&E plan filed last September.