Message-ID: <29560488.1075852352328.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 07:58:22 -0700 (PDT) From: greg.whalley@enron.com To: david.delainey@enron.com Subject: RE: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Whalley, Greg X-To: Delainey, David X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \GWHALLE (Non-Privileged)\Sent Items X-Origin: WHALLEY-G X-FileName: GWHALLE (Non-Privileged).pst i talked with sanders yesterday about our reactions to this subpoena and the one from the state senate. we are having a meeting on monday morning to discuss what to do. -----Original Message----- From: Delainey, David Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 8:58 AM To: Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ENRON Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts As per our discussion - fyi Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/EES on 07/06/2001 08:57 AM --------------------------- Janet R Dietrich 07/03/2001 05:28 PM To: Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts Lovely. I would like to discuss this further. Can we set up some time Thursday pm? Kay, will you coordinate a time that works for everyone? Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES on 07/03/2001 05:26 PM --------------------------- From: Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/03/2001 05:05 PM To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts California counsel have advised us that, in view of the broad authority given the AG to investigate unfair business practices, a court will almost certainly order us to produce our contracts to the AG in response to the outstanding subpoena. For the same reason a motion to quash the subpoena directed to PG&E, which seeks the identity of our customers and their status as direct access or on UDC service, would also likely fail. They recommend that we voluntarily offer to produce the contracts and concentrate on protecting the more sensitive commercial documents (such as the type of documents Dennis Benevides develops) from disclosure. Even with respect to those they are not very optimistic, given that the AG is willing to enter a protective order committing to keep the contents of those documents confidential. Please let me know if you concur with this recommendation or would like to discuss on a conference call. P.S. If we do decide to produce our contracts we will first have to notify our customers pursuant to the confidentiality provisions of the contracts.