<html>
<head>

<title>PG&amp;E&rsquo;S GRC</title>
</head>
<body link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="644">
<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">Washington, D.C.&nbsp; 20549</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
<br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">FORM 8-K</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">CURRENT REPORT</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">Date of Report: April 19, 2002</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 Commission<br />
 File<br />
 Number</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">Exact Name of<br />
 Registrant<br />
 as specified in<br />
 its charter</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 State or other<br />
 Jurisdiction of<br />
 Incorporation</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 IRS Employer<br />
 &nbsp; Identification<br />
 Number</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">_____________</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">_____________</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">_____________</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">_____________</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">1-12609</p>

<p align="center">1-2348</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">PG&amp;E Corporation</p>

<p align="center">Pacific Gas and<br />
 Electric Company</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">California</p>

<p align="center">California</p>
</td>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center">94-3234914</p>

<p align="center">94-0742640</p>

<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="2" valign="top">
<p align="center">Pacific Gas and Electric Company<br />
 77 Beale Street, P. O. Box 770000<br />
 San Francisco, California&nbsp;&nbsp;94177</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2" valign="top">
<p align="center">PG&amp;E Corporation<br />
 One Market, Spear Tower, Suite 2400<br />
 San Francisco, California&nbsp;&nbsp;94105</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip
Code)</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p align="center"><br />
 </p>
</td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="2" valign="top">
<p align="center">Pacific Gas and Electric Company<br />
 (415) 973-7000</p>
</td>
<td colspan="2" valign="top">
<p align="center">PG&amp;E Corporation<br />
 (415) 267-7000</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td colspan="4" valign="top">
<p align="center">(Registrant's telephone number, including area
code)</p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>
</table>

<p><br />
</p>

<div align="center">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center" />
</div>

<p><br />
Item 5. Other Events</p>

<p>A.&nbsp; Pacific Gas and Electric Company Bankruptcy</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
On April l1, 2002, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Northern District of California (Bankruptcy Court) tentatively
approved the disclosure statement relating to PG&amp;E
Corporation&rsquo;s and Pacific Gas and Electric Company&rsquo;s
(Utility) proposed plan of reorganization (Plan).&nbsp; PG&amp;E
Corporation and the Utility have agreed to make certain amendments
to the disclosure statement and to file the amended disclosure
statement and Plan on April 19, 2002.&nbsp; The Bankruptcy Court
has set a hearing for April 24, 2002 at which it is expected that
the Bankruptcy Court will give final approval of the disclosure
statement.&nbsp; The Bankruptcy Court&rsquo;s approval of the
disclosure statement does not constitute approval of the
Plan.&nbsp;</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Further, on April 15, 2002, the CPUC filed its proposed alternative
plan of reorganization (Alternative Plan) with the Bankruptcy
Court.&nbsp; Among other things, the Alternative Plan proposes
to:</p>

<p></p>

<p>&bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Retain Pacific
Gas and Electric Company as an integrated utility under the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC);</p>

<p></p>

<p>&bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Repay all valid
claims in full with interest using $3.6 billion cash on hand, $3.9
billion in new unsecured Utility debt, $1.75 billion of new Utility
equity (which would significantly dilute PG&amp;E
Corporation&rsquo;s equity ownership of the Utility), and reinstate
$4.3 billion of the Utility&rsquo;s mortgage bonds and pollution
control bonds;</p>

<p></p>

<p>&bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Become
effective only if the Utility&rsquo;s new and reinstated debt
securities receive investment grade credit ratings, however the
CPUC would retain the right to waive this condition;</p>

<p></p>

<p>&bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Treat creditors
in the same manner as proposed under the Utility&rsquo;s Plan;
and</p>

<p></p>

<p>&bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Release all the
Utility&rsquo;s claims against the State of California, including
the so-called &ldquo;filed rate case&rdquo; pending against the
CPUC Commissioners in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, but reserve the California
Attorney General&rsquo;s claims against PG&amp;E Corporation.</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The CPUC has proposed that its Alternative Plan become effective on
January 31, 2003.&nbsp; Objections to the Alternative Plan and the
related disclosure statement are due on May 3, 2002 and a hearing
to consider the filed objections is set for May 9,
2002.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>B.&nbsp; Utility Retained Generation Ratemaking Proceeding</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
On April 4, 2002, the CPUC voted to issue a decision in the
Utility&rsquo;s proceeding to determine the ratemaking for the
Utility&rsquo;s retained generation assets, consisting primarily of
its hydroelectric facilities and its Diablo Canyon nuclear power
plant (utility retained generation or &ldquo;URG&rdquo;).&nbsp; The
decision approves a 2002 revenue requirement for the
Utility&rsquo;s retained generation of $2.906 billion, subject to
true-up for an updated rate base amount (to be calculated based on
recorded December 31, 2000 net book value).&nbsp; The recorded
December 31, 2000 net book value was $845 million for Diablo Canyon
and $1.045 billion for the Utility&rsquo;s non-nuclear
assets.&nbsp; The Utility is required to provide the updated rate
base information to the CPUC by April 24, 2002.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The decision allows the Utility to recover all reasonably incurred
2002 URG costs, subject to balancing account treatment and
reasonableness review in the Utility&rsquo;s 2003 General Rate Case
(GRC) proceeding.&nbsp; The CPUC also indicated that the
Utility&rsquo;s 2003 URG revenue requirement will be considered in
the Utility&rsquo;s 2003 GRC proceeding discussed below.&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The decision does not change retail electric rates and does not
have a current earnings impact.&nbsp; The decision defers
consideration of future rate changes until such time as the CPUC
addresses the status of the retail rate freeze.&nbsp; In addition,
the CPUC has previously noted that it has yet to address the
recoverability of the Utility&rsquo;s previously written-off
generation related costs.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>C.&nbsp; California Independent System Operator (ISO)
Charges</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
On March 27, 2002, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
issued a decision reaffirming its previous orders, including its
November 7, 2001 order, regarding the ISO&rsquo;s creditworthiness
requirements for energy purchases, which the Utility has failed to
meet since early January 2001.&nbsp; In the November 2001 order,
the FERC ordered the ISO to invoice the California Department of
Water Resources (DWR) for all ISO transactions entered into on
behalf of the Utility since January 4, 2001.&nbsp; In December
2001, the DWR filed an application for rehearing of this
order.&nbsp; In the March 27, 2002 order, the FERC denied the
DWR&rsquo;s application for rehearing.</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
As previously disclosed, the Utility believes that the amount it
accrued for ISO charges as of December 31, 2001, includes amounts
that are already included in the recently approved 2001-2002
revenue requirement for the DWR.&nbsp; Also, as previously
disclosed, as of December 31, 2001, the Utility had accrued
approximately $2.2 billion as payable to the DWR.&nbsp; On March
21, 2002, the CPUC issued a decision clarifying its February 21,
2002 decision allocating the DWR&rsquo;s 2001-2002 revenue
requirement to the Utility.&nbsp; Based on the March 21, 2002 CPUC
decision, the Utility estimates that its total DWR
pass&#8209;through amount for 2001 is $2.5&nbsp;billion.&nbsp; In
light of the most recent FERC and CPUC orders, the Utility has
reversed the ISO accrual and increased the amount of the DWR
accrual for a net adjustment of $595 million, pre-tax.&nbsp; This
amount will be reflected in the Utility&rsquo;s net income for the
quarter ended March 31, 2002.</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p>D.&nbsp; 2003 General Rate Case Proceeding</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
On April 15, 2002, the Utility submitted its notice of intent (NOI)
to file it 2003 General Rate Case (GRC) application to the
CPUC&rsquo;s Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA).&nbsp; The NOI was
submitted pursuant to the Utility&rsquo;s proposal, accepted by the
CPUC, to resolve the CPUC&rsquo;s order to show cause issued on
December 11, 2001 relating to the Utility&rsquo;s failure to submit
an NOI by November 14, 2001.&nbsp; In addition, pursuant to the
accepted proposal, the Utility paid a voluntary fine of $48,000.
</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
In the 2003 GRC, the CPUC will determine the amount of authorized
&ldquo;base revenues&rdquo; to be collected from ratepayers to
recover the Utility&rsquo;s basic business and operational costs
for its gas and electric distribution operations for the period
2003 through 2005.&nbsp; These revenue requirements are determined
based on a forecast of costs for 2003 (the &ldquo;test
year&rdquo;).&nbsp; The NOI indicates that the Utility&rsquo;s GRC
application will request an increase in electric and gas
distribution revenue requirements of $407 million and $71 million,
respectively, over the current authorized amounts to meet the needs
of new customers, maintain current service levels to existing
customers, and adjust for wages and inflation.&nbsp; The Utility
also has indicated that it will seek an attrition rate adjustment
increase for 2004 and 2005.&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
To comply with the 2002 URG decision discussed above, the Utility
also plans to submit its 2003 URG revenue requirement request in
the 2003 GRC in early June 2002.&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
As presented in the NOI, the Utility&rsquo;s requested electric
distribution revenue requirement increase would not increase
electric rates over their current authorized level.&nbsp; If
granted, the amount available from revenues to pay generation
related costs would be reduced by a like amount.&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
The ORA has 25 days to review the NOI and notify the Utility of any
deficiencies.&nbsp; After addressing any deficiencies that may be
identified and after acceptance for filing by the executive
director of the CPUC, the Utility may file its GRC application with
the CPUC no sooner than 60 days after acceptance of the NOI.&nbsp;
Neither PG&amp;E Corporation nor the Utility can predict what
amount of revenue requirements, if any, the CPUC will authorize for
the 2003 &ndash; 2005 period nor when such decision will be
made.&nbsp; The Utility intends to request that any revenue
requirement change be effective January 1, 2003.</p>

<p></p>

<p>E.&nbsp; 2002 Attrition Rate Adjustment (ARA) Case</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
As previously disclosed, the Utility has requested that the CPUC
authorize an increase in the authorized electric and gas
distribution revenue requirement for 2002 to reflect inflation and
the growth in capital investments necessary to serve
customers.&nbsp; The Utility also requested that the CPUC issue an
interim decision to ensure that, if at a later date, the CPUC
approves a 2002 ARA, such adjustment may be made effective as of
the date of the interim decision and prorated to the end of
2002.&nbsp; A proposed decision was issued which would grant the
Utility&rsquo;s request.&nbsp; An alternate proposed decision also
has been issued which proposes to issue an interim decision which
would make a 2002 ARA effective only when the Utility files its
2003 GRC application.&nbsp; The Utility has filed comments to the
alternate proposed decision suggesting that the 2002 ARA be made
effective as of the date the Utility files its NOI for a 2003 GRC
(which the Utility filed on April 15, 2002).&nbsp; The CPUC is
scheduled to consider the proposed decision and the alternate
proposed decision at its meeting on April 22, 2002.&nbsp;</p>

<p></p>

<p>F.&nbsp;&nbsp; PG&amp;E National Energy Group, Inc. &ndash;
Credit Rating Outlook</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
On April 17, 2002, Moody's Investors Service (Moody's), a major
credit rating agency, announced that it had changed the rating
outlook on the senior unsecured debt securities of PG&amp;E
National Energy Group, Inc. (NEG), a subsidiary of PG&amp;E
Corporation, to negative from stable.&nbsp; The debt securities
continue to be rated Baa2.&nbsp; Moody's stated that the change in
outlook reflects "the growing reliance on less predictable cash
flows coupled with the weak marketplace for merchant
generation."</p>

<p></p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Although Moody's noted NEG's predictable cash flows provided by its
subsidiaries, PG&amp;E Gas Transmission, Northwest and USGen New
England, Inc., and from a portfolio of contracted power projects,
Moody's stated that future cash flows will become more dependent
upon margins derived from the merchant electric power market and
that the prospect for a healthy electric merchant market has
weakened.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Moody's also noted that NEG has secured funding under a bank credit
facility to complete its construction program, has materially
slowed down future commitments for power projects, and that
liquidity appears to be adequate as NEG maintains ample cash
balances at its trading company subsidiary, PG&amp;E Energy Trading
Holdings Corporation, as well as access to a $1.25 billion credit
facility for working capital requirements.&nbsp; Moody's stated
that notwithstanding these initiatives by management, "rating
pressure could surface as expected cash margins from the merchant
energy market is likely to be weak due to the amount of generating
capacity expected to be completed over the next three years."&nbsp;
Finally, Moody's noted that "additional rating pressure could occur
should NEG need to raise additional capital given the parent's
[PG&amp;E Corporation] challenge of raising equity capital due to
the April 2001 bankruptcy filing by affiliate, Pacific Gas and
Electric Company."</p>

<p></p>

<br clear="all" />


<p><br />
</p>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>SIGNATURE</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>

<p>Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on
their behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.</p>

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="324">
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>PG&amp;E CORPORATION<br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>By:&nbsp; <u>CHRISTOPHER P. JOHNS</u></p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;CHRISTOPHER P.
JOHNS<br />
 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Senior Vice President
and Controller<br />
<br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top"></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY<br />
 </p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>By:&nbsp;&nbsp;<u>DINYAR B. MISTRY</u></p>
</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<td valign="top">
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;DINYAR B. MISTRY<br />
 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Vice President and
Controller</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>

<p>Dated:&nbsp; April 19, 2002</p>
</div>
</body>
</html>
[{"type": "8-K", "sequence": "1", "filename": "final4-19.htm", "description": "8-K", "secsgml_size_bytes": 18382}]
{"company-data": {"conformed-name": "PG&E CORP", "cik": "0001004980", "assigned-sic": "4931", "irs-number": "943234914", "state-of-incorporation": "CA", "fiscal-year-end": "1231"}, "filing-values": {"form-type": "8-K", "act": "34", "file-number": "001-12609", "film-number": "02615634"}, "business-address": {"street1": "ONE MARKET SPEAR TOWER", "street2": "SUITE 2400", "city": "SAN FRANCISCO", "state": "CA", "zip": "94105", "phone": "4152677000"}, "mail-address": {"street1": "ONE MARKET SPEAR TOWER", "street2": "SUITE 2400", "city": "SAN FRANCISCO", "state": "CA", "zip": "94105"}, "former-company": {"former-conformed-name": "PG&E PARENT CO INC", "date-changed": "19951214"}}
PG&E'S GRC
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.  20549
FORM 8-K
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
Date of Report: April 19, 2002
Commission
File
Number
Exact Name of
Registrant
as specified in
its charter
State or other
Jurisdiction of
Incorporation
IRS Employer
Identification
Number
_____________
_____________
_____________
_____________
1-12609
1-2348
PG&E Corporation
Pacific Gas and
Electric Company
California
California
94-3234914
94-0742640
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
77 Beale Street, P. O. Box 770000
San Francisco, California  94177
PG&E Corporation
One Market, Spear Tower, Suite 2400
San Francisco, California  94105
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip
Code)
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(415) 973-7000
PG&E Corporation
(415) 267-7000
(Registrant's telephone number, including area
code)
Item 5. Other Events
A.  Pacific Gas and Electric Company Bankruptcy
On April l1, 2002, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Northern District of California (Bankruptcy Court) tentatively
approved the disclosure statement relating to PG&E
Corporation's and Pacific Gas and Electric Company's
(Utility) proposed plan of reorganization (Plan).  PG&E
Corporation and the Utility have agreed to make certain amendments
to the disclosure statement and to file the amended disclosure
statement and Plan on April 19, 2002.  The Bankruptcy Court
has set a hearing for April 24, 2002 at which it is expected that
the Bankruptcy Court will give final approval of the disclosure
statement.  The Bankruptcy Court's approval of the
disclosure statement does not constitute approval of the
Plan.
Further, on April 15, 2002, the CPUC filed its proposed alternative
plan of reorganization (Alternative Plan) with the Bankruptcy
Court.  Among other things, the Alternative Plan proposes
to:
•        Retain Pacific
Gas and Electric Company as an integrated utility under the
jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC);
•        Repay all valid
claims in full with interest using $3.6 billion cash on hand, $3.9
billion in new unsecured Utility debt, $1.75 billion of new Utility
equity (which would significantly dilute PG&E
Corporation's equity ownership of the Utility), and reinstate
$4.3 billion of the Utility's mortgage bonds and pollution
control bonds;
•        Become
effective only if the Utility's new and reinstated debt
securities receive investment grade credit ratings, however the
CPUC would retain the right to waive this condition;
•        Treat creditors
in the same manner as proposed under the Utility's Plan;
and
•        Release all the
Utility's claims against the State of California, including
the so-called "filed rate case" pending against the
CPUC Commissioners in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, but reserve the California
Attorney General's claims against PG&E Corporation.
The CPUC has proposed that its Alternative Plan become effective on
January 31, 2003.  Objections to the Alternative Plan and the
related disclosure statement are due on May 3, 2002 and a hearing
to consider the filed objections is set for May 9,
2002.
B.  Utility Retained Generation Ratemaking Proceeding
On April 4, 2002, the CPUC voted to issue a decision in the
Utility's proceeding to determine the ratemaking for the
Utility's retained generation assets, consisting primarily of
its hydroelectric facilities and its Diablo Canyon nuclear power
plant (utility retained generation or "URG").  The
decision approves a 2002 revenue requirement for the
Utility's retained generation of $2.906 billion, subject to
true-up for an updated rate base amount (to be calculated based on
recorded December 31, 2000 net book value).  The recorded
December 31, 2000 net book value was $845 million for Diablo Canyon
and $1.045 billion for the Utility's non-nuclear
assets.  The Utility is required to provide the updated rate
base information to the CPUC by April 24, 2002.
The decision allows the Utility to recover all reasonably incurred
2002 URG costs, subject to balancing account treatment and
reasonableness review in the Utility's 2003 General Rate Case
(GRC) proceeding.  The CPUC also indicated that the
Utility's 2003 URG revenue requirement will be considered in
the Utility's 2003 GRC proceeding discussed below.
The decision does not change retail electric rates and does not
have a current earnings impact.  The decision defers
consideration of future rate changes until such time as the CPUC
addresses the status of the retail rate freeze.  In addition,
the CPUC has previously noted that it has yet to address the
recoverability of the Utility's previously written-off
generation related costs.
C.  California Independent System Operator (ISO)
Charges
On March 27, 2002, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
issued a decision reaffirming its previous orders, including its
November 7, 2001 order, regarding the ISO's creditworthiness
requirements for energy purchases, which the Utility has failed to
meet since early January 2001.  In the November 2001 order,
the FERC ordered the ISO to invoice the California Department of
Water Resources (DWR) for all ISO transactions entered into on
behalf of the Utility since January 4, 2001.  In December
2001, the DWR filed an application for rehearing of this
order.  In the March 27, 2002 order, the FERC denied the
DWR's application for rehearing.
As previously disclosed, the Utility believes that the amount it
accrued for ISO charges as of December 31, 2001, includes amounts
that are already included in the recently approved 2001-2002
revenue requirement for the DWR.  Also, as previously
disclosed, as of December 31, 2001, the Utility had accrued
approximately $2.2 billion as payable to the DWR.  On March
21, 2002, the CPUC issued a decision clarifying its February 21,
2002 decision allocating the DWR's 2001-2002 revenue
requirement to the Utility.  Based on the March 21, 2002 CPUC
decision, the Utility estimates that its total DWR
pass‑through amount for 2001 is $2.5 billion.  In
light of the most recent FERC and CPUC orders, the Utility has
reversed the ISO accrual and increased the amount of the DWR
accrual for a net adjustment of $595 million, pre-tax.  This
amount will be reflected in the Utility's net income for the
quarter ended March 31, 2002.
D.  2003 General Rate Case Proceeding
On April 15, 2002, the Utility submitted its notice of intent (NOI)
to file it 2003 General Rate Case (GRC) application to the
CPUC's Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA).  The NOI was
submitted pursuant to the Utility's proposal, accepted by the
CPUC, to resolve the CPUC's order to show cause issued on
December 11, 2001 relating to the Utility's failure to submit
an NOI by November 14, 2001.  In addition, pursuant to the
accepted proposal, the Utility paid a voluntary fine of $48,000.
In the 2003 GRC, the CPUC will determine the amount of authorized
"base revenues" to be collected from ratepayers to
recover the Utility's basic business and operational costs
for its gas and electric distribution operations for the period
2003 through 2005.  These revenue requirements are determined
based on a forecast of costs for 2003 (the "test
year").  The NOI indicates that the Utility's GRC
application will request an increase in electric and gas
distribution revenue requirements of $407 million and $71 million,
respectively, over the current authorized amounts to meet the needs
of new customers, maintain current service levels to existing
customers, and adjust for wages and inflation.  The Utility
also has indicated that it will seek an attrition rate adjustment
increase for 2004 and 2005.
To comply with the 2002 URG decision discussed above, the Utility
also plans to submit its 2003 URG revenue requirement request in
the 2003 GRC in early June 2002.
As presented in the NOI, the Utility's requested electric
distribution revenue requirement increase would not increase
electric rates over their current authorized level.  If
granted, the amount available from revenues to pay generation
related costs would be reduced by a like amount.
The ORA has 25 days to review the NOI and notify the Utility of any
deficiencies.  After addressing any deficiencies that may be
identified and after acceptance for filing by the executive
director of the CPUC, the Utility may file its GRC application with
the CPUC no sooner than 60 days after acceptance of the NOI. 
Neither PG&E Corporation nor the Utility can predict what
amount of revenue requirements, if any, the CPUC will authorize for
the 2003 – 2005 period nor when such decision will be
made.  The Utility intends to request that any revenue
requirement change be effective January 1, 2003.
E.  2002 Attrition Rate Adjustment (ARA) Case
As previously disclosed, the Utility has requested that the CPUC
authorize an increase in the authorized electric and gas
distribution revenue requirement for 2002 to reflect inflation and
the growth in capital investments necessary to serve
customers.  The Utility also requested that the CPUC issue an
interim decision to ensure that, if at a later date, the CPUC
approves a 2002 ARA, such adjustment may be made effective as of
the date of the interim decision and prorated to the end of
2002.  A proposed decision was issued which would grant the
Utility's request.  An alternate proposed decision also
has been issued which proposes to issue an interim decision which
would make a 2002 ARA effective only when the Utility files its
2003 GRC application.  The Utility has filed comments to the
alternate proposed decision suggesting that the 2002 ARA be made
effective as of the date the Utility files its NOI for a 2003 GRC
(which the Utility filed on April 15, 2002).  The CPUC is
scheduled to consider the proposed decision and the alternate
proposed decision at its meeting on April 22, 2002.
F.   PG&E National Energy Group, Inc. –
Credit Rating Outlook
On April 17, 2002, Moody's Investors Service (Moody's), a major
credit rating agency, announced that it had changed the rating
outlook on the senior unsecured debt securities of PG&E
National Energy Group, Inc. (NEG), a subsidiary of PG&E
Corporation, to negative from stable.  The debt securities
continue to be rated Baa2.  Moody's stated that the change in
outlook reflects "the growing reliance on less predictable cash
flows coupled with the weak marketplace for merchant
generation."
Although Moody's noted NEG's predictable cash flows provided by its
subsidiaries, PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest and USGen New
England, Inc., and from a portfolio of contracted power projects,
Moody's stated that future cash flows will become more dependent
upon margins derived from the merchant electric power market and
that the prospect for a healthy electric merchant market has
weakened.
Moody's also noted that NEG has secured funding under a bank credit
facility to complete its construction program, has materially
slowed down future commitments for power projects, and that
liquidity appears to be adequate as NEG maintains ample cash
balances at its trading company subsidiary, PG&E Energy Trading
Holdings Corporation, as well as access to a $1.25 billion credit
facility for working capital requirements.  Moody's stated
that notwithstanding these initiatives by management, "rating
pressure could surface as expected cash margins from the merchant
energy market is likely to be weak due to the amount of generating
capacity expected to be completed over the next three years." 
Finally, Moody's noted that "additional rating pressure could occur
should NEG need to raise additional capital given the parent's
[PG&E Corporation] challenge of raising equity capital due to
the April 2001 bankruptcy filing by affiliate, Pacific Gas and
Electric Company."
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on
their behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
PG&E CORPORATION
By:
CHRISTOPHER P. JOHNS
CHRISTOPHER P.
JOHNS
Senior Vice President
and Controller
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
By:
DINYAR B. MISTRY
DINYAR B. MISTRY
Vice President and
Controller
Dated:  April 19, 2002