1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-1-

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION,

 - and -

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

Debtors.

☐ Affects PG&E Corporation 

☐ Affects Pacific Gas and 

Electric Company 

☒ Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in 

the Lead Case, No. 19-30088 (DM).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Bankruptcy Case

No. 19-30088-DM

Chapter 11

Jointly Administered

Date: October 7, 2019

Time: 10:00 AM

Place: Courtroom 17

450 Golden Gate Ave.

16th Floor

 San Francisco, CA

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION OF THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE 

OF TORT CLAIMANTS AND AD HOC COMMITTEE OF SENIOR UNSECURED 

NOTEHOLDERS TO TERMINATE THE DEBTORS’ EXCLUSIVE PERIODS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 1121(d)(1) OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE

On October 7, 2019, this court held a hearing on the joint 

motion (Dkt. No. 3940) of the Official Committee of Tort 

Claimants (“TCC”) and the Ad Hoc Committee of Senior Unsecured 

Noteholders (“Senior Noteholders”) (together, the “Movants”) to 

terminate the exclusivity period accorded to debtors PG&E 

Signed and Filed: October 9, 2019

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Entered on Docket 

October 09, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4167 Filed: 10/09/19 Entered: 10/09/19 14:02:15 Page 1 of

 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-2-

Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (together, 

“Debtors”). For the reasons set forth below, the court will 

grant the motion and terminate exclusivity solely as to the TCC 

and the Senior Noteholders so that they can proceed with their 

proposed plan. It will deny the oral and written requests by 

other parties that exclusivity should be terminated globally. 

The court has carefully considered the arguments of the 

Movants, the Debtors, the PG&E Shareholders, and other parties 

opposing and joining the motion. The Court recognizes that the 

Debtors have made significant progress in these cases. Their 

proposed plan reflects successful resolution of major issues, 

including settlement with a substantial group of public entity 

creditors and a tentative settlement with one of the major 

constituencies, the Ad Hoc Group of Subrogation Claim Holders. 

Further, some of their opponents’ arguments that Debtors’ plan 

is not feasible because of uncertain financing conditions have 

been adequately addressed at this point. In sum, the plan is on 

track as well as can be expected for now.

That said, the parties most deserving of consideration, 

speaking through the TCC, have changed their position from the 

last time the court considered terminating exclusivity, and 

spoken loudly and clearly that they want their and the Senior 

Noteholders’ proposed plan to be considered. Debtors’ 

contentions that their opponents’ proposed plan is flawed and 

will not be confirmable are no reason to deny the motion. As 

proposed, Movants’ proposed plan is also on track as well as can 

be expected for now. The coming weeks will permit ample time to 

explore and resolve issues regarding both plans consistent with 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4167 Filed: 10/09/19 Entered: 10/09/19 14:02:15 Page 2 of

 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-3-

the more traditional plan vetting processes well-known by 

bankruptcy professionals.

While the court has expressed concerns about avoiding any 

type of litigation that deals with corporate control and 

sophisticated and rarified bankruptcy issues at the expense of 

paying the wildfire victims, it will not second-guess the 

informed decision of two well-counselled groups who are willing 

to take the attendant risks that go with competing plan 

disputes. This is doubly important in light of the looming 

deadline for meeting the Wildfire Fund requirements of AB 1054. 

The risk that Debtors’ plan will not be confirmable for some 

reason is not worth turning away a viable alternative. A dualtrack plan course going forward may facilitate negotiations for 

a global resolution and narrow the issues which are in 

legitimate dispute. If that result is not achieved and the 

estimation process is completed on schedule in the district 

court, the outcome might result in one plan failing because it 

pays too much to the victims, or the other failing because it 

does not. One plan emerging as confirmable is a very acceptable 

outcome. And if both plans pass muster, the voters will make 

their choice or leave the court with the task of picking one of 

them.

For the foregoing reasons, the court hereby GRANTS the 

joint motion of the Movants to terminate the exclusivity period 

of Bankruptcy Code section 1121(d). By a separate order, the 

court is denying the Debtors’ Second Exclusivity Motion (Dkt. 

No. 4005).

//

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4167 Filed: 10/09/19 Entered: 10/09/19 14:02:15 Page 3 of

 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-4-

Movants are to file their proposed plan no later than 

October 17, 2019. The court will conduct a status conference on 

the two completing plans on October 23, 2019, at 10:00 AM. 

Prior to that date principal counsel for Debtors, the Senior 

Noteholders and the TCC should meet and confer about scheduling 

and related matters concerning those two plans.

**END OF ORDER**

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 4167 Filed: 10/09/19 Entered: 10/09/19 14:02:15 Page 4 of

 4