UNITED STATES
                           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 (Date of earliest event reported) Feb. 24, 1998 (Feb. 23, 1998)

                               Pacific Enterprises
              (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                  (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation

                1-40                             94-0743670
       ----------------------         ------------------------------------
       Commission File Number         (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

             555 West Fifth Street, Los Angeles, California 90013-1011
                     (Address of principal executive offices)
                                  (Zip Code)

                               (213) 895-5000
             (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)



On  February  23, 1998, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) of the  California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a proposed decision approving  the
proposed  business combination of Pacific Enterprises and Enova Corporation.
A  summary of the principal elements of the ALJ's proposed decision  is  set
forth  in  a  Reply  to Media Inquiry (attached to this  Current  Report  as
Exhibit  99.1) to be used by Pacific Enterprises in responding to media  and
other  inquiries  concerning the proposed decision.  The  proposed  decision
will  be  reviewed  by the CPUC which may accept, reject  or  modify  it  in
rendering a final decision on the business combination.

     ( c ) Exhibits
           99.1 Reply to Media Inquiry of Pacific Enterprises

- ---------

Pursuant  to  the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of  1934,  the
registrant  has duly caused this report to be signed on its  behalf  by  the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

- ---------------------

/s/ Ralph Todaro
- -----------------------------
Ralph Todaro
Vice President and Controller
(Chief Accounting Officer and
duly authorized signatory)
Date:  February 24, 1998


                           Reply to Media Inquiry

(The attached statement may be used to respond to inquiries concerning the
ALJ's Proposed Decision on the Pacific Enterprises-Enova Corporation

                                 * * * * * *

      We  are  pleased  that  the California Public  Utilities  Commission's
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) has determined in his Proposed Decision  that
the  merger  between Enova Corporation and Pacific Enterprises  is,  in  his
words,  "in  the  public  interest and should be  approved."   The  Proposed
Decision states that the merger will result in maintaining or improving  the
financial condition of the utilities, the quality of management, fairness to
employees and shareholders, and benefits to state and local economies.

      On  balance,  this  decision adopts most of our proposals  on  synergy
savings,   utility-to-utility  transactions,  performance-based   ratemaking
adjustments  and market power.  The major exception is the ALJ's recommended
adoption  of  a five-year period for the sharing of synergy savings,  rather
than the 10-year period we proposed.
     In  the  merger  case that we filed with the Commission,  we  estimated
approximately $1 billion in net synergy savings over 10 years -- with  50/50
sharing  between  customers and shareholders.  The ALJ's proposed  five-year
sharing  period reduces the total net savings to approximately $340  million
(about  $175 million for customers and around $165 million for shareholders)
- -- in essence significantly reducing the savings to the shareholders.
     The Proposed Decision also recommends that:

 - SDG&E  should divest its gas-fired generation units -- which  is  already
   in  progress  --  and SoCalGas should sell its options to purchase  those
   portions   of  the  Kern  River  and  Mojave  Pipeline  gas  transmission
   facilities  within California by Dec. 31, 1999.  These  options  are  not
   exercisable until the year 2012.

 - The  merger  will  have  no significant effect on the  environment  under
   CEQA, and a Negative Declaration should be adopted.
 - Savings  to  be generated through utility-to-utility transactions  should
   be  allowed.   The  Proposed Decision finds that applying  the  affiliate
   transaction rules to the merged company's regulated utilities  would  run
   counter  to the Commission's intent to foster efficiency and competition.
   It  also  finds  that  accounting practices now in place  provide  enough
   protection to meet the Commission's regulatory compliance requirements.

- -  Enova  and  PE  should be granted $148 million in costs  to  achieve  the
   merger,  rather  than the $202 million requested by the  companies.   The
   difference relates to transaction costs for investment bankers,  employee
   retention and internal and external communications.


It should be noted that the ALJ's Proposed Decision will be circulated among
CPUC  commissioners and parties involved in the merger case.  The  CPUC  may
accept, reject or modify the PD in rendering a final decision on the merger.
The  CPUC may also issue alternate proposed decisions during the time period
prior to a final decision being issued.  Nonetheless, this Proposed Decision
is  an important step toward a final decision on the merger, which the  CPUC
is expected to make by the end of March 1998.