|Word Document PDF Document|
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (U 39 M), a California Corporation, and the California Waterfowl Association, A California Public Benefit Corporation, for an Order Market Valuing and Authorizing the Former to Transfer to the Latter Certain Land in Shasta County (MacArthur Swamp) and Related Property Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 367(b) and 851.
(Filed May 15, 2000)
Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (U 39 M), a California corporation, the State of California, acting by and through its Department of Parks and Recreation, with the approval of its Department of General Services (DPR), and the California Waterfowl Association, A California Public Benefit Corporation (CWA), for Orders Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 367(b) and 851 (1) Establishing the Market Value of and Authorizing Pacific Gas and Electric Company to Transfer to DPR Certain Pieces of Land in Shasta County (Burney Falls) in Exchange for Land Currently Owned by DPR (Ahjumawi), and (2) Authorizing Pacific Gas and Electric Company to donate Ahjumawi to CWA.
(Filed May 15, 2000)
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING RE: BRIEFS
ON APPLICATION OF AB 6X TO THESE PROCEEDINGS
As amended by Assembly Bill 6 (2001-02 First Extraordinary Session [Dutra and Pescetti]), also known as AB 6X, Pub. Util. Code § 377 provides:
"377. The commission shall continue to regulate the facilities for the generation of electricity owned by any public utility prior to January 1, 1997, that are subject to commission regulation until the owner of those facilities has applied to the commission to dispose of those facilities and has been authorized by the commission under Section 851 to undertake that disposal. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no facility for the generation of electricity owned by a public utility may be disposed of prior to January 1, 2006. The commission shall ensure that public utility generation assets remain dedicated to service for the benefit of California ratepayers." (Emphasis added.)
The lands at issue in these consolidated proceedings are parts of watershed tracts Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) owns in California. While there are no generation facilities located on these particular tracts, per se, the lands form part of the watersheds supplying PG&E hydroelectric facilities. Furthermore, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license (License No. 2687) to operate Pit 1, one of PG&E's hydroelectric generation facilities located on the Pit River, includes within its boundaries 2000 of the 7400 acres PG&E proposes to donate as part of the MacArthur Swamp transfer, under Application (A.) 00-05-029. These proceedings are unopposed. Environmental review of the amended application filed in each proceeding, and the corresponding Proponents Environmental Assessment, has resulted in the release of a Final Mitigated Negative Declaration by Commission staff.
The purpose of this ruling is to direct applicants, and invite all other interested parties, to file briefs addressing whether AB 6X bars the proposed land transfers. Among other things, briefs should address whether the watershed lands, or some specific subset(s) of them, comprise "public utility generation assets" within the meaning of the AB 6X. Legal and policy arguments should be supported by citation to authority, including pertinent legislative history.
In accordance with the electronic service protocols established for these proceedings (attached hereto), initial briefs shall be filed and served on or before June 10, 2002 and reply briefs, on or before June 28, 2002.
IT IS RULED that:
1. Applicants shall file, and all other interested parties are invited to file, briefs which address whether AB 6X bars the proposed land transfers at issue in these consolidated proceedings, as further discussed herein.
2. Initial briefs shall be filed and served on or before June 10, 2002 and reply briefs, on or before June 28, 2002.
Dated May 13, 2002, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ JEAN VIETH
Administrative Law Judge
ELECTRONIC SERVICE PROTOCOLS
Party Status in Commission Proceedings
These electronic service protocols are applicable to all "appearances." In accordance with Commission practice, by entering an appearance at a prehearing conference or by other appropriate means, an interested party or protestant gains "party" status. A party to a Commission proceeding has certain rights that non-parties (those in "state service" and "information only" service categories) do not have. For example, a party has the right to participate in evidentiary hearings, file comments on a proposed decision, and appeal a final decision. A party also has the ability to consent to waive or reduce a comment period, and to challenge the assignment of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Non-parties do not have these rights, even though they are included on the service list for the proceeding and receive copies of some or all documents.