Word Document PDF Document

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

505 VAN NESS AVENUE

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298

January 26, 2010 Agenda ID #9194

TO SERVICE LIST FOR RESOLUTIONS ALJ-186 and ALJ-202, as supplemented by additional service lists:

As you know, in August 2005, the Commission adopted Resolution ALJ-186 that established a two-year pilot project under which public utilities may obtain an expedited review of certain transfers of property otherwise subject to Public Utilities Code Section 8511 through advice letters submitted to the Commission Industry Division. Resolution ALJ-202, adopted by the Commission in August 2007, extended the pilot program until August 23, 2010 and made additional changes to the pilot program as required for consistency with state law and General Order 96-B.

Last year, the Legislature adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 698 (Skinner), Stats 2009,
ch. 370, which amends Sections 851 and 853(d) to provide that the Commission may authorize the Executive Director or appropriate Division Director to approve certain uncontested advice letter applications when the value of the transaction is $5 million or less and environmental (CEQA) review is not required, and that the utilities may request approval of certain transactions valued at $5 million dollars or less that require CEQA review by the Commission as a Responsible Agency by advice letter, rather than by formal application. AB 698 became effective on January 10, 2010.

In order to implement AB 698, we have drafted Resolution ALJ-244 (attached) for consideration by the Commission at the February 25, 2010 business meeting. Resolution ALJ-244 also extends the pilot program for an additional year, until August 23, 2011, in order to allow us time to consider further comments from interested persons on possible additional changes to the pilot program in the future.

We wish to take a two-step approach to modifying the pilot program. First, we propose the adoption of Resolution ALJ-244, in order to promptly implement AB 698 and to help streamline the processing of utility transactions subject to Section 851 that qualify for advice letter treatment. Second, within 90 days after the adoption of Resolution ALJ-244, we will solicit comments from the utilities and other interested persons regarding any other proposed changes to the pilot program and whether the pilot program should be extended, made permanent, or discontinued.

Written opening comments on Resolution ALJ-244 are due to be served, as specified in Rules 1.9, 1.10, and 14.5,2 by no later than February 16, 2010. Please serve the attached service list and also provide a copy of your comments directly to Assistant Chief ALJ Janet A. Econome, (jjj@cpuc.ca.gov), ALJ Myra J. Prestidge, (tom@cpuc.ca.gov), and Wendy Al-Mukad, Energy Division, (wmp@cpuc.ca.gov), by email or by overnight mail or personal delivery by this date.

If you have questions, please feel free to contact Administrative Law Judge Myra Prestidge at 415-703-2629, tom@cpuc.ca.gov, or Janet Econome, Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge at 415-703-1494, jjj@cpuc.ca.gov.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Very truly yours,

_/s/ KAREN V. CLOPTON_

Karen V. Clopton

Chief Administrative Law Judge

KVC:niz

Attachment

cc: Janet Econome, Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge

Myra Prestidge, Administrative Law Judge

Julie Fitch, Director, Energy Division

Wendy Al-Mukad, Energy Division

UPDATED SERVICE LIST FOR
LETTER REGARDING RESOLUTION ALJ-244

Comments should be served pursuant to Rules 1.9, 1.10, and 14.5 on those persons appearing on the service lists set forth below. Comments should not be filed with the Docket Office.

Please serve Assistant Chief ALJ Janet A. Econome, jjj@cpuc.ca.gov, ALJ Myra J. Prestidge, tom@cpuc.ca.gov, and Wendy Al-Mukad, wmp@cpuc.ca.gov, as well as the following service list:

R.98-07-038

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R9807038_2198.htm

R.04-09-003

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0409003_66288.htm

R.05-04-005

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0504005_68617.htm

R.06-02-012

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0602012_72126.htm

R.06-12-016

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0612016_75168.htm

A.08-02-001

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/A0802001_76153.htm

R.08-02-007

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0802007_76232.htm

A.09-05-026

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/A0905026_78405.htm

R.09-06-019

http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/published/service_lists/R0906019_78410.htm

ALJ/TOM/jyc DRAFT Agenda ID #9194

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

R E S O L U T I O N

RESOLUTION ALJ-244. Extends and Modifies the Pub. Util. Code § 851 Pilot Program Established in Resolutions ALJ-186, as modified by Resolution ALJ-202, pursuant to Assembly Bill No. 698 and extends Pub. Util. Code Section 851 Pilot Program for an additional year.

Summary

This resolution modifies the Pub. Util. Code § 8513 pilot program established in Resolution ALJ-186 (adopted August 25, 2005), as modified by Resolution ALJ-202 (adopted August 23, 2007) (the pilot program), to reflect amendments made to
Sections 851 and 853 by Assembly Bill (AB) 698 (effective January 1, 2010). We also extend the pilot program for an additional year, until August 23, 2011, in order to allow time to evaluate the effectiveness of the pilot program as amended pursuant to AB 698 and to obtain comments from interested parties on additional proposed changes and whether the pilot program should be continued, made permanent, or discontinued.

The revised pilot program regulations are attached as Appendix A.

The procedures adopted in this Resolution do not apply to transfers of interests in the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PG&E) watershed lands for conservation and outdoor recreational purposes pursuant to PG&E's bankruptcy settlement. These transactions are governed by the specific procedures stated in Decision (D.) 08-11-043.4

Background Prior to the Adoption of Assembly Bill 698 (Skinner), Stats. 2009,
ch. 370

On August 25, 2005, the Commission adopted Resolution ALJ-186, which established a two-year pilot program for processing and approving certain transfers of interests in utility property through advice letters, rather than formal applications under Section 851. Section 851 generally requires Commission approval of any sale, lease, encumbrance, mortgage, or other transfer or disposition of an interest in utility property that is necessary or useful in the provision of the utility's services to the public.5 The purpose of the Commission's review is to ensure that the proposed transaction is not adverse to the public interest, i.e., does not impair the ability of the utility to provide service to customers at reasonable rates.

Before our adoption of the pilot program, utility transactions involving the transfer or disposition of interests in property necessary or useful in the provision of services to the public generally required a formal application and a Commission decision pursuant to Section 851. The purpose of the pilot program was to expedite and simplify the Commission's review and approval of non-controversial transactions involving the transfer or conveyance of interests in utility property that did not require environmental review by the Commission as a Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and did not warrant more extensive review by the Commission through the formal application process.

Also in 2005, the Legislature adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 736 (Stats. 2005, ch. 370, section 1), effective January 1, 2006, which amended Section 851. These amendments to Section 851 authorized utilities to obtain Commission approval of transactions involving transfers or disposition of property interests that are valued at $5 million or less by filing an advice letter and obtaining a Commission resolution approving the transaction, rather than filing a formal application and seeking a Commission decision. Under AB 736, utilities were still required to file formal Section 851 applications for transactions valued at over $5 million.

Under Section 851, as amended by AB 736, the Commission must approve or deny advice letter requests within 120 days of the utility's filing of the advice letter by resolution, unless the advice letter application does not include complete information or a timely protest has been filed.

AB 736 also added Section 853(d), which stated as follows, to the Public Utilities Code:

(d) It is the intent of the Legislature that transactions with monetary values that materially impact a public utility's rate base should not qualify for expedited advice letter treatment pursuant to this article. It is the further intent of the Legislature that the Commission maintain all of its oversight and review responsibilities subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, and that public utility transactions that jurisdictionally trigger a review under the act should not qualify for expedited advice letter treatment pursuant to this article.

In August 2007, after obtaining written comments from regulated utilities, the Commission Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), and other interested parties, the Commission adopted Resolution ALJ-202, which amended the pilot program regulations pursuant to AB 736 and GO 96-B, regarding the processing of advice letters filed with the Commission in general. Resolution ALJ-202 requires approval of
Section 851 advice letters by Commission resolution pursuant to AB 736. The Resolution also characterizes Section 851 advice letters as Tier 3 advice letters under
GO 96-B, because of the requirement for Commission approval of these advice letters by Resolution.

Based on Section 853(d), Resolution ALJ-202 further requires the utilities to file formal applications, rather than advice letters, to seek approval of transactions that require CEQA review by the Commission as either a Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency, or when a transaction will materially impact the ratebase of the utility, whether or not the transaction is valued at $5 million or less.6

We also extended the pilot program for an additional three years, in order to allow sufficient time to consider whether the pilot program should be continued, allowed to expire, or further modified, and to obtain additional comments from interested parties on these issues.

Unless sooner extended, the pilot program is now scheduled to expire on August 23, 2010.

Adoption of AB 698

In 2009, the Legislature adopted AB 698 (Skinner), which further amended Sections 851 and 853(d) in order to expand the types of transactions which the Commission may approve by advice letter. AB 698 became effective on January 1, 2010. AB 698 amends Sections 851 and 853 to provide that:

Under AB 698, if the proposed transaction would require CEQA review by the Commission as the Lead Agency, the utility is still required to file a formal application for Commission approval pursuant to Section 851.

Discussion

In considering potential amendments to the Section 851 advice letter pilot program regulations, the Commission has two objectives: 1) to promptly implement AB 698 in order to expedite and simplify our procedures for review and approval of proposed transfers of interests in utility property subject the requirements of Section 851, and 2) to further consider additional changes to the pilot program and whether the pilot program should be continued, made permanent, or terminated after obtaining comments from interested parties and the public.

We first address implementation of AB 698.

Although AB 698 permits, but does not require, the Commission to authorize its Executive Director or the Director of the Commission Division having regulatory jurisdiction over the utility to approve, modify, or deny uncontested advice letters for qualifying transactions that do not require CEQA review,7 we believe that implementing this provision will enable the Commission to more expeditiously process and facilitate non-controversial, uncontested transactions. We therefore amend the pilot program regulations (attached as Appendix A) to carry out this provision of
AB 698.

We also amend the pilot program regulations to implement the AB 698's amendment of Section 853(d), so that the utilities may file advice letters to seek Section 851 approval of transactions valued at $5 million or less, in cases that require environmental review by the Commission only as a Responsible Agency under CEQA, when the Lead Agency has completed its appropriate CEQA review. The utilities must continue to file formal Section 851 applications for transactions which require environmental review by the Commission as the Lead Agency under CEQA.

As permitted by AB 698, we retain the current provisions of our pilot program that require the utilities to file formal applications or to follow a procedure other than filing an advice letter as designated by the Commission when a particular transaction valued at $5 million or less warrants a more extensive review or will materially impact the ratebase of the utility. These provisions ensure that the Commission is able to more thoroughly assess proposed transactions when necessary or appropriate in order to protect the public interest.

We note that our amended pilot program regulations do not apply to transactions involving the transfer of property interests in the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) watershed lands to the extent that these transactions are subject to the procedures approved in Decision (D.) 08-04-020. Any party wishing to request a change in these procedures in view of AB 698 may file a petition for modification pursuant to Rule 16.4.

In addition, we have amended Section VII.A.3.c. of the pilot program regulations to delete language which stated that an Industry Division may reject an advice letter because its consideration would involve the exercise of discretion by Commission staff. The general rule is that powers conferred upon public agencies and officers that involve the exercise of judgment or discretion are in the nature of public trusts and cannot be delegated to staff in the absence of legislative authority. However, here, AB 698 has amended Section 851 to expressly authorize the Commission to delegate the authority to review and act upon certain qualifying pilot program advice letters to the Executive Director or the Director of the Commission Division having regulatory jurisdiction over the utility. Therefore, the general rule no longer bars the Executive Director or Division Director having subject matter jurisdiction from making discretionary decisions in reviewing and acting on these advice letters. We have retained existing language in Section VII, A.3.c., which authorizes the Industry Division to reject an advice letter because its consideration is otherwise barred by GO 96-B.

Appendix A, which modifies the pilot program regulations as described above in order to implement AB 698 and makes other minor, technical changes, is attached. We approve Appendix A here.

Second, in order to allow for additional time to obtain and consider comments from interested parties and the public on the overall effectiveness of the pilot program, whether additional changes to the program are needed, and whether the pilot program should be continued, made permanent, or discontinued, we extend the pilot program for an additional year, or until August 23, 2011.

Within 90 days of the effective date of this Resolution, the Chief Administrative Law Judge shall request written comments from interested parties on the above issues. A notice of the opportunity to file written comments on the effectiveness of the Section 851 advice letter pilot program, suggested changes to the program, and whether the program should be continued, made permanent, or discontinued, and the deadline for submitting comments shall also be posted on the Commission website, in order to give additional notice to the public.

The Commission will then consider these comments and take any appropriate action regarding the Section 851 advice letter pilot program before the expiration of the program on August 23, 2011.

PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT

The proposed Resolution was mailed to the parties for review and comment on
January 26, 2010, pursuant to Section 311(g)(1). Timely comments were received from _____________________.

THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that:

1 In order to implement Assembly Bill No. 698, the pilot program originally adopted in Resolution ALJ-186 and amended in Resolution ALJ-202, which authorizes Commission review and approval of certain transactions involving the transfer or disposition of interests in utility property by advice letter, is amended as stated in Appendix A.

2. The pilot program described above is extended for an additional year and shall expire on August 23, 2011, unless sooner extended or made permanent by the Commission.

3. Within 90 days of the effective date of this Resolution, the Chief Administrative Law Judge shall request written comments from interested parties on the overall effectiveness of the above pilot program, additional proposed changes to the pilot program, and whether the pilot program should be continued, made permanent, or discontinued. A notice of this opportunity to file written comments and the deadline for submitting comments shall also be posted on the Commission website in order to give additional notice to the public.

4. The pilot program regulations stated in Appendix A shall not apply to transfer of interests in the Pacific Gas and Electric Company watershed lands, to the extent that these transactions are subject to the procedures adopted in D.08-11-043.

This resolution is effective today.

I certify that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced, passed, and adopted at a conference of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California held on _________________________, the following Commissioners voting favorably thereon:

APPENDIX A

SECTION 851 PILOT PROGRAM

REGULATIONS

SECTION 851 PILOT PROGRAM

ALJ Division

I. Summary

II. Eligible Section 851 Transactions

III. Applicability of GO 96-B

IV. Contents of Advice Letters

V. Notice and Service of Advice Letters

Notification and service of the advice letter shall be made in accordance with GO 96-B. In all cases, the advice letter shall be noticed in the Daily Calendar and a copy served on the appropriate Industry Division, the Commission Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), and the Commission CEQA team, the relevant departments of the city and county in which any real property involved in a transaction is located, and persons and organizations on the utility's advice letter service list, as required by GO 96-B.

VI. Protests to Advice Letters

A. Protests to an advice letter shall be filed with the Industry Division and served on the utility within 20 days of the filing of the advice letter. All protests and replies shall comply with the requirements of
GO 96-B.

B. All protests shall be processed and addressed pursuant to the procedures stated in GO 96-B.

VII. Review Process for Advice Letters

A. Industry Division Review

_-_`_33333333111111111111111_1_1$$33333$1133333333,3333#$$33333____114333''33_1136$33300333333333333311__11333333333333737;33337;_17333333333311111111((0333333333(333(4 The proposed transaction does not satisfy the criteria for the pilot program;

_-_`_44444444111111111111111_1_1$$44444$1144444444,4444#$$44444____114444''44_1146$44400444444444444411__11444444444444747;44447;_17444444444411111111((0444444444(444(5 The proposed transaction presents unusual issues of fact or law that require more complete fact-finding and informed decisionmaking, or otherwise warrants a more comprehensive review;

_-_`_55555555111111111111111_1_1$$55555$1155555555,5555#$$55555____114555''55_1156$55500555555555555511__11555555555555757;55557;_17555555555511111111((0555555555(555(6 The proposed transaction is inappropriate for advice letter consideration because doing so is otherwise barred by
GO 96-B;

_-_`_66666666111111111111111_1_1$$66666$1166666666,6666#$$66666____114666''66_1166$66600666666666666611__11666666666666767;66667;_17666666666611111111((0666666666(666(7 The monetary value of the transaction will materially impact the ratebase of the utility;

_-_`_77777777111111111111111_1_1$$77777$1177777777,7777#$$77777____114777''77_1176$77700777777777777711__11777777777777777;77777;_17777777777711111111((0777777777(777(8 The transaction involves the division of a single asset that the utility proposes to transfer into smaller parts valued at less than $5 million in order to avoid a formal application under Section 851;

_-_`_88888888111111111111111_1_1$$88888$1188888888,8888#$$88888____114888''88_1186$88800888888888888811__11888888888888787;88887;_17888888888811111111((0888888888(888(9 The transaction warrants a more comprehensive review or may require an evidentiary hearing based on issues raised in a timely protest; and

_-_`_99999999111111111111111_1_1$$99999$1199999999,9999#$$99999____114999''99_1196$99900999999999999911__11999999999999797;99997;_17999999999911111111((0999999999(999(10 The utility has failed to respond in a timely manner to a request by the Industry Division for additional information or documentation.

VIII. Appeal or Review of Commission Action on Advice Letters

(END OF APPENDIX A)

INFORMATION REGARDING SERVICE

I have provided notification of the foregoing Draft Resolution
ALJ-244 to the electronic mail addresses on the attached service lists, as well as a Notice of Availability by U.S. mail. I have served a hard copy of the foregoing Draft Resolution ALJ-244 by U.S. mail on those persons on the attached service lists that do not have e-mail addresses.

Dated January 26, 2010, at San Francisco, California.

1 All subsequent Code references are to the Public Utilities Code.

2 All Rule citations are to the Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Rules are posted on the Commission website at www.cpuc.ca.gov.

3 All subsequent Code references are to the Public Utilities Code, unless otherwise stated.

4 Parties wishing to request amendment of the procedures stated in D.08-11-043 pursuant to AB 698 may file a petition for modification pursuant to Rule 16.4 of the Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules).

5 Exceptions to this requirement exist if the Commission exempts a utility, class of utility, transaction, or class of transactions from the requirements of Section 851 pursuant to Section 853(b), or if the particular transaction meets the criteria stated in General Order (GO) 69-C. The conditions that must be met in order for such an exception to apply to the grant of an easement, license, or permit are stated in GO 69-C.

6 Based on the plain language of the statute, we interpreted the first sentence of
Section 853(d) to mean that if a particular transaction is valued at $5 million or less but still materially impacts the ratebase of a utility, the transaction does not qualify for review through an advice letter, and the utility must file a formal Section 851 application in order to obtain our approval of the transaction.

As quoted above, before the enactment of AB 698, Section 853(d) further stated that transactions involving transfers of utility property subject to Section 851 may not be approved by advice letter if the transaction "jurisdictionally triggers" environmental review by the Commission under CEQA. We interpreted this language to mean that advice letter treatment of a transaction is not permitted when the Commission is acting as either the Lead Agency or as a Responsible Agency, because even as a Responsible Agency, the Commission has significant duties under CEQA. For example, as a Responsible Agency, the Commission must review the environmental documents prepared by the Lead Agency and make its own findings regarding whether the transaction will have significant environmental impacts, and whether these impacts can be mitigated. State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15096(f) and (h). The Commission may also require additional mitigation measures for significant adverse environmental impacts related to aspects of the project that the Commission decides to carry out, finance, or approve. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15096(g).

7 Section 851, as amended by AB 698, states that: "If the advice letter is uncontested, approval may be given by the executive director or the director of the division of the commission having regulatory jurisdiction over the utility." Under the principles of statutory construction, "may" is generally interpreted as permissive language, which does not impose a mandatory obligation. Therefore, we believe that the Commission has discretion to determine whether to grant this authority to the Executive Director and/or the appropriate Division Director.

8 All Code references are to the Public Utilities Code, unless otherwise stated.

Top Of Page