9 Conclusions of Law
1. The residential electric service extension to Complainant's residence is governed by Rule 16.
2. PG&E must strictly adhere to its lawfully published tariff.
3. The lawful tariff provisions of Rule 16 must be administered and applied regardless of any misquotation by PG&E's representatives or misunderstanding by either party.
4. Installation of a dedicated transformer to serve only Complainant's residence would exceed what is required to meet service adequacy standards and would be considered a special facilities installation under Rule 2.
5. Because the residential electric service extension meets service adequacy requirements of Rule 16 and Complainant has not shown he paid for a special facilities installation, the complaint should be denied.
6. Because Complainant is not, nor has been a customer of record for service to the agricultural well and never applied for electric service to the agricultural well, the complaint should be denied.
7. Complainant should apply for a special facilities installation if he still desires a dedicated transformer for his residence. Complainant may also apply for service to the agricultural well subject to the requirements for establishing service to the well.
8. PG&E's motion to file exhibits 2C, 102C and 103C under seal should be granted.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The complaint of Nash Dweik is denied.
2. Pacific Gas and Electric Company's motion to file Exhibits 2C, 102C and 103C under seal is granted. Exhibits 2C, 102C, and 103C shall remain under seal until further order from the Commission, the Commissioner or the Assigned Administrative Law Judge.
3. Motions not specifically addressed are deemed denied.
4. Case 09-11-001 is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated December 13, 2010, at San Francisco, California.
