V. CATEGORIZATION
Rule 7.1(c) of the Commission's Rules specifies that an Order Instituting Investigation (OII) will preliminarily determine the category of the proceeding and the need for hearing. We determine that this proceeding is adjudicatory as defined in Rule 1.3(a), and evidentiary hearings may be necessary. Pursuant to Rule 8.2(b) ex parte communications are prohibited. The determination as to category is appealable under Rule 7.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. An investigation is instituted on the Commission's own motion to determine whether PG&E violated any provision of the California PU Code, general orders, or any other rules, or requirements by engaging in deceitful conduct towards anti-smart meter consumer groups.
2. Respondent PG&E is directed to show at hearings why the Commission should not find it in violation of provisions of the PU Code, general orders, decisions, other rules, or requirements identified in this Order, and/or engaging in unreasonable and/or imprudent practices related to these matters, and why the Commission should not impose penalties. If any PG&E violation is found, PG&E is directed to show why penalties and/or any other form of relief should not be applied.
3. PG&E is hereby given notice that fines may be imposed in this matter pursuant to PU Code Sections 2107 and 2108.
4. PG&E is named as Respondent to this investigation.
5. CPSD is named as a party to this investigation.
6. Pursuant to Rule 7.1(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, this proceeding is categorized as adjudicatory, deemed to require hearings. Pursuant to Rule 8.2(b) ex parte communications are prohibited. This Order, only as to category, is appealable under Rule 7.6.
7. The scope of the issues in this proceeding is preliminarily determined to be whether PG&E violated provisions of the PU Code, general orders, decisions, other rules, or requirements identified in this Order, and/or engaging in unreasonable and/or imprudent practices related to these matters, and why the Commission should not impose penalties. This ordering paragraph suffices for the "preliminary scoping memo" required by Rule 7.1(c).
8. A prehearing conference shall be convened before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) for the purpose of establishing a schedule in this matter, including the date, time, and location of an evidentiary hearing.
9. The report and supporting documents prepared or attached by CPSD will be entered into the record for this proceeding. If PG&E believes that under the law any portion of the report or attachments, not already public, should remain unavailable for public review, PG&E must file a written motion for a protective order for specific identified portions of the report and attachments, and must identify the legal support for its requests, no later than May 21, 2012. CPSD is directed to provide any reply to this request no later than May 28, 2012.
10. The Executive Director shall cause a copy of this Order and CPSD Staff Report to be served by certified mail, on Respondent, PG&E, at:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, #100 San Francisco, CA 94105 Attention: Agent for Service of Process Christopher P. Johns President Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 |
Lise H. Jordan Law Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 |
| Brian K Cherry Vice President, Regulatory Relations Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1087 San Francisco, CA 94105 |
|
This order is effective today.
Dated April 19, 2012, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
MICHEL PETER FLORIO
CATHERINE J.K. SANDOVAL
MARK J. FERRON
Commissioners
