Discussion

We conclude that the Resolution approving the subdivision does not require the relocated electric facilities on Academy Avenue to be placed underground. The Resolution expressly grants an exception from any undergrounding requirement for the existing 70 kV and 12 kV lines along Academy Avenue (see p. 1 of Attachment E to the complaint).

Relocation of the existing overhead electric facilities to a new location within the easement obtained by the County does not subject PG&E to the condition in the Resolution that all new utilities in the subdivision be placed underground (see p. 5 of Attachment E to the complaint). This undergrounding requirement is intended for those facilities providing service within the subdivision. The Resolution expressly exempts the 70 kV and 12 kV line along Academy Avenue. PG&E's transmission pole line serves the general public and transmits electricity from generation or substation to substation. PG&E's overhead facilities were and are within the franchise area obtained by the County for the purpose of accommodating the overhead electric facilities. Any requests for underground service are subject to the Commission-approved application process as provided in PG&E's Electric Tariff Rule 20.

Complainants' concerns regarding the County acquiring an easement rather than purchasing their property which subjects the Complainants to property taxation is a land rights issue between the Complainants and the County and is outside the scope of this proceeding.

Complainants have failed to show that PG&E has violated any law or Commission rule or order. Therefore, we conclude that the complaint should be dismissed.