STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor

PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

505 VAN NESS AVENUE

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298

August 27, 2008

TO PARTIES OF RECORD IN CASE 07-06-001 DECISION 08-08-038,
MAILED AUGUST 27, 2008.

On July 25, 2008, a Presiding Officer's Decision in this proceeding was mailed to all parties. Public Utilities Code Section 1701.2 and Rule 15.5(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures provide that the Presiding Officer's Decision becomes the decision of the Commission 30 days after its mailing unless an appeal to the Commission or a request for review has been filed.

No timely appeals to the Commission or requests for review have been filed. Therefore, the Presiding Officer's Decision is now the decision of the Commission.

The decision number is shown above.

/s/ PHILIP S. WEISMEHL for

Angela K. Minkin, Chief

Administrative Law Judge

ANG:rbg

Attachment

ALJ/VDR-POD/rbg Date of Issuance 8/27/2008

Decision 08-08-038

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Lawrence A. Rupprecht,

Complainant,

vs.
Southern California Edison Company (U338E),
Defendant.

Case 07-06-001
(Filed June 1, 2007)

Lawrence Rupprecht, in pro per, complainant.

Gary Chen, Attorney at Law, for Southern California
Edison Company, defendant.

PRESIDING OFFICER'S DECISION DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND ORDERING EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF PURSUANT TO
GENERAL ORDER 95, RULE 12.4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE

PRESIDING OFFICER'S DECISION DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND ORDERING EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF PURSUANT TO GENERAL
ORDER 95, RULE 12.4 2 2

1. Summary of Decision 2 2

2. Procedural History 2 2

3. Background 3 3

4. Discussion 8 8

4.1. Pole Replacement 9 9

4.2. Clearance of the line over the Elna Property 10 10

4.3. "Flicker" and the replacement of the secondary line. 10 10

5. Conclusion 12 12

6. Assignment of Proceeding 12 12

Findings of Fact 13 13

Conclusions of Law 17 17

ORDER 18 18

PRESIDING OFFICER'S DECISION DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND ORDERING EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF PURSUANT TO
GENERAL ORDER 95, RULE 12.4

1. Summary of Decision

Lawrence Rupprecht (Rupprecht or complainant) seeks to have existing overhead electric facilities to his residence in Cathedral City reconfigured and partially undergrounded. He claims that the existing configuration violates certain provisions of Commission General Order (GO) 95, and that accordingly a secondary pole on his property must be replaced, and a span of wire must be upgraded, at the sole expense of Southern California Edison Company (Edison or defendant), his service provider.

We disagree with complainant's contentions, and we conclude that the complaint must be dismissed. However, as a result of the matters called to our attention by the complaint, we order Edison to inspect and measure the clearance of the secondary line above the residence of complainant's neighbor at 39015 Elna Way. If that clearance fails to comply with the clearance requirement of GO 95, we order Edison to alter or reconstruct the line at its expense in the interest of safety, as provided in Rule 12.4 of GO 95.

The complaint is dismissed and Case 07-06-001 is closed.