3. Scope of Proceeding

In April 2000, the assigned Commissioner found the following issues to be within the scope of this proceeding:

1. Need for the proposed project including consideration of the decision by the ISO that the project is needed;

2. Assessment of the merits of alternative routes, including route segments located underground, the proposed and alternate routes, and proposed and alternative substation locations;

3. Consideration of the following factors contained in Pub. Util. Code § 1002:

a. Community values;

b. Recreational and park areas;

c. Historical and aesthetic values; and

d. Influence on the environment;

4. Consideration of whether, pursuant to the Commission's General Order (GO) 131-D, the project promotes the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of the public;

5. Jurisdiction over costs, and advisability and amount of a cap on project cost;

6. Whether the project has cumulative and/or growth-inducing impacts.³

³ The foregoing description of the scope is derived from the text of the April 26, 2000 Assigned Commissioner's Ruling Establishing Category and Providing Scoping Memo. The ruling stated the issues slightly differently. In addition, the list of issues described herein does not include one of the issues listed in the ruling because no party pursued it during the case.