Comments on Draft Decision

The draft decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with § 311(g)(1) and Rule 77.7 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. No comments were received.

Findings of Fact

1. It is undisputed that the current owners of the Tripp property contest the validity of the unrecorded 1974 easement.

2. The 2002 service extension proposal requires a valid easement across the Tripp property.

3. The undisputed facts indicate that PG&E acted within its established practices and policies when it did not record the 1974 easement.

Conclusions of Law

1. The Commission lacks jurisdiction to order PG&E to record the 1974 easement.

2. The Commission should not order PG&E to perform the 2002 service extension proposal because of the lack of a valid easement as required by the proposal.

3. PG&E's failure to record the Tripp easement in 1974 did not violate its Tariff Rule No. 15 or other law enforceable by the Commission.

4. The Commission lacks jurisdiction to determine the legal or equitable rights and obligations of the Rodriguezes and PG&E with respect to the 1974 unrecorded easement under any verbal, implied, or written agreements.

5. No hearing is necessary.

6. The complaint should be dismissed.

7. In order to provide certainty to the parties regarding their rights in this forum, this decision should be effective immediately.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Complaint of Joseph S. and Delores K. Rodriguez against Pacific Gas and Electric Company is dismissed for failure to state a cause of action within the jurisdiction of this Commission.

2. The need for hearing determination is changed. No hearing is necessary.

3. This proceeding is closed.

This order is effective today.

Dated March 16, 2004, at San Francisco, California.

Previous PageTop Of PageGo To First Page