BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company to Market Value Hydroelectric Generating Plants and Related Assets Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Sections 367(b) and 851. (U 39 E)

Application 99-09-053 (Filed September 30, 1999)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING

REGARDING DEFICIENCIES IN NOTICES OF INTENT

In the Preliminary Ruling on Notices of Intent (January 31, 2000), I preliminarily ruled on six Notices of Intent and set February 11, 2000 as the date for the filing of any further Notices of Intent. Two additional Notices of Intent (Notices) were served. This ruling identifies deficiencies in the Notices and provides alternative steps for correction of those deficiencies. (See Rule 2.6.) I also address the California Hydropower Reform Coalition's Response to the January 31 Ruling regarding whom that organization represents.

Notices must meet the statutory requirements, as interpreted by the Commission. The most recent decision summarizing the Commission's interpretation of the Intervenor Compensation statutes (Pub. Util. Code §§ 1801-1812) is Decision (D.) 98-04-059. When a Notice includes a showing of financial hardship, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) is directed to issue a preliminary ruling, in consultation with the Assigned Commissioner, addressing whether the filer will be eligible for compensation. That ruling should address: first, whether the filer is a "customer" (§ 1802(b)); second, what definition of customer the filer meets (§ 1802(b)); and third, whether "significant financial hardship" has been shown (§ 1802(g)). Significant financial hardship may be demonstrated by meeting one of two specific definitions, which are dependent on the definition of customer the filer meets. The filer must also state the nature and extent of its participation, and provide an estimate of the costs of its participation.

Without adequate information on which to base a preliminary ruling, the ALJ may request further information before ruling. Alternatively, the ALJ may rule, pointing out deficiencies and alerting a party to address the deficiencies in any Request for Compensation. This was the approach taken in the Preliminary Ruling on Notices of Intent, January 31, 2000, with the deficiencies in the Notices of the California Hydropower Reform Coalition (Coalition) and Environmental Defense. The party may continue to participate in the proceeding, uncertain of its eligibility for compensation.

California Hydropower Reform Coalition

On February 16, 2000, the Coalition served a response to the January 31, 2000, Preliminary Ruling, accompanied by a Motion for Leave to File One Day Out-of-Time. The Coalition states that, due to an office move, it neglected to properly calendar the date for the response. No party has responded to the Coalition's Notice, and no party is harmed by the fact that the Coalition tendered its response one day late. The Motion is granted.

The Coalition clarifies that it will represent American Whitewater, California Outdoors, California Trout, Foothill Conservancy, Friends of the River, Natural Heritage Institute, and Trout Unlimited. It has complied with Ruling Paragraph 9.