Procedural Chronology

October 22, 2003 - PG&E filed its application.

November 10, 2003 - The City of Bakersfield filed a protest to the application.

November 13, 2003 - Bakersfield filed a supplemental statement and exhibit in support of its protest.

November 24, 2003 - ORA filed a protest to the application.

November 25, 2003 - The assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a ruling requesting additional information from PG&E.

December 4, 2003 - NAPG filed a motion to intervene and for leave to respond to the protest of the City of Bakersfield.

December 15, 2003 - In response to the ALJ ruling, PG&E submitted a supplement to its application containing additional information.

December 17, 2003 - Bakersfield filed a response to NAPG's motion, opposing NAPG's request to respond to Bakersfield's protest.

December 23, 2003 - The assigned ALJ issued a ruling granting NAPG's motion to intervene and to respond to Bakersfield's protest, and identifying topics to be discussed at the previously scheduled pre-hearing conference.

January 8, 2004 - At the pre-hearing conference, the parties and ALJ discussed the process for adjudicating the application. Consistent with the consensus of the parties, the ALJ ruled that the Commission would first address and resolve the issue of whether the sale of the Kern Facility is permissible under § 377, prior to addressing (as needed) the other issues raised by the parties.

January 26, 2004 - The scoping memo for this proceeding was issued.

January 27, 2004 - PG&E, NAPG, and Bakersfield filed and served briefs addressing § 377.