VII. Categorization and Comments
In Resolution ALJ 176-3051, dated November 21, 2000, the Commission preliminarily categorized this proceeding as ratesetting, and preliminarily determined that hearings were not necessary. ORA filed a protest to the application, but stated its view that hearings were not necessary. Based on the record in this matter, public hearing is not necessary, and we affirm the preliminary determinations made in Resolution ALJ 176-3051.
The Commission mailed the draft decision of the ALJ in this matter to the parties in accordance with Section 311 (g)(1) and Rule 77.7 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Parties filed comments on ____, and filed reply comments on _____.
1. PG&E is a public utility corporation subject to the jurisdiction of this Commission.
2. OnFiber is a telecommunications company operating under authority granted by the Commission.
3. PG&E and OnFiber have entered into a Master Agreement that initially gives OnFiber a revocable license, consistent with General Order 69-C, to install its telecommunication equipment on PG&E's electric distribution facilities.
4. The Master Agreement is structured to convert from a revocable license to a lease if Commission approval is granted.
5. ORA filed a protest on December 20, 2000 stating that CEQA review is required for each specific site leased and objecting to a term in the Master Agreement allowing additional installations without further Commission approval.
6. The work proposed in the Master Agreement is categorically exempt from CEQA review because it entails minor alterations to existing utility structures.
7. The Master Agreement supports the policies set forth in the Commissions ROW decisions.
8. Revenues generated by the Master Agreement will flow to and benefit PG&E's ratepayers.
9. The unique facts of this case do not present a situation where PG&E is using G.O. 69-C to avoid the requirements of CEQA or the advance approval requirements of § 851.
1. No public hearing is necessary.
2. Joint use of utility property should be encouraged in appropriate cases because of the obvious economic and environmental benefits.
3. No further environmental review of this application is required.
4. The Master Agreement should be approved with the following conditions:
a. Work performed under the Master Agreement shall comply with the requirements of GOs 95-128.
b. Work performed by OnFiber under the Master Agreement shall not go beyond that authorized in its certificate of public convenience and necessity.
c. PG&E shall file under Section 851 for advance Commission review of any amendments to the Master Agreement.
d. PG&E shall notify the Energy Division and the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, through their respective directors, in writing, within 30 days of the execution, extension or termination of this Master Agreement.
e. PG&E shall notify the Energy Division and ORA directors, in writing, of any substantive changes to plant in service resulting from implementation of leases under the Master Agreement, within 60 days of any such change.
f. PG&E shall notify the Energy Division and ORA directors, in writing, if any right-of-way under the Master Agreement ceases to be used and useful for the provision of electric service or if there are any substantive changes in the right-of-way segments, within 30 days of any such event.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Application 00-11-041 by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and OnFiber Carrier Services, Inc. for approval of a Master Pole and Underground Facilities License and Lease Agreement (Master Agreement) is approved subject to the conditions set forth in this order.
2. Revenues generated under the Master Agreement shall be credited to PG&E's electric ratepayers.
3. The protest of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates is denied in part and granted in part.
4. This proceeding is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated , at San Francisco, California.
