Comments on Draft Decision

The draft decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311(g)(1) of the Public Utilities Code and Rule 77.7 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. PG&E and NAPG filed comments on March 29, 2004, and Bakersfield filed reply comments in opposition to PG&E and NAPG on April 5, 2004. PG&E argues that the draft decision erred in not adequately considering Commission Resolution E-3816, but PG&E fails to show how a Commission Resolution renders a statute inapplicable. In its comments, NAPG presents for the first time a new interpretation of § 377 that, while creative, is not persuasive. Accordingly, no changes to the draft decision are necessary as a result of the comments and reply comments.