Protect 500 California River Miles Today

Theresa Lorejo-Simsiman

American Whitewater along with members of the California Hydropower Reform Coalition are inching closer to a crucial vote that will protect 500 river miles across California. The state's rivers are in the crosshairs of a Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) application to transfer all 22 hydropower projects including 62 powerhouses, 97 reservoirs, 72 diversions, 167 dams, and 400 miles of water conveyance systems to a separate subsidiary, Pacific Generation LLC, an organization that PG&E says could be operated with just one employee. (Read the background here.)  In a Proposed Decision addressing this asset transfer, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Sophia J. Park of the California Public Utilities Commission found that the applicants “have not met their burden of demonstrating that the proposed transaction is adequately justified, reasonable, and in the public interest”. Effectively, ALJ Park proposes the denial of PG&E’s application. (Download the Proposed Decision here)

As a member of the California Hydropower Reform Coalition, American Whitewater has testified before the CPUC that the transfer of hydropower assets introduces a complex new ownership and operational structure that raises significant safety and accountability questions, particularly in the context of dam operations and maintenance of facilities on many of our favorite rivers. If this decision is upheld by a vote of the CPUC it will protect many of our outstanding whitewater reaches found on the North Fork Feather, the Pit, the McCloud, Butte Creek, Fordyce, the South Yuba, the Bear, the Eel, the Mokelumne, the San Joaquin, and the North Fork Kings. American Whitewater encourages the paddling community to comment in favor of ALJ Park’s Proposed Decision before April 18. 

HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENTS TO THE CPUC

1) Go to the following California Public Utilities Commission Docket link:

https://apps.cpuc.ca.gov/apex/f?p=401:1:0

2) Enter A2209018 in the box next to the Proceeding Number Search and click the Search button.

3) Click on the blue A2209018 ACTIVE link under the heading Proceeding Number.

4) Click the Public Comments tab at the top of this page

5) On the “A2209018 – Public Comments” page click the Add Public Comment button in the middle of the page and click OK to the Public Records Acts Disclaimer. Then copy and paste the sample comments provided below into the  comment field or make your own comments as a PG&E Ratepayer, a member of the public, or a stakeholder who would be impacted by the proposed asset transfer. Fill in your name, city, state, zip code, email & phone number. Verify you are not a robot and hit submit.

Sample Comment in Favor of the Proposed Decision

Dear Honorable Members of the California Public Utilities Commission,

I am writing to express strong support for the Proposed Decision issued by Administrative Law Judge Sophia J. Park, which denies Application 2209018 of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to transfer all non-nuclear assets to a new and separate subsidiary, Pacific Generation LLC. After thorough consideration, the Proposed Decision highlights several pivotal concerns that align with the best interest of ratepayers and the public. I urge the Commission to adopt the ALJ's proposal, as it exemplifies a commitment to:

1) Protection of Ratepayers and the Public Interest 

The Proposed Decision prioritizes the welfare of ratepayers, articulating potential risks associated with increased costs and rates. This decision underlines the necessity of demonstrating tangible benefits to the public from such transactions, a criterion the application fails to meet. Advocating for the ratepayers' financial interests and service quality is paramount, and this decision effectively upholds these principles.   

2) Dam Safety and Operational Integrity

The decision points out the lack of a detailed assessment of how PG&E's Dam Safety Program will adapt to ensure continued or enhanced safety oversight under the new operational setup. Significant operational concerns arise from the proposed transaction, notably the complex structure and diminished accountability of PG&E. The Proposed Decision insightfully critiques the potential operational inefficiencies and legal ambiguities that could compromise the safe and reliable operation of utility assets. Upholding operational integrity and accountability is crucial, and this decision rightly challenges the adequacy of the proposed operational model.       

3) Regulatory Oversight, Jurisdictional Clarity, and Transparency

The decision underscores the imperative for clear regulatory oversight and jurisdiction, especially given the novel nature of the transaction. The complexities introduced by the proposed ownership structure necessitate vigilant regulatory scrutiny to prevent any evasion of regulatory responsibilities. The decision also advocates for a transparent process and comprehensive evaluation of the transaction's implications. This approach is vital for informed decision-making and for upholding the principles of fairness, transparency, and public participation in the regulatory process.

In conclusion, I strongly support the Proposed Decision's rationale and its alignment with the overarching goals of protecting ratepayers, ensuring dam safety, and maintaining rigorous regulatory oversight and transparency. I respectfully urge the Commission to adopt ALJ Sophia J. Park's Proposed Decision, reaffirming your commitment to the public interest and the principles of just and reasonable utility regulation.

Thank you for considering this perspective. 

A few more paragraphs

Finish the Trip Report