ML023250011
| ML023250011 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/2002 |
| From: | Brendan Collins US Dept of Justice (DOJ) |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, US Federal Judiciary, Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California |
| References | |
| 01-30923 DM | |
| Download: ML023250011 (3) | |
Text
ROBERT D.
- MCCALLUM, JR.
Assistant Attorney General J.
CHRISTOPHER KOHN Director BRENDAN COLLINS SBN DC 413658 MATTHEW J.
TROY SBN GA 717258 Trial Attorneys Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice P.O. Box 875 Ben Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0875 Telephone:
(202) 616-2231 Facsimile:
(202) 307-0494 150--
KEVIN V.
- RYAN, SBN CA 118321 United States Attorney DOUGLAS CHANG, SBN HI 2922 Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone:
(415) 436-6985 Facsimile:
(415) 436-7234 Attorneys for the United States of America UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (San Francisco Division) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
) )
)
) ) ) )
) )
)
)
)
CASE NO.
01-30923 DM CHAPTER 11 Date: November 18, 2002 Time: 9:30 a.m.
UNITED STATES' COUNTER FINDINGS OF FACT IN OPPOSITION TO CPUC'S PLAN OF REORGANIZATION The United States of America, on behalf of its various
- agencies, files its Counter Findings of Fact in Opposition to the Plan of Reorganization propounded by the California Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC")
and the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, (the "CPUC Plan").
(\\06\\
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
In re PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC
- COMPANY, a California Corporation, Debtor.
1 Counter Proposals 2
93-97.
Disputed.
The United States further adopts the 3
proposed alternate findings proposed by PG&E at paragraphs 98 and 4
203-211.
'5 The United States further proposes the following additional 6
findings of fact.
7 244. In Southern California Edison Co. v. Lynch, 307 F.3d 8
794 (9th Cir. 2002),
the Ninth Circuit considered a settlement 9
agreement between Southern California Edison and the CPUC in the 10 form a stipulated judgment setting rates at an amount sufficient 11 to allow Edison to recover substantially all of its past 12 procurement cots.
13 245.
In considering that settlement, which is substantially 14 similar to the settlement at issue here, the Ninth Circuit found 15 that serious questions existed as to whether it violated state 16 law, both in substance and the procedure by which the CPUC agreed 17 to it.
18 246.
The Ninth Circuit further held that if the CPUC lacked 19 capacity to consent to the Stipulated Judgment, it would be 20 required to vacate it as void.
Id.
at 809.
21 247. Recognizing that the issue presented a question of 22 state, as opposed to federal law, the Ninth Circuit certified the 23 question of whether the stipulated judgment violated state law to 24 the California Supreme Court.
25 248.
If the California Supreme Court agrees~with the 26 reasoning of the Ninth Circuit, the settlement proposed in CPUC's 27 28 United States' Counter Finding of Fact in Opposition to CPUC's Plan of Reorganization 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plan would be void and the $2.75 billion of headroom would no longer be available for payment to PG&E's creditors but would instead be recoverable by ratepayers.
Respectfully submitted, ROBERT D.
MCCALLUM Assistant Attorney General KEVIN V.
- RYAN, SBN CA 118321 United States Attorney DOUGLAS.
K. CHANG, HI No.
02922 Assistant United States Attorney J.
CHRISTOPHER KOHN TRACY J.
WHITAKER BRENDAN COLLINS MATTHEW J.
TROY Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division United States Department of Justice P.O. Box 875, Ben Franklin station Washington, DC 20044 (202) 616-2231 Attorneys for United States of America November 14, 2002 United States' Counter Finding of Fact in Opposition to CPUC's Plan of Reorganization