So. Cal. Edison Co. v. PUC
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Filed 9/27/04 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, Petitioner, v. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION, No. B171050 (Cal. P.U.C. Dec. Nos. 03-07-033, 03-10-020) ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING [CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] Respondent; CENTER FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGIES, Real Party in Interest. THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein and certified for publication on August 31, 2004, be modified as follows: 1. On page 2, fourth sentence of the first paragraph, the words requires that the public utility pay are changed to may require the public utility to pay so the sentence reads: California Public Utilities Code section 399.25, as interpreted by respondent California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), may require the public utility to pay the upfront costs. 2. On page 2, last sentence of the first paragraph, the word require is changed to permit a requirement so the sentence reads: Accordingly, on a petition for a writ of review filed by SCE, we annul certain PUC decisions to the extent they purport to interpret Public Utilities Code section 399.25 to permit a requirement that transmission owners pay the upfront costs of network upgrades. 3. On page 13, first full paragraph, in the sentence after the citation to Public Utilities Code section 1757, subdivision (a)(1), the words require utilities to are changed to permit a requirement that so the sentence reads: The Interim Opinion and Order Denying Rehearing interpret Public Utilities Code section 399.25 to permit a requirement that utilities pay upfront costs of system upgrades necessary to connect new sources of renewable energy to the grid. 4. In the disposition on page 13, the words require utilities to are changed to permit a requirement that so the disposition reads: California Public Utilities Commission Decisions Nos. 03-07-033 and 03-10-020 are annulled to the extent they purport to interpret Public Utilities Code section 399.25 to permit a requirement that utilities pay upfront costs of system upgrades required to connect new sources of renewable energy to the grid. 2 This modification changes the judgment. Respondent s petition for rehearing is denied. MALLANO, J. ORTEGA, Acting P. J. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
