, ,

POSTED FROM — http://vcclimatehub.weebly.com/get-involved.html

eacd7b82-62b0-40cd-b8ec-42e608a256b5On March 17, 2016, The CPUC commissioners will vote on whether or not to pause the proceedings pending a full environmental review at the CEC.  Oxnard Mayor Pro Tem Carmen Ramirez urges all of us to tell the PUC to tell SCE “to go back to the drawing board and do a new request for offer, which would insure that renewable energy proposals would be considered. Reliability, sea level rise and environmental justice concerns demand that any new energy source be located elsewhere for all of these reasons and more. “

“Oxnard has been subjected to bullying and abuse by Southern California Edison, the Investor Owned Utility that distributes electricity and the energy producer, NRG which owns the two power plants about to be shut down, facilities that have marred our coast for more than 50 years.”

It does not matter where you live. This beach and this climate belong to all of us. The waste and unnecessary pollution affects everyone. Environmental justice is important for everyone.

Reference: Application of SCE  to  Approve  Fourth Power Plant  in Oxnard #14-11-016
E-mail: public.advisor@cpuc.ca.gov

Here are some legal points:
· While the CEC—as the lead CEQA agency—has a large role to play in the consideration of environmental issues, the CPUC also has a mandate to consider environmental issues in the Public Utilities Code.

· Public Utilities Code Section 451 states, in part, “every public utility shall furnish and maintain such adequate, efficient, just, and reasonable service, instrumentalities, equipment, and facilities, including telephone facilities, as defined in Section 54.1 of the Civil Code, as are necessary to promote the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons, employees, and the public.” This broad authority of the CPUC to promote the safety, health, and comfort of the public necessarily includes consideration of environmental justice issues.

· A CPUC decision from 2007 (D0712052) states that, “some criteria for which we believe the IOUs need to provide greater weight include disproportionate resource sitings in low income and minority communities, and environmental impacts/benefits.” For almost a decade, the CPUC has believed it should consider issues of environmental justice when making decisions and in 2013 the CPUC acknowledged that SCE remains bound by these requirements.

· Commissioner Peterman’s and Commissioner Florio’s APDs lack proper consideration of legislative mandate and CPUC historical precedent. The initial Proposed Decision by Administrative Law Judge Regina M. DeAngelis must be supported.

See DeAngelis decision here:http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M157/K542/157542051.PDF

Florio decision: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M157/K541/157541708.PDF

FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/Ventura350