DOCSLIB.ORG

Memorandum CAPITAL of SILICON VALLEY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Memorandum CAPITAL of SILICON VALLEY RULES COMMITTEE: 03-26-08 ITEM: E CITYOF A SAN]OSE Memorandum CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Lee Price, MMC City Council Members City Clerk SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: March 21, 2008 March 15-20,2008 ITEMS TRANSMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATION ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD (a) Reply comments ofPacific Gas and Electric Company from Andrew L. Niven and Craig M. Buchsbaum attorneys for PG&E beforethe Public Utilities Commission ofthe State ofCalifornia dated March 11, 2008. (b) Notice ofTrustee's intent to enter into stipulation for relieffrom the automatic stay, and to abandon and destroy unrepossessed assets and business records to all creditors and parties in interest and the Office ofthe United States Trustee dated March 13, 2008. (c) Notice ofEX PARTE Communication before,the Public Utilities Commission ofthe State ofCalifornia dated March 6, 2008. (d) Letter from David S. Wall to Mayor Reed and Council dated March 14,2008 regarding arts stabilization fund update. (e) Invitation from Santa Clara County Office ofHuman Relations to Mayor Reed and Council received March 20, 2008 to attend the 3'd Annual Veterans and Their Families Resource Fair on April19, 2008. (f) Reply ofPacific Gas and Electric Company to protests ofexpedited application from Andrew L. Niven and Ann H. Kim attorneys for PG&E before the Public Utilities Commission ofthe State ofCalifornia dated February 22,2008. (On file in the Office of the City Clerk) Lee Price, MMC . City Clerk LP/np Distribution: Mayor/Council . City Auditor City Manager Director ofPublic Works Assistant City Manager Director ofFinance Assistant to City Manager Public Information Officer Council Liaison San Jose Mercury News Director ofPlanning Library City Attorney BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking to Consider the Annual Revenue Requirement Determination ofthe California Department ofWater Rulemaking 06-07-010 Resources (Filed July 20, 2006) REPLY COMMENTS OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ANDREW L. NIVEN CRAIG M. BUCHSBAUM Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 973-4844 Facsimile: (415) 973-0516 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Dated: March 11,2008 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking to Consider the Annual Revenue Requirement Determination ofthe California Department ofWater Rulemakiug 06-07-0I0 Resources (Filed July 20, 2006) REPLY COMMENTS OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Pursuant to the "Administrative Law Judge's Ruling Inviting Comments" dated February 22, 2008, PG&E hereby files reply comments on allocation ofthe California Department ofWater Resources' (DWR) supplemental revenue requirements determination for 2008. In summary, as described in PG&E's opening comments filed on March 5, 2008, PG&E's near term reliefpertaining to the Calpine 2 termination should be granted within the requested time-frame, and the Commission also should initiate efforts to implement PG&E's longer term request to revisit the permanent allocation method. These reply comments also focus on two technical matters, relating to the actual computation for 2008 (See II, below) and implications for the 2010 revenue requirement determination (See III, below). I. ALL PARTIES CONCUR WITH PG&E'S NEAR-TERM ALLOCATION PROPOSAL, AND THE RESULTING ADJUTMENTS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED BY THE COMMISSION, OR REFLECTED IN A PROPOSED ALLOCATION DECISION, BY APRIL 10,2008 All commentitig parties support, or otherwise concur with, PG&E's request that DWR's supplemental revenue requirements determination for 2008 be allocated consistent with the short-term reliefrequested in PG&E's petition for modification ofDecision 05-06-060, filed on January 18, 2008, in Application 00-11-038 et af (i.e., that PG&E be allocated the entire net fixed cost reductions attributable to the termination and replacement ofthe Calpine 2 contract with the substitute "peaking contract"). See Comments ofSCE, p. 2; ofSDG&E, p. 2; and of CLECA; p. 2. Accordingly, the Commission should implement this recommendation, and the resulting adjustments, when allocating tlie 2008 DWR supplemental revenue requirements. As to timing, PG&E repeats its recommendation (described in its opening comment at pp. 2"3) that, in order to reflect these adjustments in PG&E's May 1 rate changes, either 1) the Commission shorten the comment period on a proposed supplemental 2008 DWR allocation decis.ion to allow a fmal decision by April 10, 2008 or 2) the ALJ issue a proposed allocation decision no later than April 10, 2008 which PG&E could then use a basis for implementing the DWR revenue requirement. Ifthe latter alternative is followed, PG&E notes that any change in revenue requirements from the proposedallocation decision could notbe implemented in time to be reflected in PG&E's May 1 rate adjustments. II. PG&E'S ALLOCATED DWR REVENUE REQUIREMENTS FOR 2008 SHOULD BE REDUCED BY $475 MILLION ON ACCOUNT OF THE CALPINE 2 TERMINATION AND REPLACEMENT There is a small discrepancy between the amount ofthe reduction attributable to the Calpine 2 termination and replacement, as estimated by SCE for 2008 ($467 million) and the amount ofthe reduction which should be allocated to PG&E ($475 million). This discrepancy is not caused by a misunderstanding regarding the mechanism for reflecting the Calpine 2 tettnination and contract replacement, but by independent adjustments not related to Calpine 2, including adjustments attributable to the so-called Coral contract. Specifically, in DWR's supplemental determination for 2008, DWR made an additional adjustment, correcting an error attributable to their estimate ofnon-avoidable costs under that contract. The increase in non- avoidable costs ($10 million) attributable to DWR's correction ofCoral non-avoidable costs (as well as any smaller changes in fixed costs not related to Calpine 2, as well as reserve adjustments), must be spread to all utilities, consistent with the permanent allocation method and past practices. Excluding Coral and other changes, the reduction to PG&E from the DWR -2- supplemental determination should be $475 million, consisting ofa $479 million decrease due the termination ofthe Calpine 2 contract, and a $4 million increase due to its replacement by the peaker contract. III. THE REDUCTION IN DWR COSTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CALPINE TERMINATION WILL EXTEND INTO THE 2010 REVENUE REQillREMENT DETERMINATION Although there is no present controversy, PG&E wishes to note for the record that DWR costs will be reduced, on account ofthe Calpine 2 termination, through January ofthe 2010 revenue requirement determination. Thus, PG&E will be entitled to be allocated one"month's benefit ofthe Calpine 2 contract reductions, in the allocation ofthe 2010 DWR revenue requirement. This adjustment to 2010 allocations is necessary because DWR reflects its contract costs in the revenue requirement determination, one month after the costs are actually incurred. Because ofthis lag, DWR's Calpine 2 costs that were incurred in December, 2007, before the effective termination date ofJanuary 1, 2008, were included in DWR's 2008 supplemental determination (i.e., Calpine 2 costs for December, 2007 were included, as a January, 2008, DWR cost and PG&E was allocated only eleven months ofcost reductions).l Consequently, for the 2010 revenue requirement qetermination, PG&E will be entitled to one month ofreduced costs to reflect costs that would have been incurred under the Calpine 2 contract in December, 2009, and reflected in the 2010 DWR revenue requirement determination. In this way, PG&E will receive the entire allocation, through the DWR allocation process, oftwo year's worth of reduced Calpine 2 contract costs (11/12 for 2008 plus 12/12 for 2009 plus 1/12 for 2010). 1 Specifically, the Supplemental DWR Revenue Requirement Detennination for 2008 still includes (in the month ofJanuary, 2008) $44 million ofCalpine 2 costs, or 1/12th ofthe $522 million in Calpine 2 costs that DWR incnrred during 2007. - 3 - IV. PG&E CONTINUES TO SUPPORT REVISITING THE PERMANENT ALLOCATION METHOD For all the reasons previously stated, in addition to the short tenn relief, described above, PG&E supports, over the longer tenn, a revisiting ofthe pennanent allocation method. In particular, PG&E believes the Commission should endorse efforts to detennine metrics and gather data tocompare the relative burdens ofthe respective utilities over time, as a first step towards initiating such a review. Respectfully Submitted, ANDREW L. NIVEN CRAIG M. BUCHSBAUM By: /s/ .--'-------==-:-::-=-'~==-:-::-:=-=---- CRAIG M. BUCHSBAUM Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 973-4844 Facsimile: (415) 973-0516 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Dated: March 11, 2008 -4- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC MAIL OR U.S. MAIL I, the undersigned, state that I am a citizen ofthe United States and am employed in the City and County ofSan Francisco; that I am over the age ofeighteen (18) years and not a party to the within cause; and that my business address is Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Law Department B30A, Post Office Box 7442, San Francisco, CA 94120. On the 11th day ofMarch 2008, I served a true copy of: REPLY COMMENTS OF PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY [XX] By Electronic Mail- serving the enclosed via e-mail transmission to each ofthe parties listed on the official service list for R.06-07-010, A.00-11-038 (consolidated with A.OO­ 11-056, and A.00-10-028), and A.08-01-014 with an e-mail address. [XX] By U.S. Mail- by placing the enclosed for collection and mailing, in the course of ordinary business practice, with other correspondence ofPacific Gas and Electric Company, enclosed in a sealed envelope, with postage fully prepaid, addressed to those parties listed on the official service list for R.06-07-010, A.00-11-038 (consolidated with A.00-11-056, and A.00-10-028), and A.08-01-014 without an e-mail address.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Directory of Theamerican Society of Certified Public Accountants, December 31, 1934 American Society of Certified Public Accountants
    University of Mississippi eGrove American Institute of Certified Public Accountants AICPA Committees (AICPA) Historical Collection 1-1-1934 Directory of theAmerican Society of Certified Public Accountants, December 31, 1934 American Society of Certified Public Accountants Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_comm Part of the Accounting Commons, and the Taxation Commons Recommended Citation American Society of Certified Public Accountants, "Directory of theAmerican Society of Certified Public Accountants, December 31, 1934" (1934). AICPA Committees. 148. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_comm/148 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Historical Collection at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in AICPA Committees by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DIRECTORY -----------------------of----------------------- THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Officers ■ Directors ■ State Representatives ■ Committees Members of State Boards of Accountancy Officers of State Organizations ■ Membership Roster Constitution and By-Laws THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING - WASHINGTON, D. C. DECEMBER 31, 1934 DIRECTORY OF OFFICIALS, 1934-35 OFFICERS STATE REPRESENTATIVES President: William C. Heaton, 207 Broad Alabama—Gilbert F. Dukes, First National Street, Elizabeth, New Jersey. Bank Building, Mobile. First Vice-President: William D. Morrison, Alaska—Erling Johansen, P. O. Box 266, First National Bank Building, Denver, Col­ Petersburg. orado. Arizona—Alex W. Crane, Heard Building, Second Vice-President: Orion N. Hutchinson, Phoenix. Johnston Building, Charlotte, North Caro­ lina. Arkansas—Caddie H. Kinard, Armstrong Build­ ing, El Dorado. Treasurer: Walter D. Wall, 44 West Gay Street, Columbus, Ohio.
    [Show full text]
  • LBEX-BARFID 0011679-0011764.Pdf
    Real Estate Investors Face Ups And Downs Korpacz Real Estate Investor Survey® Second Quarter 2008 www.pwcreval.com CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED BY BARCLAYS LBEX-BARFID 0011679 Dear Reader: During my conversations with investors this quarter, the slow recovery in the capital sector and the pric­ ing gap between buyers and sellers took center stage. Opinions on the movement of overall cap rates, the fragile state of the U.S. economy, and the comforting notion that industry fundamentals are still quite healthy also made their way into each discussion. In our lead story, "Investors Face Ups and Downs," read about the shifts occurring in the industry as it continues to work through the economic slowdown, the credit disruption, and the price correction. More insight into the movement of overall cap rates can be found in our Overall Cap Rate Analysis sec­ tion, which returns after debuting last quarter. Also returning in this issue is the National Medical Office Buildings Market, which debuted as a special report in the fourth quarter of 2007. Going forward, we will report on this market on a quarterly basis. Read it to find out why an increasing number of investors are targeting this asset class. Other informative articles include our semiannual Domestic Self-Storage Market, Bob White's Real Estate Capital Markets column, and our quarterly Technology News & Trends and Economic News columns. In addition, we have included charts illustrating the current U.S. Real Estate Cycle Positions for the four major property types. Take a look and see where the top U.S. markets are positioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States ______
    No. 16-1513 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ________________ PLIVA, INC., Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY (JERRYANN MILLER, Real Party in Interest), Respondents. ________________ On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District ________________ BRIEF IN OPPOSITION ________________ MARK G. CRAWFORD MARK P. ROBINSON, JR. Counsel of Record ROBINSON CALCAGNIE, INC. SKIKOS, CRAWFORD, 19 Corporate Plaza Drive SKIKOS & JOSEPH LLP Newport Beach, CA 92660 1 Sansome St., Ste. 2830 (949) 720-1288 San Francisco, CA 94104 [email protected] (415) 546-7300 [email protected] For Real Party in Interest August 16, 2017 LEGAL PRINTERS LLC, Washington DC ! 202-747-2400 ! legalprinters.com i COUNTERSTATEMENT OF QUESTIONS PRESENTED The present petition presents an identical question to the pending petition brought by Petitioner PLIVA, Inc.’s sister company, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (No. 16-1364) PLIVA and Teva’s petitions arise out of the same coordinated proceeding pending since 2010 and involving numerous plaintiffs and manufacturers and distributors of name-brand and generic metoclopramide, and now is on the verge of resolution by settlement agreements amongst the parties. As with Teva, the trial court determined twice that PLIVA explicitly consented to personal jurisdiction and waived personal jurisdiction challenges in Real Party’s case based on the lengthy historical record in the case. This Court previously denied certiorari review of these issues in 2016 as to both PLIVA and Teva (No. 15-1209), and the law on consent and waiver has not changed since then. It is not the law in dispute here, but rather the trial court’s determination of the facts.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 Labeled Buildings List Final Feb6 Bystate
    ENERGY STAR® Qualified Buildings and Manufacturing Plants As of December 31, 2007 Building/Plant Name City State Building/Plant Type Alabama Calhoun County Administration Building Anniston AL Courthouse Calhoun County Court House Anniston AL Courthouse 10044 Birmingham AL Office Alabama Operations Center Birmingham AL Office BellSouth City Center Birmingham AL Office Birmingham Homewood TownePlace Suites by Marriott Birmingham AL Hotel/Motel Roberta Plant Calera AL Cement Plant Honda Manufacturing of Alabama, LLC Lincoln AL Auto Assembly Plant Alaska Elmendorf AFB, 3MDG, DoD/VA Joint Venture Hospital Elmendorf Air Force Base AK Hospital Arizona 311QW - Phoenix Chandler Courtyard Chandler AZ Hotel/Motel Bashas' Chandler AZ Supermarket/Grocery Bashas' Food City Chandler AZ Supermarket/Grocery Phoenix Cement Clarkdale AZ Cement Plant Flagstaff Embassy Suites Flagstaff AZ Hotel/Motel Fort Defiance Indian Hospital Fort Defiance AZ Hospital 311K5 - Phoenix Mesa Courtyard Mesa AZ Hotel/Motel 100 North 15th Avenue Building Phoenix AZ Office 1110 West Washington Building Phoenix AZ Office 24th at Camelback Phoenix AZ Office 311JF - Phoenix Camelback Courtyard Phoenix AZ Hotel/Motel 311K3 - Courtyard Phoenix Airport Phoenix AZ Hotel/Motel 311K4 - Phoenix North Courtyard Phoenix AZ Hotel/Motel 3131 East Camelback Phoenix AZ Office 57442 - Phoenix Airport Residence Inn Phoenix AZ Hotel/Motel Arboleda Phoenix AZ Office Bashas' Food City Phoenix AZ Supermarket/Grocery Biltmore Commerce Center Phoenix AZ Office Biltmore Financial Center I Phoenix AZ
    [Show full text]
  • Entertainment Law Directory
    Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 26 Number 2 Article 5 1-1-2006 Entertainment Law Directory Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation , Entertainment Law Directory, 26 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 287 (2006). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol26/iss2/5 This Directory is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENTERTAINMENT LAW DIRECTORY The Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Directory is intended as an information guide to entertainment-oriented law firms and entertainment companies located on the West and East Coasts and in the Midwest. The list was compiled from oral and written information provided to the Review during March 2005. We welcome information from additional firms. There is no charge for placement in this Directory. The Directory is meant to be only a guide. No claims are made regarding the accuracy of the information printed therein. WEST COAST ATTORNEYS AARONSON & AARONSON ................................................... 818-783-3858 16133 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 675 Encino, California 91436 ABRAMS GARFINKEL MARGOLIS BERGSON, LLP ............ 310-300-2900 9229 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 710 Los Angeles, California 90069 AKIN, GUMP, STRAUSS, HAUER & FELD, LLP .................. 310-229-1000 2029 Century Park East, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, California 90067 www.akingump.com ALSCHULER, GROSSMAN, STEIN & KAHAN, LLP .............
    [Show full text]
  • Lpd R9807038 List
    APPENDIX E ************ SERVICE LIST *********** Last Update on 13-FEB-2001 by: LPD R9807038 LIST ************ APPEARANCES ************ Marco Gomez Attorney At Law Peter A. Casciato BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT Attorney At Law 800 MADISON STREET, 5TH FLOOR A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION OAKLAND CA 94607 8 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 701 (510) 464-6058 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111-4825 [email protected] (415) 291-8661 [email protected] Jeffrey F. Beck, J. Bronfman For: Time Warner Connect/NorthPoint Communications, Inc./Central JILLISA BRONFMAN Wireless Partnership Attorney At Law BECK & ACKERMAN Dorothy Connelly FOUR EMBARCADERO CENTER, SUITE 760 Director, Government Relations SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111 AIRTOUCH COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (415) 263-7302 ONE CALIFORNIA STREET, 29TH FLOOR [email protected] SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111 For: Evans/GTE West Coast/Happy (415) 658-2063 Valley/Hornitos/Kerman/Pinnacles/Siskiyou/Volcano/Winterhaven Michele F. Joy Darlene Clark General Counsel Staff Attorney ASSOCIATION OF OIL PIPE LINES CALIFORNIA CABLE TELEVISION ASSN. 1101 VERMONT AVENUE N.W. STE 604 PO BOX 11080 WASHINGTON DC 20005-3521 OAKLAND CA 94611-0080 (202) 408-7970 (510) 428-2225 [email protected] [email protected] For: ASSOCIATION OF OIL PIPE LINES Richard J. Balocco Randolph W. Deutsch President Attorney At Law CALIFORNIA WATER ASSOCIATION AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF CALIFORNIA, INC. 374 W. SANTA CLARA STREET 795 FOLSOM STREET, ROOM 690 SAN JOSE CA 95196 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94107 (408) 279-7860 (415) 442-5560 [email protected] Robert Green Joint Venture & Regulatory Specialist Tom Dukich CHEVRON PIPE LINE COMPANY AVISTA CORP PO BOX 4879 PO BOX 3727 HOUSTON TX 77210-4879 SPOKANE WA 99220-3727 (281) 596-3518 (509) 482-4724 [email protected] [email protected] For: WP Natural Gas Charles E.
    [Show full text]
  • ORDER Granting 577 Letter Motion to Seal. It Is Hereby ORDERED That
    Nypl v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. et al Doc. 597 Case 1:15-cv-09300-LGS Document 597 Filed 07/20/20 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------X : JOHN NYPL, et al., : Plaintiffs, : : 15 Civ. 9300 (LGS) -against- : : ORDER JP MORGAN CHASE & CO., et al., : Defendants. : ------------------------------------------------------------ X LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, on July 10, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a motion to seal the portions of a joint letter (Dkt. No. 577). On July 14, 2020, Defendants filed a letter in support (Dkt. No. 584). It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion to seal is GRANTED. The unredacted version of the joint letter will remain sealed, and only the parties and individuals identified in the attached appendix will have access. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119–20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). Filing the above-referenced document in redacted form is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information. Dated: July 20, 2020 New York, New York Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:15-cv-09300-LGS Document 597 Filed 07/20/20 Page 2 of 4 CORRECTED APPENDIX OF PARTIES AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD Joseph M.
    [Show full text]
  • Entertainment Law Directory
    Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review Volume 18 Number 1 Article 6 9-1-1997 Entertainment Law Directory Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation , Entertainment Law Directory, 18 Loy. L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 165 (1997). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/elr/vol18/iss1/6 This Directory is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENTERTAINMENT LAW DIRECTORY The Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal Directory is intended to be an information guide to entertainment-oriented law firms and entertainment companies located on both the West and East Coasts. The list was compiled from oral and written information provided to the Journal as of October 1997. We welcome information from additional firms. There is no charge for placement in the Directory. This Directory is meant to be only a guide. No claims are made as to the accuracy of the information printed. WEST COAST ATTORNEYS AARONSON & AARONSON ................................................. 818-783-3858 16133 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1080 Encino, California 91436 ADLER, JOHN S., LAW OFFICES OF, A.P.C ...................... 619-455-8055 9255 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121 AGAJANIAN, MCFALL & TOMLINSON ............................. 818-763-6304 10 Universal City Plaza, Suite 1550 Universal City, California 91608-1004 ALIOTO & ALIOTO ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • THIS IS the BEGINNIN UF Tjr
    FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION WAmSUcTO". OC 20,413 THIS ISTHE BEGINNIN UF tJR # IDTE FILMED CAERA NO. *~~ ND DELIVERED May 13, 1988 FEDERL EXPRESS Lawrence M. Noble, Esq. General Counsel Federal Elections commission - 999 E Street, NW* ~ Washington, D.C. 20463 Re: Complaint for Possible Federal Violations by Friends of Dan--Boatwig=h Committee- Dear Mr. Noble: Please consider this a formal complaint for your consideration under Section 111.4 of Volume 11 of the Code of Federal Regulations. our full names and addresses as complainants are set forth at the end of this letter. We are supporters of Reverend Jesse Jackson's candidacy for president and are involved in his campaign to secure delegates in the California presidential primary, June 7, 1988. Senator Daniel E. Boatwright is a candidate for re-election and renomination in the upcoming primary of the same date. We are concerned that Senator Boatwright's activities designed to create the illusion of a "slate" of himself and the Reverend Jackson in connection with the primary election are violative of federal campaign spending limitations and thereby threaten to tarnish Reverend Jackson's California campaign. Let us state at the forefront that Reverend Jackson's formal campaign organization has disavowed Senator Boatwright's activities and we believe that the Jackson campaign is not in any way responsible for these "slate" activities. (See enclosed article from the Saturday, April 9, 1988 issue of the West Contra Costa Times.) In conformance with 11 CFR 111.4(d), we set forth the following: 1. The respondent appearing to have possibly committed violations of Federal campaign spending regulations is the Friends of Dan Boatwright Committee, Michael A.
    [Show full text]
  • F I L E D State of California 10-31-07 04:59 Pm
    BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE F I L E D STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10-31-07 04:59 PM Order Instituting Rulemaking to Implement the ) Commission’s Procurement Incentive Framework ) Rulemaking 06-04-009 and to Examine the Integration of Greenhouse ) (Filed April 13, 2006) Gas Emission Standards Into Procurement ) Policies. ) BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter Of, ) ) Docket 07-OIIP-01 AB 32 Implementation – Greenhouse Gas ) Emissions. ) COMMENTS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) ON QUESTIONS PRESENTED IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING REGARDING COMMENTS AND NOTICE OF WORKSHOPS ON ALLOWANCE ALLOCATION ISSUES MICHAEL D. MONTOYA ANNETTE GILLIAM Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-4880 Facsimile: (626) 302-1935 E-mail: [email protected] Dated: October 31, 2007 LAW #1419833 BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking to Implement the ) Commission’s Procurement Incentive Framework ) Rulemaking 06-04-009 and to Examine the Integration of Greenhouse ) (Filed April 13, 2006) Gas Emission Standards Into Procurement ) Policies. ) BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter Of, ) ) Docket 07-OIIP-01 AB 32 Implementation – Greenhouse Gas ) Emissions. ) COMMENTS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) ON QUESTIONS PRESENTED IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING REGARDING COMMENTS AND NOTICE OF WORKSHOPS ON ALLOWANCE ALLOCATION ISSUES On October 15, 2007, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued the Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling Requesting Comments and Noticing Workshop on Allowance Allocation Issues (Ruling). The Ruling requests comments on issues related to the distribution of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions allowances, which were first discussed at a workshop held jointly by the staffs of the California Energy Commission (CEC) and CPUC (Joint Staff) on June 22, 2007 (Workshop).
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ADVICE LETTER FILING SUMMARY ENERGY UTILITY MUST BE COMPLETED by LSE (Attach Additional Pages As Needed)
    CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ADVICE LETTER FILING SUMMARY ENERGY UTILITY MUST BE COMPLETED BY LSE (Attach additional pages as needed) Company name/CPUC Utility No. Liberty Utilities (CalPeco Electric) LLC Utility type: Contact Person for questions and approval letters: Gregory Campbell_ ELC GAS Phone #: 562-299-5117 PLC HEAT WATER E-mail: [email protected] EXPLANATION OF UTILITY TYPE (Date Filed/ Received Stamp by CPUC) ELC = Electric GAS = Gas PLC = Pipeline HEAT = Heat WATER = Water Advice Letter (AL) #: 89-E Subject of AL: GHG Emission Performance Standard (EPS) filing 2017 Tier Designation: 1 2 3 Keywords (choose from CPUC listing): AL filing type: Monthly Quarterly Annual One-Time Other Does AL replace a withdrawn or rejected AL? If so, identify the prior AL 1 Summarize differences between the AL and the prior withdrawn or rejected AL : Requested effective date: March 15, 2018 No. of tariff sheets: Estimated system annual revenue effect: (%): Estimated system average rate effect (%): When rates are affected by AL, include attachment in AL showing average rate effects on customer classes (residential, small commercial, large C/I, agricultural, lighting). Tariff schedules affected: N/A Service affected and changes proposed1: N/A Pending advice letters that revise the same tariff sheets: N/A Protests and all other correspondence regarding this AL are due no later than 20 days after the date of this filing, unless otherwise authorized by the Commission, and shall be sent to: CPUC, Energy Division Utility Info (including e-mail) Liberty Utilities (CalPeco Electric) LLC Attention: Tariff Unit 505 Van Ness Ave., Attention: Advice Letter Protests San Francisco, CA 94102 933 Eloise Avenue [email protected] South Lake Tahoe, CA 9696150 Email: [email protected] 1 Discuss in AL if more space is needed.
    [Show full text]
  • 02-07-06 Arem Reply Comments on GHG PD
    BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking to Implement the Commission's Procurement Incentive Framework and to Examine the Integration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards into Procurement Policies. COMMENTS OF THE WESTERN POWER TRADING FORUM ON THE JORYT STAFF PROPOSAL FOR REPORTING OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY LOAD-SERVING ENTITIES Clarc Brcidenich Daniel W. Douglass 224 '/z 24thAvenue East Douglass & Liddell Seattle, Washington 98 112 2 1700 Oxnard Street, Suite 1030 Telephone: (206) 829-9 193 Woodland Hills, California 9 1367 Email: clare@wptf org Telephone: (8 18) 961 -3002 GHG Consultant Facsimile: (8 18) 961-3004 Email: rlo~rglri.~.~(atrnc~'g~~u~tornt~~.corn Attorneys for the WESTERNPOWERTRADINGFORUM July 2,2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 II. Comments ............................................................................................................................2 A. Treatment of unspecified power purchases......................................................................... 2 B. Contract-shuffling............................................................................................................... 3 C. Exports ................................................................................................................................4 D. Internalization of the GHG price in dispatch decision.......................................................
    [Show full text]