Read Legal Information Re: PG&E Does Not Have The Right To Cut Down Trees On Private Property

More confirmation from Concord, CA that PG&E DOES NOT have the right to cut down trees on private property. What happened to Contra Costa County? PI-ZZ-049, along with the history and interpretation of this regulation from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials and Safety Administration. What it says is that local land control is primary with respect to tree removal. The guidance on this regulation is current as of 9-28-2011. PG&E has to follow PHMSA guidance. I don't where the arborist is getting his information, but it is wrong, especially with respect to private property, and the county does have protection outside the coastal zone. PG&E doesn't have a right to override easements. A California Appellate Court decision (Krieger v. Pacifice Gas & Electric Co.,1981) says that. In that appellate decision the court quotes this: The rationale for these restrictive and long-relied upon rules of property law is explained in Felsenthal v. Warring , supra, 40 Cal. App. 119, at page 131: "We know of no principle of law or power in a court of equity to justify or authorize an invasion of the property rights of one private party to serve the convenience or necessities of another private party. Such a principle, if once adopted by judicial tribunals, upon grounds of necessity, would, in its practical operation, result in a system of judicial condemnation of the property of one citizen to answer an assumed necessity or convenience of another citizen, and the sacred right of property, so jealously guarded by courts in all English-speaking countries, would become but a shadowy unsubstantiality. PI-01-0106 The Honorable Arlen Specter United States Senator 600 Arch Street, Suite 9400 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Dear Senator Specter: Thank you for your letter to David Marks, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Congressional Affairs, concerning negotiations between the East Goshen Conservancy Board and the Duke Energy Corporation over Duke Energy's plan to cut trees on its pipeline easement in East Goshen Township. Your letter has been referred to the Research and Special Programs Administration(RSPA) for response. RSPA is responsible for administering the Federal pipeline safety program. As stated in the incoming correspondence, Duke Energy plans to cut down trees to facilitate routine inspection of its easement by aerial patrol. It also wants to remove trees to make it easier for large equipment to gain access to the easement for normal maintenance and emergency response. Pipeline operated by Duke Energy are subject to the safety regulations of the Department of Transportation. These regulations require pipeline operators to patrol to patrol their easements for signs of leaks and construction activity. Although it is not a federal requirement to keep the right-of-way is clear. However, federal regulations do not give operators a right to cut down trees on their pipeline easements. An operator's authority to cut down trees is subject to private agreements with landowners and to any local land use controls. If we can be of further assistance, please contact me or Patricia Klinger, Director of External Communications, at (202) 366-4831. Sincerely yours, Elaine E. Joost Acting Deputy Administrator The above letter was a written response from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, it is a direct quote from the Federal pipeline safety regulations (49 CFR Parts 190-199) and contains legally binding requirements. Interpretation: PI-ZZ-049 Date: 09-22-2000 “Part 192 does not give the right of operators to remove trees along a ROW where landowner agreements and local land use controls may dictate otherwise. Where trees obscure the use of aerial patrols, walking or driving patrols may be employed.” For Santa Cruz county, local land use for trees can be found in Chapter 16.34 SCCC, Significant Trees Protection.