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 

XAVIER BECERRA, SBN 118517

Attorney General of California 

MARGARITA PADILLA, SBN 99966 

Supervising Deputy Attorney General 

JAMES POTTER, SBN 166992 

Deputy Attorney General 

1515 Clay Street, 20th Floor 

P.O. Box 70550 

Oakland, CA 94612-0550 

Telephone: (510) 879-0815 

Fax: (510) 622-2270 

Margarita.Padilla@doj.ca.gov 

James.Potter@doj.ca.gov 

STEVEN H. FELDERSTEIN, SBN 059678 

PAUL J. PASCUZZI, SBN 148810 

FELDERSTEIN FITZGERALD 

WILLOUGHBY & PASCUZZI LLP 

400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1750 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Telephone: (916) 329-7400 

Fax: (916) 329-7435 

sfelderstein@ffwplaw.com 

ppascuzzi@ffwplaw.com 

Attorneys for California Department of Toxic 

Substances Control, et al. 

XAVIER BECERRA, SBN 118517

Attorney General of California 

DANETTE VALDEZ, SBN 141780 

ANNADEL ALMENDRAS, SBN 

192064 

Supervising Deputy Attorneys General 

455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 

San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 

Telephone: (415) 510-3367 

Fax: (415) 703-5480 

Danette.Valdez@doj.ca.gov 

Annadel.Almendras@doj.ca.gov 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION 

- and – 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY, 

Debtors.

Bankruptcy Case

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

Chapter 11 

(Lead Case) 

(Jointly Administered) 

 Affects PG&E Corporation 

 Affects Pacific Gas and 

Electric Company 

 Affects both Debtors 

Date: June 26, 2109 

Time: 9:30 a.m. 

Ctrm: 17 

Judge: Dennis Montali 

CONDITIONAL OBJECTION OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES TO MOTION 

OF THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF TORT CLAIMANTS PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. 

§§ 105(a), 501 AND FED. R. BANKR. P. 3001(a), 3003(c), 5005 AND 9007 FOR ENTRY OF 

AN ORDER (I) ESTABLISHING A BAR DATE FOR FILING FIRE CLAIMS, 

(II) APPROVING THE FORM AND PROCEDURES FOR NOTICE OF THE BAR DATE 

FOR FIRE CLAIMS, AND (III) APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEDURES FOR 

NOTICE OF THE BAR DATE TO FIRE CLAIMANTS [DOCKET NO. 2297]

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 1 of

8
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 

-1- 

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control, California Department of Water 

Resources acting by and though the California Energy Resources Scheduling Division and on 

behalf of the State Water Project, State Water Resources Control Board, Regional Water Quality 

Control Boards, State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, California 

Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), California Coastal Commission, 

California Air Resources Board, Department of Parks and Recreation, San Francisco Bay 

Conservation and Development Commission, Department of Housing and Community 

Development, Central Valley Flood Protection Board, Department of Conservation including the 

Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, State Coastal Conservancy, California 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, and California Natural Resources Agency (collectively, the 

“California State Agencies”) hereby file this conditional objection to the Motion of the Official 

Committee of Tort Claimants (“TCC”) for an order (i) establishing deadline for filing fire proofs 

of claim, (ii) approving the form and procedures for notice thereof, and (iii) approving 

supplemental procedures for providing notice of bar date to fire claimants (the “TCC Motion”) 

[Docket No. 2297] based on the following: 

1. The TCC and the Debtors have dueling motions regarding the form of proofs of 

claim to be filed in the Debtors’ Chapter 11 Cases as well as the timing and notice of the bar date 

for filing such claims.1

 Both motions are set for hearing at the same time and include similar 

requests to which the California State Agencies object (“Objections”). 

2. The California State Agencies have met and conferred with counsel for both the 

TCC and the Debtors to address the Objections. The main Objection remaining with respect to 

the Debtors’ motion is what constitutes a pre-petition wildfire claim for which a proof of claim 

needs to be filed. The California State Agencies filed a limited objection to the Debtors’ motion 

on May 31, 2019 (“Limited Objection”) [Docket No. 2307]. 

3. As described below, the California State Agencies have resolved the Objections 

with the TCC, subject to review and approval of the final order submitted on the Motion. The 

 

1

 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meanings given to 

them in the Motion. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 2 of

8
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 

-2- 

TCC has circulated a revised proposed order, which the California State Agencies are reviewing 

at this time. The revised proposed order addresses many of the common issues to both the TCC 

and Debtors proposed orders. Further, the TCC has agreed to carve out from operation of the 

TCC Motion governmental units of the State of California. This means governmental units of the 

State of California will file their claims using the standard proof of claim form and subject to the 

typical proof of claim filing requirements. The California State Agencies have proposed similar 

treatment to the Debtors, but no agreement has been reached. To the extent that the California 

State Agencies are not excluded from the order on the TCC Motion and the issues are not 

resolved by the proposed order circulated, the California State Agencies submit this conditional 

objection to the TCC Motion. 

Potentially Resolved Issues, Subject to Review and Agreement on Revised Proposed Order 

4. As described in more detail in paragraph 4 of the Limited Objection, the California 

State Agencies believe that the proposed order should be clear that California residents, 

businesses, and governmental units, including but not limited to cities, counties and state entities, 

do not need to file proofs of claim based on post-petition fires for which the Debtors may be 

liable. If the TCC disagrees and intends to take such a position, the TCC’s proposed notice is 

wholly insufficient to provide the notice that would satisfy the requirement of due process for a 

claims bar date. The California State Agencies are reviewing the TCC’s revised proposed order, 

but this issue appears to be resolved. 

5. The California State Agencies have requested that the TCC make clear in the 

proposed order that the word claim refers to “claim” as defined in 11 U.S.C. §101(5), which the 

California State Agencies also has requested of the Debtors and are informed and believe the 

Debtors have agreed to do. The order on the TCC Motion does not clearly define Fire Claims or 

Fire Claimants. The TCC should use the definition from its motion to approve the form of proof 

of claim at Docket No. 1825, at page 2, lines 4-15, but add that the word claim refers to “claim” 

as defined in section 101(5). See Exhibit A hereto for requested language to address this issue. 

The California State Agencies are reviewing the TCC’s revised proposed order, but this issue 

appears to be resolved. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 3 of

8
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 

-3- 

6. As described in paragraph 13 of the Limited Objection, due to the often vague and 

ambiguous description of claims with respect to agencies of the State of California in the Debtors’ 

schedules, the California State Agencies request the following underlined language be added to 

paragraph 3(g) of the proposed order, which addresses notice to creditors when the Debtors’ 

amend their schedules: 

In the event that the Debtors amend or supplement their Schedules 

subsequent to the date of entry of this Order, the Debtors shall give notice of any 

amendment or supplement to the holders of claims or interests affected thereby 

and reasonably sufficient information for such claimants to determine the identity 

of the claimant and the nature of the amendment or supplement, and such holders 

shall have until the later of (i) the Fire Claim Bar Date and (ii) thirty (30) days 

from the date of such notice to file a Fire Proof of Claim or be barred from doing 

so and shall be given notice of such deadline. 

The TCC’s revised proposed order resolves this issue. 

7. As described in more detail in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Limited Objection, the 

California State Agencies object to the language in the proposed order that purports to bar, estop 

or enjoin claimants from asserting claims if they fail to comply with the order. The California 

State Agencies are informed and believe that the TCC has agreed to delete the offending language 

in a paragraph 5(i). Subject to review and approval of the revised proposed order, this issue 

appears to be resolved. 

8. The California State Agencies also note that the term “Fire Claim” used in the 

Motion is unclear. The Fire Claim Form says the form is for “tort claimants.” Neither the order 

nor the Motion define “Fire Claim,” but it appears the definition is in the prior TCC motion to 

approve the proof of claim form. See Dkt. No. 1825 at 2:25-27. Either way, the term is 

extremely broad and appears to include claims from wildfires that are not tort claims. As 

described in more detail in paragraph 7 of the Limited Objection, not all claims that arise from a 

wildfire are tort claims and the California State Agencies reserve all rights as to treatment of nontort, statutory based wildfire claims in a future chapter 11 plan. To the extent that the California 

State Agencies are not excluded from the order granting the TCC Motion, the California State 

Agencies non-tort wildfire claims should not be required to be filed on the same forms and 

provided the same treatment as tort claims. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 4 of

8
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 

-4- 

9. As described in more detail in paragraphs 9 through 11 of the Limited Objection, 

the California State Agencies are concerned that the failure to use a specific proof of claim form 

could result in drastic consequences, including disenfranchising creditors for purposes of voting 

and distribution if the claim is not filed on the “appropriate form.” Order ¶ 5(ii). The California 

State Agencies are informed and believe that the TCC has agreed to add the following paragraph 

to the proposed order: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, claimants that make a 

good faith effort to assert a claim in the appropriate form shall be permitted to revise, amend 

and/or supplement their proof of claim until such claim is allowed or disallowed by Court order.” 

With this language included in the revised proposed order, this issue appears to be resolved. 

10. The TCC also requests that any documentation submitted with the Fire Proof of 

Claim Form be kept confidential. See Order ¶ 4. The California State Agencies are informed and 

believe that the TCC has agreed to delete paragraph 4. Subject to review and approval of the 

revised proposed order, this issue appears to be resolved. 

11. As described in paragraph 4 of the Limited Objection, the California State 

Agencies have requested additional language in paragraph 11 of the proposed order addressing 

reservations of rights to challenge the designation of matters as executory contracts in the 

Debtors’ schedules. The TCC has agreed to add language to the proposed order to address this 

issue. Subject to review and approval of the revised proposed order, this issue appears to be 

resolved. 

12. Neither this conditional objection nor any subsequent appearance, pleading, proof 

of claim, claim or suit is intended or shall be deemed or construed as: 

a. a consent by the California State Agencies to the jurisdiction of this Court 

or any other court with respect to proceedings, if any, commenced in any case against or 

otherwise involving the California State Agencies; 

b. a waiver of any right of the California State Agencies to (i) have an 

Article III judge adjudicate in the first instance any case, proceeding, matter or controversy as to 

which a Bankruptcy Judge may not enter a final order or judgement consistent with Article III of 

the United States Constitution, (ii) have final orders in non-core matters entered only after de 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 5 of

8
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 

-5- 

novo review by a District Court Judge, (iii) trial by jury in any proceeding so triable in the 

Chapter 11 Cases or in any case, controversy, or proceeding related to the Chapter 11 Cases, 

(iv) have the United States District Court withdraw the reference in any matter subject to 

mandatory or discretionary withdrawal, or (v) any and all rights, claims, actions, defenses, setoffs, 

recoupments or remedies to which the California State Agencies are or may be entitled under 

agreements, in law or in equity, all of which rights, claims, actions, defenses, setoffs and 

recoupments are expressly reserved hereby; or 

c. a waiver of any objections or defenses that the State of California, the 

California State Agencies or any other agency, unit or entity of the State of California may have 

to this Court’s jurisdiction over the State of California, the California State Agencies or such 

other agency, unit or entity based upon the Eleventh Amendment to the United States 

Constitution or related principles of sovereign immunity or otherwise, all of which objections and 

defenses are hereby reserved. 

Dated: June 19, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 

XAVIER BECERRA 

Attorney General of California 

MARGARITA PADILLA 

Supervising Deputy Attorney General 

By:/s/ Paul J. Pascuzzi____________________________ STEVEN H. FELDERSTEIN 

PAUL J. PASCUZZI 

FELDERSTEIN FITZGERALD 

WILLOUGHBY & PASCUZZI LLP 

Attorneys for California Department of Toxic 

Substances Control, California Department of Water 

Resources acting by and though the California Energy 

Resources Scheduling Division and on behalf of the 

State Water Project, State Water Resources Control 

Board, Regional Water Quality Control Boards, State 

Energy Resources Conservation and Development 

Commission, California Department of Forestry and 

Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), California Coastal 

Commission, California Air Resources Board, 

Department of Parks and Recreation, San Francisco Bay 

Conservation and Development Commission, 

Department of Housing and Community Development, 

Central Valley Flood Protection Board, Department of 

Conservation including the Division of Oil, Gas, and 

Geothermal Resources, State Coastal Conservancy, 

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and 

California Natural Resources Agency 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 6 of

8
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 

-6- 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

I, Lori N. Lasley, declare: 

I am a resident of the State of California and over the age of eighteen years, and not a 

party to the within action; my business address is 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1750, Sacramento, CA 

95814. On June 19, 2019, I served the within documents: 

CONDITIONAL OBJECTION OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES TO 

MOTION OF THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF TORT CLAIMANTS 

PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. §§ 105(a), 501 AND FED. R. BANKR. P. 3001(a), 

3003(c), 5005 AND 9007 FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) ESTABLISHING A 

BAR DATE FOR FILING FIRE CLAIMS, (II) APPROVING THE FORM AND 

PROCEDURES FOR NOTICE OF THE BAR DATE FOR FIRE CLAIMS, AND 

(III) APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEDURES FOR NOTICE OF THE 

BAR DATE TO FIRE CLAIMANTS [DOCKET NO. 2297] 

By Electronic Service only via CM/ECF. 

/s/ Lori N. Lasley

Lori N. Lasley 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 7 of

8
EXHIBIT A 

Fire Claims are claims as defined in 11 U.S.C. §101(5) based on fires that occurred over a 

three-year period, including but not limited to the following: the November 2018 Camp Fire, the 

October 2017 Atlas Fire, the October 2017 Adobe Fire, the October 2017 Bear Fire, the October 

2017 Blue Fire, the October 2017 Cascade Fire, the October 2017 Cherokee Fire, the October 2017 

Honey Fire, the October 2017 La Porte Fire, the October 2017 Lobo Fire, the October 2017 

McCourtney Fire, Norrbom Fire, the October 2017 Nuns Fire, the October 2017 Oakmont Fire, 

the October 2017 Partrick Fire, the October 2017 Pocket Fire, the October 2017 Point Fire, the 

October 2017 Potter Fire, the October 2017 Pythian Fire, the October 2017 Redwood Fire, the 

October 2017 Sulphur Fire, the October 2017 Sullivan Fire, the October 2017 Tubbs Fire, the 

October 2017 37 Fire, the December 2016 Ghost Ship Fire, the September 2015 Butte Fire, and 

other fires that occurred in California prior to the Petition Date. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2627 Filed: 06/19/19 Entered: 06/19/19 13:37:22 Page 8 of

8