City of Santa Rosa, California - Page 18

                                        - 18 -                                         
               First, we cannot agree that Company’s arrangement to receive            
          and to dispose of wastewater represents a private business use of            
          the financed pipeline.  It is respondent’s position in the                   
          context of the output facility regulations that the pipeline’s               
          purpose is the disposal of wastewater, that it is an integral                
          part of petitioner’s sewage facilities, and that it is not a                 
          facility which distributes water.  Indeed, in respondent’s reply             
          brief at 32, he states that “the Contract with the Company is not            
          an arrangement for the purchase of output, but rather was entered            
          for the purpose of disposing of the Wastewater.”  Also, in his               
          reply brief at 35 n.12, he states that “Rather than meeting the              
          definition of an output facility, the Pipeline Project may meet              
          the definition of a sewage facility [in section 142(a)(5) and                
          section 1.142(a)(5)-1(a)(iv), Income Tax Regs.] in that it is                
          property used for the collection, storage, use, processing, or               
          final disposal of wastewater.”  If the purpose of the pipeline is            
          waste removal and if it is a sewage facility that is used for the            
          disposal of wastewater, Company’s use of the wastewater would                
          begin after the pipeline’s sewage disposal purpose was completed.            
               The only use involved in Company’s arrangement with                     
          petitioner is the use of a set amount of wastewater from the                 
          pipeline.  However, the wastewater is not financed property, and             
          respondent agrees that the wastewater is merely a waste byproduct            
          of petitioner’s sewage facilities.  Company’s use of the                     






Page:  Previous  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011