Is there a difference between a special allegation and a substantive charge in a firearm possession case?

^5. In fact, the subdivision (b)(6) allegation was pleaded as part of the substantive crime and not as a separate special allegation. Specifically, it was alleged in count one "that the firearm and unexpended ammunition were in the immediate possession of, and readily accessible to[] the defendant and that the firearm was not registered to the defendant." A separate special allegation was pleaded. That is, that appellant "was not the registered owner of the firearm . . . within the meaning of Penal Code Section 12025 (B)(6)." This special allegation is nonsensical because a (b)(6) allegation requires two parts. A former section 12025, subdivision (b)(6) allegation provided that the offense is a "wobbler" if the defendant is not listed with the Department of Justice as the registered owner of the firearm and either the firearm is loaded or both the firearm and unexpended ammunition are in the immediate possession of, or readily accessible to, the defendant. (Former 12025, subd. (b)(6).) Under these circumstances, it can be punished as either a felony or a misdemeanor. (People v. Hall (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 380, 385.)