|
|
|
|
Filer Requested Category:
Preliminary Category:
Commission Designated Category:
Ratesetting
|
Filed By:
PUC - UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
|
|
|
DOCUMENTS
Number of Documents: 24
|
Type:
DRAFT DECISION
|
Filing Date:
September 30, 2003
|
Filed By:
ALJ/PATRICK/PUC
|
|
Description:
Closing proceeding. Comments are due by October 20, 2003; reply comments - 5 days after comments are filed.
|
Type:
RULING
|
Filing Date:
June 12, 2003
|
Filed By:
ALJ/PATRICK/PUC
|
|
Description:
regarding schedule for proceeding: UP should file its intentions by July 3, 2003; all parties should respond to UP's letter by July 24, 2003; as set forth.
|
Type:
REPORT
|
Filing Date:
April 17, 2003
|
Filed By:
WATER/LIU/JACKSON/PUC
|
|
Description:
Ratemaking Report on Union Pacific's Keene Water System Including Proposed Rates and a discussion of the rate issues raised in D02-04-017
|
Type:
REHEARING REQUEST
|
Filing Date:
May 8, 2002
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
of D02-04-017
|
Type:
COMMENTS ON ALTERNATE
|
Filing Date:
March 14, 2002
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
on Alternate Order of Commr. Wood
|
Type:
ALTERNATE
|
Filing Date:
March 7, 2002
|
Filed By:
CMMR/WOOD/PUC
|
|
Description:
Alternate Order [Opinion Finding Keene Water System Dedicated to Public Use] mailed 3/7/2002 (Comments are due by 3/14/2002; reply comments due by 3/18/2002)
|
Type:
COMMENTS
|
Filing Date:
January 9, 2002
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Comments on the Proposed Decision
|
Type:
PROPOSED DECISION
|
Filing Date:
December 20, 2001
|
Filed By:
ALJ/DEULLOA/PUC
|
|
Description:
[Opinion finding Keene Water System dedicated to public use] mailed 12/20/2001 (Comments are due by 1/9/2002; reply comments due 5 days after comments are filed. Opening comments shall not exceed 15 pages)
|
Type:
MOTION
|
Filing Date:
July 11, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
for order authorizing suspension of water service pending repairs by Stonybrook Corporation and Steve Cummings
|
Type:
MOTION
|
Filing Date:
July 11, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
for order shortening time for hearing on motion to suspend water service to Steve Cummings and the Stonybrook Corporation
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 20, 2001
|
Filed By:
ORA/FAIRCHILD/PUC
|
|
Description:
reply; to the brief of the Union Pacific Railroad Compan
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 20, 2001
|
Filed By:
BEARD, BRIDGET
|
|
Description:
reply
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 19, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Final Closing Brief
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 14, 2001
|
Filed By:
STONYBROOK CORPORATION
|
|
Description:
post-hearing
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 12, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Closing brief (filing instructed by ALJ DeUlloa)
|
Type:
BRIEF
|
Filing Date:
March 12, 2001
|
Filed By:
ORA/FAIRCHILD/PUC
|
|
Description:
Brief
|
Type:
RESPONSE
|
Filing Date:
February 26, 2001
|
Filed By:
STONYBROOK CORPORATION
|
|
Description:
to Union Pacific Railroad Company's objections to the testimony of the Stonybrrok Corporation and/or Motion to strike said testimony
|
Type:
MOTION
|
Filing Date:
February 20, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
to strike testimony and/or objections to testimony of the Stonybrook Corporation
|
Type:
MISCELLANEOUS FILING
|
Filing Date:
February 7, 2001
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Proposed findings of fact and conclusion of law
|
Type:
MISCELLANEOUS FILING
|
Filing Date:
February 5, 2001
|
Filed By:
ORA/FAIRCHILD/PUC
|
|
Description:
Proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law [pursuant to the direction of the presiding ALJ]
|
Type:
SCOPING RULING
|
Filing Date:
November 16, 2000
|
Filed By:
CMMR/WOOD/PUC
|
|
Description:
Confirms that this is a ratesetting proceeding. Determines that hearings are needed. Sets the following schedule: 11/22/00 - testimony served by ORA, 12/22/00 - testimony served by Union Pacific and Intervenors, 1/26/01 - rebuttal testimony to Union Pacific or Intervenor testimony served, 1/29/01 - PHC and Public Participation Hearing, 2/13/01 - Evidentiary Hearing. Designates ALJ DeUlloa as the principal hearing officer. (INTERNET Users: Click on "SCOPING RULING" for the full text.)
|
Type:
RESPONSE
|
Filing Date:
June 19, 2000
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Response to the Order of the PUC re: Regulation and Jurisdiction of the Commission over the Keene Water System.
|
Type:
COMMISSION INVESTIGATION
|
Filing Date:
May 18, 2000
|
Filed By:
PUC - UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
|
|
Description:
Order Instituting Investigation into the status, rates, rules, operations, service, facilities, equipment, contracts and practices of Union Pacific Railroad Company in the supply and distribution of water in the communities of Keene and Woodford in Kern County
|
Type:
PRIMARY PARTICIPANT
|
Filing Date:
May 18, 2000
|
Filed By:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
|
|
Description:
Respondent
|
DECISIONS
Number of Decisions: 3
|
Decision Number:
D0310073
|
Rendered Date:
October 30, 2003
Effective Date:
October 30, 2003
|
|
Description:
Closes this Investigation and requires Union Pacific Railroad Company to file an application for a rate increase for its Keene Water System. This proceeding is closed.
|
Decision Number:
D0208075
|
Rendered Date:
August 22, 2002
Effective Date:
August 22, 2002
|
|
Description:
Denies Union Pacific's application for rehearing of D02-04-017.
|
Decision Number:
D0204017
|
Rendered Date:
April 4, 2002
Effective Date:
April 4, 2002
|
|
Description:
Addresses the issue of whether the Keene Water System operated by Union Pacific Railroad Company has been dedicated to public use for the benefit of the communities of Keene and Woodford in Kern County. The decision finds that dedication has occurred and that the Keene Water System is a public utility system subject to Commission jurisdiction pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 2701. The determination of rates shall be addressed in a subsequent decision in this proceeding.
|