1. Background
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) submitted its 2010 revenue requirement determination to the Commission on August 6, 2009. This submission consisted of the August 6, 2009 "Determination of Revenue Requirements for the Period January 1, 2010 Through December 31, 2010," the August 6, 2009 "Notice of Determination of Revenue Requirements," and an August 6, 2009 memorandum from Timothy J. Haines of DWR to President Peevey of the Commission. The memorandum notified the Commission of DWR's 2010 revenue requirement determination, and requested "that the Commission calculate, revise and impose Bond Charges in accordance with Article V of the Rate Agreement..." and "that the Commission calculate, revise and impose Power Charges in accordance with Article VI of the Rate Agreement...."2
On September 9, 2009, the Commission held a prehearing conference (PHC) to discuss the processing of DWR's 2010 revenue requirement determination. At the PHC, DWR informed the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), as explained in DWR's 2010 revenue requirement determination, that it was planning to submit a revised 2010 revenue requirement determination to the Commission about October 27, 2009.
DWR initiated its revision of the 2010 revenue requirement by issuing a "Proposed Revision to the Determination of Revenue Requirements" on October 15, 2009. The deadline for submitting comments with DWR through its administrative process was October 22, 2009. DWR did not receive any comments on its proposed revision, and DWR found the revised 2010 revenue requirement to be just and reasonable.
On October 27, 2009, DWR submitted its revised 2010 revenue requirement determination to the Commission. This submission consists of the October 27, 2009 "Revision to the Determination of Revenue Requirements for the Period January 1, 2010 Through December 31, 2010," and the October 27, 2010 "Notice of 2010 Revised Revenue Requirement Determination."
At the September 9, 2009 PHC, the ALJ announced the procedure for the filing of a protest or objection to the allocation of the revised 2010 revenue requirement determination. That procedure was also set forth in the September 28, 2009 scoping memo and ruling (scoping memo). In accordance with this procedure, protests or objections were to be filed within three days of DWR's submission of the revised 2010 revenue requirement determination to the Commission. Shortly after DWR submitted and served its revised determination, the ALJ reminded the service list by e-mail of this procedure and directed that any protest or objection to the allocation of the revised 2010 revenue requirement determination be filed by October 30, 2009.
No protests or objections to the revised 2010 revenue requirement determination were filed. Since no one protested or objected to the revised 2010 revenue requirement determination, we conclude that there are no contested issues concerning DWR's request to allocate its revised determination.
In accordance with the procedure set forth at the September 9, 2009 PHC, and as explained in the scoping memo, the ALJ then prepared the proposed decision.
2 The terms "Bond Charge" and "Power Charges" are defined in Article I of the Rate Agreement that was adopted in Decision (D.) 02-02-051.
