6. Proposals to Modify the FAR System

As discussed below, the active parties in this proceeding offered a package of unanimous, uncontested joint recommendations (referred to as the "JRO") resolving all operational issues and one rate issue identified in the Scoping Memo.¹⁵ According to the Joint Parties on Operational Recommendations, the JRO recognizes that certain aspects of the FAR system can be improved and proposes several modifications to the FAR system intended to improve FAR certainty and promote operational and administrative efficiency.

Also, as discussed below, SDG&E/SoCalGas, DRA, TURN, CMTA, SCGC, and RES (collectively, Joint Parties on Rate Recommendations) jointly recommend a revenue requirement and rate design proposals (referred to as the "JRR") to address the remaining issues identified in the Scoping Memo.¹⁶ Unlike the JRO, certain parties (CCC, IP, and Watson) oppose some of the JRR's recommendations.

The sponsoring parties presented the JRO and JRR immediately prior to the start of evidentiary hearings. The JRO and the JRR were not filed as formal settlements. Instead, they were submitted as sponsored exhibits as permitted by Rule 12.7.¹⁷ However, as discussed below, the recommendations comply with Rule 12.1 in all other respects.

We first address the JRO's name change recommendations (Sections 7 and 8) in order to make the remainder of the decision easier to follow. We then address the JRR's rate recommendations in Section 9, followed by the JRO's operational recommendations in Sections 10 through 19.¹⁸

¹⁵ The JRO is identified as Exhibit No. JRO-1, and is included with this decision as Attachment 1. The JRO is sponsored by SDG&E/SoCalGas, DRA, TURN, SCE, SCGC, Shell, Long Beach, Southwest Gas, IP/Watson, and RES (collectively, Joint Parties on Operational Recommendations).

¹⁶ The JRR is identified as Exhibit No. JRR-1, and is included with this decision as Attachment 2.

¹⁷ All references to "Rules" are to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure unless otherwise indicated.

¹⁸ However, the JRO recommendation for an in-kind fuel charge is addressed in Section 9.2.4 with other rate recommendations.