Discussion
Rule 12.1(d) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure provides that, before approving a settlement, the Commission must determine that the settlement is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with the law, and in the public interest. We find that the Settlement Agreement fully satisfies these requirements and therefore should be approved.
The Settlement Agreement at issue here also includes imposition of a penalty. In determining the appropriate penalty, the parties took into consideration the criteria used by the Commission. Specifically, the parties considered factors previously used by the Commission in setting fines, including but not limited to: (1) severity of the offense, (2) conduct of the utility,3 and (3) Commission precedent in similar cases.
Here, CPSD indicates that it is satisfied that the Settlement Agreement resolves all of the concerns raised in its protest and that adoption of the Settlement Agreement would be in the public interest. We agree. The Settlement Agreement does the following:
1. It shows unequivocal acknowledgement of CPSD's concerns by Applicant, the history of cooperation by Applicant in addressing the issues raised by CPSD during the course of this proceeding, and Applicant's commitment to comply with all regulatory matters going forward;
2. The terms and conditions it imposes upon Applicant allow Applicant to serve California customers. It provides the Commission with necessary assurances that in the future, Applicant will comply with its regulatory obligations. It imposes an $8,000 penalty for the failure to fully disclose information to the Commission during the application process and requires Applicant to file an amended application fully disclosing the FCC violation which preserves the integrity of the application and licensing process of the Commission and provides sufficient deterrence to Applicant (and by example to others similarly situated) from engaging in future violations for which further penalties will be imposed by the Commission; and
3. It saves the Commission the further expense and commitment of resources involved in possible hearings of the questions of the violations set forth in CPSD's protest and the degree of culpability associated with same.
As a result of the Settlement Agreement, the Commission finds that the public will benefit because Applicant has taken measures to rectify a violation of law, and to protect California consumers and the integrity of the Commission's jurisdiction and process. The terms of the Settlement Agreement protect Applicant's customers and members of the public in California by ensuring that Applicant will fully meet its regulatory and legal obligations while allowing Applicant to offer the services contemplated to California consumers. Additionally, the terms of the Settlement Agreement are consistent with other settlement agreements that the Commission has approved based on similar factual situations.
The proposed Settlement Agreement is an all-party settlement as CPSD and Applicant are the only active parties in this proceeding. The settling parties reasonably reflect the affected interests. The Parties have had sufficient opportunity to review and discuss the terms of the Settlement Agreement. All issues raised by the CPSD's protest to the Application have been resolved in the Settlement Agreement. Therefore, the Settlement Agreement is found to be reasonable and in the public interest and should be adopted. Accordingly, we adopt the Settlement Agreement, and Applicant is granted a CPCN consistent with the terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement.
3 Rulemaking to Establish Rules For Enforcement of the Standards of Conduct Governing Relationships Between Energy Utilities and Their Affiliates Adopted By the Commission In Decision 97-12-088, (1998) D.98-12-075 at 71, 1998 Cal. PUC LEXIS 1016.
