11. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Pub. Util. Code § 311(d) and Rule 77.1 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure.

On August 8, 2005 SDG&E and UCAN filed timely comments on the ALJ's proposed decision and Commissioner Kennedy's alternate.

SDG&E recommended adoption of Commissioner Kennedy's alternate, with some corrections, and opposed the ALJ's proposed decision in its entirety. To the extent SDG&E's comments reargued positions taken in briefs they were accorded no weight. SDG&E did correctly identify the need to modify the amortization period, due to the delay in issuing this decision, and that change has been made. Additionally, the intention of the ALJ's proposed decision was to correctly reflect the final data including all exhibit errata and those changes have been made. Finally, SDG&E proposed greater specificity for the ordering paragraphs to authorize and implement rate recovery and those changes have been made.

UCAN recommended adoption of the ALJ's proposed decision and opposed Commissioner Kennedy's alternate in its entirety. UCAN proposed one correction to the ALJ's proposed decision: to re-characterize ORA's position as a settlement with SDG&E. ORA and SDG&E did not settle within the meaning of Rule 51 and this change is not appropriate. ORA's participation and recommendations have been correctly included herein.