STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
505 VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298
September 9, 2003 Agenda ID #2708
TO: PARTIES OF RECORD IN APPLICATION 01-03-026
This is the proposed decision of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) O'Donnell, previously designated as the principal hearing officer in this proceeding. It will not appear on the Commission's agenda for at least 30 days after the date it is mailed. This matter was categorized as ratesetting and is subject to Pub. Util. Code § 1701.3(c). Pursuant to Resolution ALJ-180 a Ratesetting Deliberative Meeting to consider this matter may be held upon the request of any Commissioner. If that occurs, the Commission will prepare and mail an agenda for the Ratesetting Deliberative Meeting 10 days before hand, and will advise the parties of this fact, and of the related ex parte communications prohibition period.
The Commission may act at the regular meeting, or it may postpone action until later. If action is postponed, the Commission will announce whether and when there will be a further prohibition on communications.
When the Commission acts on the proposed decision, it may adopt all or part of it as written, amend or modify it, or set it aside and prepare its own decision. Only when the Commission acts does the decision become binding on the parties.
Parties to the proceeding may file comments on the proposed decision as provided in Article 19 of the Commission's "Rules of Practice and Procedure." These rules are accessible on the Commission's website at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov. Pursuant to Rule 77.3 opening comments shall not exceed 15 pages. Finally, comments must be served separately on the ALJ and the assigned Commissioner, and for that purpose I suggest hand delivery, overnight mail, or other expeditious method of service.
/s/ ANGELA K. MINKIN
Angela K. Minkin, Chief
Administrative Law Judge
ANG:tcg
ALJ/JPO/tcg DRAFT Agenda ID #2708
Ratesetting
Decision PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJ O'DONNELL (Mailed 9/9/2003)
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application of PacifiCorp (U-901-E) for an Order Authorizing an Immediate Interim Rate Increase, Subject to Refund and for Consideration of a Rate Stabilization Plan. |
Application 01-03-026 (Filed March 16, 2001) |
James C. Paine and James Van Ostrand, Attorneys at Law, for PacifiCorp, applicant.
Gregory Heiden, Attorney at Law, for the Office of Ratepayer Advocates; S. Bradley Van Cleve, Attorney at Law, for Roseburg Forrest Products; Karen Norene Mills, Attorney at Law, for the California Farm Bureau Federation, and Mary Francis Mc Hugh, Deputy Siskiyou County Counsel, for Siskiyou County; interested parties.
DECISION ADOPTING SETTLEMENTS
I. Summary
By this decision, we adopt an unopposed settlement of the revenue requirement for PacifiCorp for a 2002/2003 test year.1 In addition, we adopt an all-party settlement of the revenue allocation and rate design2. The result is an overall revenue requirement increase of $2.8 million over the revenues generated by the present rates (current revenues), as opposed to PacifiCorp's requested increase of $11.4 million.
1 July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003. 2 Technically, these are stipulations because they each resolve part of the proceeding, rather than the entire proceeding. However, the requirements for approval are no different for stipulations, and the parties call them settlements in their filings. Therefore, we will call them settlements.
