Procedural Background

Fisch filed this complaint on March 9, 2000. Garrapata filed a timely answer on May 8 and both parties appeared at a prehearing conference on June 16. On June 21, Commissioner Henry M. Duque, the assigned Commissioner, issued a scoping memo as required by Pub. Util. Code § 1702.1. The scoping memo identified issues for hearing, set a procedural schedule, and designated Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Vieth the presiding officer for this case.¹

Evidentiary hearing occurred in Monterey on September 20 and a briefing schedule, later revised in part, was set that day. Fisch timely filed an opening brief on November 3. Garrapata's brief, served on complainant by mail November 1 and faxed to the ALJ that morning, was not received at the Commission until November 6; at the ALJ's direction, the brief has been accepted for filing. Upon the filing of concurrent reply briefs on November 17, the case was submitted for decision.

By ruling on December 4, the ALJ set aside submission and requested the Commission's Water Division to direct a staff engineer to inspect the meter box on Fisch's property in the company of representatives of both parties and to submit a report, with copies to the parties. Neither party objected to evidentiary use of the report or requested additional proceedings. By ruling on January 10, 2001, the ALJ received the report in evidence and resubmitted this case.