3. Procedural History
Notice of these two applications appeared in the Commission's Daily Calendar on April 8, 2009. The Commission preliminarily categorized them as ratesetting in Resolution ALJ 176-3232, dated April 16, 2009. The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) protested both applications. The Utility Reform Network (TURN) filed a protest to SCE/SDG&E's application and a response to PG&E's application. The Merced Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District filed a joint response to PG&E's application, but did not otherwise participate.
The proceedings were consolidated in the Scoping Memo and Ruling issued June 15, 2009 and expanded to include an examination of the management of the decommissioning trust funds maintained by each utility. The utilities were also ordered to serve Supplemental Testimony to 1) describe their compliance with certain requirements from the prior Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Triennial Proceeding (NDCTP) (Ordering Paragraphs 6-8 of D.07-01-003), and 2) provide information about investment fund managers hired by the nuclear decommissioning trust funds, performance of the investment funds, management costs, and efforts to develop emerging investment fund managers. On July 30, 2009, the Commission adopted Resolution E-4258 which referred to these proceedings consideration of a modified procedure sought by PG&E3 for reviewing and determining the reasonableness of its expenditures for decommissioning the Humboldt Bay Powerplant 3 (HB3). A subsequent ruling by Administrative Law Judge Darling (ALJ) clarified the expanded scope of the proceedings and divided them into two phases. Phase 1 would consider the usual issues for an NDCTP and include the issue of whether to modify the Commission's reasonableness review of decommissioning expenditures. The utilities were directed to file a brief discussing the reasonableness review issue and other parties were permitted to file reply briefs. The issues regarding trust fund management were deferred to Phase 2.
The utilities filed a joint brief in which they presented the reasonableness review proposal as applicable to all phases of decommissioning for SONGS Units 1, 2, and 3 and HB3. Customer-intervenor Scott Fielder (Fielder) filed a brief in opposition to any changes to the current review process. All parties served timely rebuttal and other supplemental testimony as allowed or required by the ALJ. Five days of evidentiary hearings were held from October 13 through October 19, 2009, including a portion reserved for oral argument on the reasonableness review issue which was attended by assigned Commissioner Timothy Alan Simon. At the conclusion of the evidentiary hearings, the underlying testimony of witnesses in this phase of the proceedings was received into evidence without objection. A list of all Exhibits admitted into the record is attached hereto as Appendix A.
Upon notice of a pending Settlement Agreement among some or all of the parties, the ALJ extended the deadlines for filing post-hearing briefs. On December 18, 2009, the utilities and TURN filed a Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement which purported to resolve all issues in Phase 1. Both DRA and Fielder filed Opposition to the Motion. A hearing on the Motion and terms of the proposed Settlement Agreement was held on April 5, 2010. The Settling Parties filed an opening post-hearing brief on April 16, 2010 and non-settling parties filed reply briefs on April 26, 2010.
Accordingly, the basis for adjudicating issues in this phase of the proceedings consists of (1) the evidence developed through written testimony and oral cross-examination on the underlying merits of issues in dispute, (2) the Settlement Agreement which represents a negotiated compromise of certain parties and the written comments filed in response to this agreement, and (3) the evidence developed through testimony and oral cross-examination at the hearing on Settlement and post-hearing written briefs.
3 On March 27, 2009, PG&E filed Advice Letter 3444-E in which it provided notice of its intent to begin decommissioning of HB3, requested general authorization for interim trust fund disbursements, and sought approval of a procedure whereby its decommissioning costs would be presumed reasonable if within the scope and amount approved in the 2009 NDCTP cost estimates for HB3.
