4. Joint Comparison Exhibit
At the August 23, 2007 PHC, the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ordered all active parties to participate in settlement discussions subsequent to the tendering of interested parties' testimony and prior to the start of an evidentiary hearing.2 ALJ Dorothy Duda was assigned as a neutral ALJ to mediate settlement discussions prior to the December 4, 2007 evidentiary hearing.
The parties reported at the beginning of the evidentiary hearing that the mediation process resulted in significant progress on settlement of many of the contested issues between the parties and that the parties would continue to discuss settlement throughout the evidentiary hearing. The parties also reported that they were working on a document that identified settled issues and a comparison table that identified the remaining revenue requirement difference between SGV and the DRA.
Late-filed Exhibit 38 was reserved for a joint SGV and DRA exhibit to be received subsequent to the evidentiary hearing and prior to opening briefs. Exhibit 38 (1) identified and explained settled LA and General Division issues, and (2) provided a comparative test year July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009 (test year 2008 or test year) results of operation schedule that showed differences between SGV and DRA prior to and subsequent to a partial settlement. Exhibit 38 was received into evidence on December 27, 2007 and included Attachment A to the partial settlement agreement, which has been renamed as Appendix A to this decision.
2 Active parties consisted of SGV, the DRA, City of Fontana (City), and Fontana Unified School District (FUSCD). The City and FUSCD restricted their participation in this proceeding to new office buildings being proposed in El Monte and Fontana.
