7. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of the Administrative Law Judge (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.

Comments were filed by all of the parties. Breuer contends, without specific citation to the record, that the proposed decision fails to address Breuer's legal arguments and misstates the facts presented at hearing. On the contrary, the proposed decision addresses Breuer's arguments at some length and explains why those arguments fail in the face of applicant's evidence and the analyses presented by the Commission's Water Division. (See pp. 6-10.) As to the facts of the case, Breuer elected at hearing to present no fact witnesses and argued that the issues before the Commission were solely issues of law and tariff interpretation. To the extent Breuer simply reargues positions taken in its briefs, the comments are given no weight, pursuant to Rule 77.3 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure.

We have made one change to the text of the proposed decision in response to Breuer's comments. The ALJ stated that "all parties agree" that replacing an interruptible supply of water with a reliable system of extracting Lake Oroville water is desirable. Breuer comments that it did not agree with that assertion, although it does not dispute the desirability of an alternative water source. The text has been changed to more accurately reflect Breuer's position.

Counsel for protestants Lane, Kasza and Jacobs has filed comments criticizing the proposed decision as a denial of due process, but the claim is unsupported by any citation to legal authority and without specific reference to any facts in the record. Counsel attacks the integrity of the applicant, Commission staff witnesses, the Commissioners, the ALJ, the Water Division, and the ORA. Under the Commission's rules, counsel's intemperate and rude assertions are accorded no weight and should not have been filed. (Rule 77.3.) We note that counsel for protestants Lane, Kasza and Jacobs declined to present evidence at hearing and failed to submit briefs at the close of hearing.

Findings of Fact

1. Pursuant to Tariff Rule 15.A.8., Del Oro seeks a Commission ruling on the validity of a main extension agreement that the utility required for new connections beginning in January 1991.

2. The application has been protested by parties who are suing Del Oro in Superior Court challenging the main extension agreement on a number of grounds.

3. Del Oro acquired the water system in 1990 from the Lime Saddle Community Services District.

4. Del Oro's Lime Saddle District in 1990 served 259 customers in the community of Paradise in Butte County.

5. Because the district's five wells are inadequate to serve all customers, the district purchases water from the Stirling Bluffs Corporation and wheels it through the Paradise Irrigation District.

6. Stirling Bluffs and the irrigation district can terminate the purchased water agreement on five years' notice, and they can refuse to supply water if the needs of their own customers so require.

7. Because the source of water is interruptible, DHS has limited the number of additional connections that Lime Saddle can serve to 181.

8. To replace this interruptible source of water, Del Oro engineers designed an intertie project to take water from Lake Oroville, rights to which had been acquired from the Community Services District.

9. Cost of the intertie project was estimated at $2.8 million.

10. To finance the intertie project, Del Oro on January 1, 1991, began charging $5,000 for each new connection through a main extension agreement.

Conclusions of Law

1. The main extension agreement complies with Rule 15 of Del Oro's filed tariffs for its Lime Saddle District.

2. Based on a Commission audit of Lime Saddle District books, Del Oro has properly accounted for funds collected through the main extension agreements.

3. The categorization of this proceeding should be amended to state that hearings were required.

4. To promptly resolve this and the related superior court litigation, this order should be made effective immediately.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The application of the Del Oro Water Company requesting a determination to the effect that the main extension agreements required for new connections in Del Oro's Lime Saddle District comply with Del Oro's Tariff Rule 15 is granted.

2. The categorization of this proceeding is amended to show that hearings were required.

This proceeding is closed.

This order is effective today.

Dated January 9, 2002, at San Francisco, California.

Previous PageTop Of PageGo To First Page