XIV. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and Rule 14.2(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments and/or reply comments were filed by PG&E, SCE, Sempra, CCSF, CBIA, TURN, and DRA. All comments were considered. Changes have been made, as necessary, to reflect the comments.

In its comments, PG&E argues for approval of its request that any change to base costs that result from these proceedings be considered incremental to its 2007 GRC. It further argues that it should be permitted to file advice letters to record approved changes to base revenues and to recover such costs through the already-established annual gas and electric true-up advice letters. PG&E includes its request under the issue "Criteria for requiring a revenue impact estimate to be included in a line extension allowance change advice letter."

PG&E's request was not identified as an issue in the scoping memo for this proceeding. The issue PG&E includes its request under concerns criteria for determining whether advice letters requesting a change to the line extension allowance should include an estimate of the revenue impact of the allowance change. PG&E's request addressing a mechanism for recovery of such costs does not fit within that issue, is beyond the scope of this proceeding, and need not be addressed.