4. Categorization, Need for Hearings,
Ex Parte Rules, and Designation of
Principal Hearing Officer

This proceeding has been preliminarily categorized as ratesetting, as that term is defined in Rule 5(c), and this ruling affirms that categorization. Parties in their protests and prehearing statements state there is a need for evidentiary hearings; no party objects to hearings. This ruling determines that evidentiary hearings are required and sets a procedural schedule for such hearings.

In a ratesetting proceeding, Rule 5(k)(2) defines the "presiding officer" as the principal hearing officer designated as such by the Assigned Commissioner prior to the first hearing in the proceeding. The undersigned Assigned Commissioner designates ALJ Maribeth A. Bushey as the principal hearing officer.

The Commission's ex parte rules applicable to this proceeding are set forth in Rules 7(c) and 7.1. These ex parte rules apply to all parties of record and, more broadly, to all persons with an interest in any substantive matter; the broad category of individuals subject to our ex parte rules is defined in § 1701.1(c)(4) and Rule 5(h).