9. Assignment of Proceeding
Michael R. Peevey is the Assigned Commissioner, and A. Kirk McKenzie is the assigned ALJ in these proceedings.
1. Cal-Am entered into a settlement agreement with ORA concerning both the Coronado and Village Districts. This agreement (ORA Settlement Agreement) is attached to this decision as Appendix A.
2. Cal-Am entered into a separate settlement agreement with Thousand Oaks concerning the Village District. This agreement (Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement) is attached to this decision as Appendix B.
3. When considered together, the ORA Settlement Agreement and the Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement resolve every issue raised by the parties in this proceeding.
4. When considered together, the ORA Settlement Agreement and the Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement command the sponsorship of all active parties in this proceeding.
5. The active parties are fairly reflective of the affected interests in these consolidated proceedings.
6. When considered together, the two settlement agreements convey sufficient information to permit the Commission to discharge its future regulatory obligations with respect to the parties and their interests.
7. The agreement between Cal-Am and Thousand Oaks to pursue an exchange of the Conejo Oaks and Academy service areas will enable Cal-Am to avoid the expense of making certain capital improvements during the years covered by this rate case.
8. The hardware and software improvements that Cal-Am expects to have in place by March 1, 2005 appear to be appropriate initial responses to the concerns about inadequate water pressure, inadequate fire flows and lack of response to service calls that were expressed at the PPH held in Thousand Oaks on June 29, 2004.
9. The low-income discount endorsed in ¶¶ 12 and 20.2 of the ORA Settlement Agreement would not be available to individuals and families who are tenants in master-metered dwellings that lack individual sub-metering.
10. The low-income discount endorsed in the ORA Settlement Agreement does not allocate the revenue shortfalls associated with the proposal to other customers, but instead permits these shortfalls to be tracked in a memorandum account for possible future recovery.
11. It is possible that if Cal-Am were to seek future rate recovery of the revenue shortfalls associated with the low-income discount agreed to by Cal-Am and ORA, some low-income consumers might end up paying higher water rates than if this discount were not implemented.
12. The low-income discount endorsed in the ORA Settlement Agreement does not require consumers entitled to the discount to institute any water conservation measures.
1. The participation of Thousand Oaks in this consolidated proceeding has been limited to matters relating to the Village District.
2. Taken together, the ORA Settlement Agreement and the Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement represent an uncontested settlement within the meaning of Rule 51(f), as well as an all-party settlement as defined in D.92-12-019.
3. Except for the provisions relating to low-income ratepayer assistance, no term in either the ORA Settlement Agreement or the Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement contravenes any statutory provision or prior Commission decision.
4. Except for the provisions relating to low-income ratepayer assistance, the ORA Settlement Agreement and the Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement are reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with law, and in the public interest.
5. Except for the provisions relating to low-income ratepayer assistance, the ORA Settlement Agreement should be adopted.
6. The Thousand Oaks Settlement Agreement should be adopted.
7. Consistent with D.02-12-068, the rate increase for the Coronado District adopted in this decision for Test Year 2005 should be deferred until January 1, 2006, and the rate increases approved herein for the Coronado District for 2006 and 2007 should be deferred until January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2008, respectively.
8. Consistent with D.02-12-068, the rate decrease for the Village District adopted in this decision for Test Year 2005 should become effective on January 1, 2005, but the rate increases for the Village District approved herein for 2006 and 2007 should be deferred until January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2008, respectively.
9. This decision should be made effective immediately.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The settlement agreement between California-American Water Company (Cal-Am) and the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA), which is attached hereto as Appendix A, is adopted except for the provisions relating to low-income ratepayer assistance set forth in paragraphs 12 and 20.2 thereof.
2. The settlement agreement between Cal-Am and the City of Thousand Oaks (Thousand Oaks), which is attached hereto as Appendix B, is adopted in its entirety.
3. The rates adopted herein for Cal-Am's Coronado District for 2005 shall go into effect on January 1, 2006, and the rates adopted for 2006 and 2007 for the Coronado District shall go into effect on January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2008, respectively.
4. The rates adopted herein for Cal-Am's Village District for 2005 shall go into effect on January 1, 2005, and the rates adopted for 2006 and 2007 for the Village District shall go into effect on January 1, 2007 and January 1, 2008, respectively.
5. Cal-Am is authorized to file in accordance with General Order 96-A, or its successor, and to make effective on not less than five days' notice, tariffs containing the rate changes authorized in this decision for the Coronado and Village Districts, consistent with Appendix A.
6. Cal-Am is authorized to establish memorandum accounts to track (a) costs associated with Cal-Am's participation in the regional water supply study for San Diego County, and (b) costs arising from additional charges for purchased water imposed by the City of San Diego, as described in paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 of Appendix A.
7. This proceeding is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated , at San Francisco, California.
|
Jason R. Alcala |
Timothy B. Sottile Lenard G. Weiss |
(END OF APPENDIX C)
