V. Conclusion

In summary, we conclude that the Settlement Agreement conforms with Rule 51 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, and is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with law, and in the public interest. The Settlement Agreement avoids the complexity, uncertainty, and extensive use of resources that would likely result from litigation of all of the issues in dispute among the active parties relating to Pacific's implementation cost recovery. The Settlement also meets the criteria for all-party sponsorship as set forth in D. 92-12-019, and reflects the give-and-take inherent in bringing together disparate parties' interests. In consideration of these factors, we find the Settlement Agreement, taken in its totality, provides for a reasonable resolution of the issues relating to the amount and the manner of Pacific's recovery of implementation costs within the scope of this proceeding. Accordingly, the Settlement Agreement is approved. Pacific shall be authorized to begin recovering the $87 million allowance on January 1, 2001 over a two-year period, through the Rule 33 surcharge mechanism as set forth in the order below and consistent with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.