Comments on Proposed Decision
The proposed decision (PD) of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311(d). Rule 77.7(g) of the Commission's Rules provides that the 30-day comment period may be reduced upon the stipulation of all parties to the proceeding. All parties stipulated to a 10-day comment period with no reply comments.
Comments on the PD were received from Sierra and WMA. Most of Sierra's comments recommended minor changes, which we have simply incorporated into the text. However, one of Sierra's concerns should be discussed. In its comments, Sierra requested that references in the PD related to the consistency of the settlement with Assembly Bill (AB) 1 X should be deleted. We have deleted these references, because the provisions in Water Code ยง 80110 that restrict rate increases for usage up to 130% of baseline do not apply to Sierra, as Sierra's customers do not pay for any of the power purchased by the California Department of Water Resources pursuant to AB 1 X.
Findings of Fact
1. On February 3, 2006, Sierra filed a motion requesting the Commission to adopt a settlement agreement entitled "Settlement Agreement Between Sierra Pacific Power Company, Division of Ratepayer Advocates, The Utility Reform Network, The A-3 Customer Coalition, and the Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association."
2. All parties have agreed to settle this proceeding.
3. All issues in this proceeding are encompassed by, and resolved in, the Settlement Agreement.
4. The parties to the Settlement Agreement are all of the active parties in this proceeding.
5. The parties are fairly reflective of the affected interests.
6. No term of the Settlement Agreement contravenes statutory provisions or prior Commission decisions.
7. The Settlement Agreement conveys to the Commission sufficient information to permit it to discharge its future regulatory obligations with respect to the parties and their interests.
8. The Settlement Agreement is reasonable in light of the record, is consistent with law, and is in the public interest.
9. The revenue requirement as set forth in Exhibit A of the Settlement Agreement is reasonable.
10. The revenue allocation set forth in Table A of the Settlement Agreement is reasonable.
1. The Settlement Agreement fully resolves and settles all disputed issues among the parties concerning Sierra's application in this proceeding.
2. The Settlement Agreement we approve is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with law, and in the public interest.
3. The Settlement Agreement should be approved.
4. This decision should be effective today so that the Settlement Agreement may be implemented expeditiously.
5. A.05-06-018 should be closed.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The Settlement Agreement set forth in Attachment A is approved.
2. Within eight days of today's date, Sierra Pacific Power Company shall file an advice letter with tariff changes and new rates to implement this decision. The tariff changes and new rates shall become effective on or after the date filed, subject to Energy Division's determination that they are in compliance with this decision.
3. Application 05-06-018 is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated August 24, 2006, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
GEOFFREY F. BROWN
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
RACHELLE B. CHONG
Commissioners
APPENDIX A
(List of Appearances)
************ APPEARANCES ************ |
********** STATE EMPLOYEE *********** |
Case Administration |
(END OF APPENDIX A)
