P. 1
Assigned Commissioner's Ruling, Joined by an Administrative Law Judge, Reaffirming Denial of Joint Motion of Settling Parties

Assigned Commissioner's Ruling, Joined by an Administrative Law Judge, Reaffirming Denial of Joint Motion of Settling Parties

|Views: 108|Likes:
Published by L. A. Paterson
California American Water Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, California Public Utilities Commission
California American Water Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project, California Public Utilities Commission

More info:

Published by: L. A. Paterson on Jun 14, 2014
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/14/2014

pdf

text

original

95878273 - 1

-
MP1/GW2/vm2 6/13/2014



BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Application of California-American Water
Company (U210W) for Approval of the
Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project
and Authorization to Recover All Present
and Future Costs in Rates.



Application 12-04-019
(Filed April 23, 2012)


ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER’s RULING, JOINED BY
AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE, REAFFIRMING DENIAL OF
JOINT MOTION OF SETTLING PARTIES

This ruling reaffirms the May 2, 2014 assigned Commissioner Ruling,
joined by the Administrative Law Judge, denying the Settling Parties’
March 14, 2014, Joint Motion to Reduce the Special Request 1 Surcharge.
In the “Settling Parties’ Joint Comments on Ruling Requesting Comments
on Surcharge Options and Proposals,” filed on May 12, 2014, the Settling Parties
oppose the surcharge proposals by the Commission’s Division of Water and
Audits set forth in the May 2 Ruling, and “request reconsideration of their
Joint Motion on Surcharges.” (Settling Parties’ Joint Comments at 2.) That
request for reconsideration is denied.
FILED
6-13-14
12:52 PM
A. 12-04-019 MP1/GW2/vm2


- 2 -
To the extent any party or parties wish to change the level of the Special
Request 1 Surcharge, the appropriate way to do so is by a Petition for
Modification of Decision 11-09-039,
1
which sets the Special Request 1 Surcharge
at 15%. (Id. at 1, 6, 14 and 15.)
IT IS RULED that the request for reconsideration of their prior
“Joint Motion to Reduce the Special Request 1 Surcharge” set forth in the
“Settling Parties’ Joint Comments on Ruling Requesting Comments on Surcharge
Options and Proposals” is denied. The previous denial of the Settling Parties’
Joint Motion to Reduce the Special Request 1 Surcharge is reaffirmed.
Dated June 13, 2014, at San Francisco, California.



/s/ MICHAEL R. PEEVEY /s/ GARY WEATHERFORD
Michael R. Peevey
Assigned Commissioner
Gary Weatherford
Administrative Law Judge



1
Modifying Decision 06-12-040.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->