Various Authors 3:12 p.m., June 24
- Community Blog
- Encanto Gas Holder
CPUC Allows Hearings in SDG&E Time-Based Rate Scheme Application
The Administrative Law Judge Division of California's Public Utilities Commission has reported in Resolution ALJ 176-3257 that hearings will be required in the ratesetting application A1007009 by San Diego Gas & Electric Company. ALJ Division Executive Director Paul Clanon certified that Commissioners Michael Peevey (presiding), Dian Grueneich, John Bohn, Timothy Simon, and Nancy Ryan had unanimously approved the resolution regarding A1007009 and ten other various applications.
According to SDG&E's application, evidentiary hearings are tentatively scheduled for November 29 through December 3, 2010. For persons interested as potential parties by protest/response or in intervening, the prehearing conference is scheduled for August 30 and the scoping memorandum is due by September 10, all in 2010.
If approved later by CPUC, SDG&E's application will eventually change the rate structure for small businesses and residential power customers, from an amount-used basis to a time-used basis. SDG&E intends to provide a price incentive for small businesses and rediential power consumers to avoid using electrical appliances and other powered equipment during normal business hours in the work week.
Apparently, the proposed lower evening and weekend off-peak rates are good news for small after-hours adult entertainment venues, vampires and various other creatures of the night, as all are meant to be served by public utilities according to California law. If you are not one of the above, well, then think about protesting or intervening on your own, preferably with an attorney experienced in CPUC practice and procedures.
SDG&E's A1007009 application does include a request to bill all customers for an estimated $118 million in consumer education and other related PSW/PSH costs to be incurred between now and 2015. By comparison, Pacific Gas & Electric Company paid only around $30 million in shareholder equity for a massive television advertising blitz, only to lose on its Proposition 16 constitutional amendment initiative in the June state primary.
Resolution ALJ 176-3257 for categorization and required hearings determination
NB On third-party request, above links may have been deprecated without blogger's input at website administrator's discretion.
More like this:
- Nobody Seems to Like SDG&E Proposed PeakShift at Home Rate Hike — Nov. 9, 2010
- CPUC DRA Moves To Strike $118 Million Part of SDG&E Rate Hike Proposal — Aug. 11, 2010
- Does SDG&E's Sunrise Powerlink Really Make Sense? — July 27, 2010
- 1.2 Million SDG&E Residental Customers to be Billed by Time-of-Day/Week — July 12, 2010
- SDG&E Files CPUC Application for Replacement South Bay Substation — June 19, 2010