way that respected the due process rights of the parties. Regarding the extremely important substantive issues in this case, TURN carefully analyzed a broad array of issues associated with GT&S PG&E’s functions. TURN submitted testimony from five witnesses on a wide variety of those issues, and addressed additional issues through our cross-examination of PG&E witnesses during the evidentiary hearings. As described in more detail below, TURN’s efforts resulted in a substantial contribution on numerous issues addressed in our testimony and briefs. Even where the Commission did not adopt TURN’s recommended outcome even in part, analysis helped to develop a more TURN’s balanced and complete record for the consideration. Therefore, the Commission’s Commission should have no trouble determining that substantial TURN’s contribution on the wide array of issues addressed in this proceeding warrants the requested award of compensation. 1. Overall outcome in D.16-06-056– The D.16-06-056, Commission approved an interim test year p.3 Verified 2015 revenue requirement of $908 million, D.16-11-056, p. 3. or $379 million less than request. PG&E’s TURN can take credit for a substantial portion of this reduction of $379 million for 2015. As shown in the substantial contributions detailed below, consistent with advocacy, a significant portion of TURN’s this reduction takes the form of disallowances for which PG&E’s shareholders are made responsible for the costs of the work. 2. In-Line Inspection (ILI) Program Pace Verified – TURN Opening Brief, §7.2.1.2 of Make Piggable Work: TURN advocated that the Commission reduce PG&E’s proposed pace of work to make its pipelines D.16-06-056, pp. 41-42. piggable, i.e., able to accommodate ILI. The Commission adopted TURN’s recommendation in part. 3. Direct Assessment (DA) Program: Verified TURN Opening Brief, §§ 7.2.2, 7.3 TURN advocated that a portion of PG&E’s
way that respected the due process rights of the parties. Regarding the extremely important substantive issues in this case, TURN carefully analyzed a broad array of issues associated with PG&E’s GT&S functions. TURN submitted testimony from five witnesses on a wide variety of those issues, and addressed additional issues through our cross-examination of PG&E witnesses during the evidentiary hearings. As described in more detail below, TURN’s efforts resulted in a substantial contribution on numerous issues addressed in our testimony and briefs. Even where the Commission did not adopt TURN’s recommended outcome even in part, TURN’s analysis helped to develop a more balanced and complete record for the Commission’s consideration. Therefore, the Commission should have no trouble determining that TURN’s substantial contribution on the wide array of issues addressed in this proceeding warrants the requested award of compensation. 1. Overall outcome in D.16-06-056– The Commission approved an interim test year 2015 revenue requirement of $908 million, or $379 million less than PG&E’s request. TURN can take credit for a substantial portion of this reduction of $379 million for 2015. As shown in the substantial contributions detailed below, consistent with TURN’s advocacy, a significant portion of this reduction takes the form of disallowances for which PG&E’s shareholders are made responsible for the costs of the work. D.16-11-056, p. 3. D.16-06-056, p.3 Verified 2. In-Line Inspection (ILI) Program – Pace of Make Piggable Work: TURN advocated that the Commission reduce PG&E’s proposed pace of work to make its pipelines piggable, i.e., able to accommodate ILI. The Commission adopted TURN’s recommendation in part. TURN Opening Brief, §7.2.1.2 D.16-06-056, pp. 41-42. Verified 3. Direct Assessment (DA) Program: TURN advocated that a portion of PG&E’s TURN Opening Brief, §§ 7.2.2, 7.3 Verified