While we do not intend to revisit the GRC judge’s determination here, we emphasize that, as a regulatory body, the focus of this Commission is on preventing harm through the development and enforcement of regulations. Accordingly, the Commission may at any time, consistent with the authority granted by § 315, initiate an investigation or make such orders or recommendations which, “in its judgment seems just and reasonable,” with respect to GSWC’s compliance with GO 103-A or any other Commission order. By this decision we put GSWC and any party that fails to comply with the Commission’s safety orders or regulations on notice that Section 2107 permits the Commission to impose fines for any failure to comply with Commission reporting orders and rules, whether or not there are negative consequences or damages which correlate with, or result from, the failure to comply. We do not recommend a penalty at this time. However, there is no explicit limitation upon the Commission’s discretion to impose a § 2107 penalty. For this reason, we point out that the Commission’s Water Division may in its discretion, decide to further investigate the July 20, 2014 water main break, or GSWC’s record of compliance since July 20, 2014, should it deem investigation appropriate. Categorization and Need for Hearing This decision confirms the categorization of C.1606008 as adjudicatory, as defined in Rule 1.3(a). The evidentiary determination is that no evidentiary hearings involving the City of Ojai are necessary. Comments on Proposed Decision The proposed decision of ALJ Miles in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and comments were allowed under Rule 14.3. GSWC filed comments on September 5, 2017.
While we do not intend to revisit the GRC judge’s determination here, we emphasize that, as a regulatory body, the focus of this Commission is on preventing harm through the development and enforcement of regulations. Accordingly, the Commission may at any time, consistent with the authority granted by § 315, initiate an investigation or make such orders or recommendations which, “in its judgment seems just and reasonable,” with respect to GSWC’s compliance with GO 103-A or any other Commission order. By this decision we put GSWC and any party that fails to comply with the Commission’s safety orders or regulations on notice that Section 2107 permits the Commission to impose fines for any failure to comply with Commission reporting orders and rules, whether or not there are negative consequences or damages which correlate with, or result from, the failure to comply. We do not recommend a penalty at this time. However, there is no explicit limitation upon the Commission’s discretion to impose a § 2107 penalty. For this reason, we point out that the Commission’s Water Division may in its discretion, decide to further investigate the July 20, 2014 water main break, or GSWC’s record of compliance since July 20, 2014, should it deem investigation appropriate. Categorization and Need for Hearing This decision confirms the categorization of C.1606008 as adjudicatory, as defined in Rule 1.3(a). The evidentiary determination is that no evidentiary hearings involving the City of Ojai are necessary. Comments on Proposed Decision The proposed decision of ALJ Miles in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and comments were allowed under Rule 14.3. GSWC filed comments on September 5, 2017.