including false testimony by Intervenor did not ALJ’s 08/05/15 to Show Cause SCE President Ron Litzinger. timely file the request Ruling found 10 violations of Rule 8.4, for intervenor p. 35, and two Rule 1.1 “possible compensation. The violations,” p. 43, including Litzinger’s Commission has not statements which misled the “incorrect verified Intervenor’s Commission,” p. 46. claimed contribution. D.15-12-016 determined violated “SCE Rule 1.1 as a result of the false statement made by Mr. Litzinger under oath,” COL 8. D.15-12-016 imposed financial penalties for Rule 8.4 violations and two “eight Rule 1.1 violations,” COL 11. 6. A4NR’s 05/06/15 Amended A4NR 05/06/15 Amended Motion, pp. Motion argued that SCE’s 24-25. Intervenor did not failure to properly disclose the D.15-12-016 characterized timely file the request “SCE’s Pickett/Peevey grossly negligent acts and omissions” as for intervenor communications in Poland continuing violation” (COL 7) and compensation. The “a should be treated as a applied penalty against SCE for Commission has not “826 continuing violation. days of the continuing violation arising verified Intervenor’s from SCE’s acts and omissions claimed contribution. to Mr. Pickett’s meeting with Commissioner Peevey,” COL 14. Duplication of Effort (§ 1801.3(f) and § 1802.5): Intervenor’s CPUC Assertion Discussion a. Was the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) a Yes. Intervenor did not party to the proceeding? timely file the request for intervenor compensation. The Commission has not verified Intervenor’s statements regarding duplication of effort. b. Were there other parties to the proceeding with Yes, although Intervenor did not positions similar to yours? these parties timely file the focused upon request for
including false testimony by SCE President Ron Litzinger. ALJ’s 08/05/15 to Show Cause Ruling found 10 violations of Rule 8.4, p. 35, and two “possible Rule 1.1 violations,” p. 43, including Litzinger’s “incorrect statements which misled the Commission,” p. 46. D.15-12-016 determined “SCE violated Rule 1.1 as a result of the false statement made by Mr. Litzinger under oath,” COL 8. D.15-12-016 imposed financial penalties for “eight Rule 8.4 violations and two Rule 1.1 violations,” COL 11. Intervenor did not timely file the request for intervenor compensation. The Commission has not verified Intervenor’s claimed contribution. 6. A4NR’s 05/06/15 Amended Motion argued that SCE’s failure to properly disclose the Pickett/Peevey communications in Poland should be treated as a continuing violation. A4NR 05/06/15 Amended Motion, pp. 24-25. D.15-12-016 characterized “SCE’s grossly negligent acts and omissions” as “a continuing violation” (COL 7) and applied penalty against SCE for “826 days of the continuing violation arising from SCE’s acts and omissions to Mr. Pickett’s meeting with Commissioner Peevey,” COL 14. Intervenor did not timely file the request for intervenor compensation. The Commission has not verified Intervenor’s claimed contribution. Duplication of Effort (§ 1801.3(f) and § 1802.5): Intervenor’s Assertion CPUC Discussion a. Was the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) a party to the proceeding? Yes. Intervenor did not timely file the request for intervenor compensation. The Commission has not verified Intervenor’s statements regarding duplication of effort. b. Were there other parties to the proceeding with positions similar to yours? Yes, although these parties focused upon Intervenor did not timely file the request for
163188608.docx