The ALJ indicated that the OCA later retreated and through its witness Catlin submitted the following explanation in direct testimony: Equitable has included investment in the replacement of gathering or field lines in its DSIC-eligible investment. These lines are included in Account No. 332, which is not explicitly identified as a DSIC-eligible plant account in the Model Tariff. However, subject to the Commission’s conditions that the gathering lines are part of the utility’s distribution system and that all customers who make use of and benefit from the replacement of those lines are required to bear a share of their costs, their inclusion in the DSIC appears to be appropriate. OCA St. 1 at 4. As the OCA did not object to the inclusion of gathering or field lines as DSIC-eligible, as presented in the presently effective DSIC tariff, the OCA Company’s submits that this issue has been resolved without the need for briefs. OCA M.B. at 27, R.D. at 12. Additionally, Peoples - Equitable Division notes that witness Catlin and the OCA are no longer challenging the field lines (FERC Account 322) as DSIC-eligible property. Peoples Equitable Division M.B. at 8, R.D. at 12. – Accordingly, since the OCA has effectively withdrawn its initial position on this issue, the ALJ recommended that the Commission approve the withdrawal OCA’s of this issue. R.D. at 13. Based on our review, we find that the recommendation that we ALJ’s approve the withdrawal on this issue is reasonable and appropriate. We note that OCA’s the decision reaffirms the intent to include field lines (FERC Account ALJ’s Company’s 322) in its list of DSIC-eligible property. Furthermore, the Company has stated that the witness Mr. Catlin testified that inclusion of this item as a DSIC-eligible property OCA’s
The ALJ indicated that the OCA later retreated and through its witness Catlin submitted the following explanation in direct testimony: Equitable has included investment in the replacement of gathering or field lines in its DSIC-eligible investment. These lines are included in Account No. 332, which is not explicitly identified as a DSIC-eligible plant account in the Commission’s Model Tariff. However, subject to the conditions that the gathering lines are part of the utility’s distribution system and that all customers who make use of and benefit from the replacement of those lines are required to bear a share of their costs, their inclusion in the DSIC appears to be appropriate. OCA St. 1 at 4. As the OCA did not object to the inclusion of gathering or field lines as DSIC-eligible, as presented in the Company’s presently effective DSIC tariff, the OCA submits that this issue has been resolved without the need for briefs. OCA M.B. at 27, R.D. at 12. Additionally, Peoples - Equitable Division notes that witness Catlin and the OCA are no longer challenging the field lines (FERC Account 322) as DSIC-eligible property. Peoples – Equitable Division M.B. at 8, R.D. at 12. Accordingly, since the OCA has effectively withdrawn its initial position on this issue, the ALJ recommended that the Commission approve the OCA’s withdrawal of this issue. R.D. at 13. Based on our review, we find that the ALJ’s recommendation that we approve the OCA’s withdrawal on this issue is reasonable and appropriate. We note that the ALJ’s decision reaffirms the Company’s intent to include field lines (FERC Account 322) in its list of DSIC-eligible property. Furthermore, the Company has stated that the OCA’s witness Mr. Catlin testified that inclusion of this item as a DSIC-eligible property
1317099.docx