1992 AGN DEC 15 I17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Client Letter November 20, 1992 Page 2 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL negotiation and, if necessary, arbitration or mediation to resolve those disputes. I. ISSUES A. Rate Cases -- The 1992 Settlement resolves the price squeeze issues in FERC Dockets ER76-205 and ER79-150, and the remaining issues in FERC Dockets ER81-177, ER82-427, ER84-75, ER86-271, ER87-483, and FA85-67. Below is a brief description of those cases: 1. Price Squeeze Cases -- ER76-205 and ER79-150: The FERC, upon remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals, reversed its prior findings and held that the Cities had failed to establish a price squeeze in Dockets ER76-205 and ER79-150. The FERC, in an order issued February 6, 1992, authorized Edison to impose a surcharge to recover previous price squeeze refunds which Edison had paid Cities. Cities filed a timely request for rehearing which is currently pending before the FERC. The amount at issue in the two cases is $11,300,000 plus interest until the date of payment (approximately $1,800,000 through June 31, 1992. 2. ER81-177: There are no remaining matters at issue in this proceeding. 3. ER82-427: Cities (and Vernon) filed a petition for review of FERC's Opinion 359 and 359-A with the U.S. Court of Appeals raising two issues: (a) review of FERC's determination to allow Edison to include 100% of the costs associated with San Onfre Nuclear Unit 2 in rate base, even though Unit 2 was not placed into service until the end of the test year; and (b) the appropriate period for determining demand allocation factors. Cities filed a protest with the FERC challenging Edison's compliance filing. Cities protested Edison's proposal in the compliance filing to offset refunds in Docket ER82-427 by amounts Edison claims Cities owe as a result of an FERC Staff fuel audit in Docket FA85-67. Cities also protested Edison's inclusion of certain expenses related to Operation and Maintenance.