Thought you might enjoy this.  Don't pass it on....
>   -----Original Message-----
>  From:  Cherry, Brian
>  Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2000 7:25 PM
>  To: Williams, Ray; Johnson, Kirk; Thomas, Dan (CGT Dir); Katz,
> Michael; Campbell, Benjamin; Bellenger, Geoffrey; Berkovitz, Trista; Gee,
> Dennis; Buchner, Les; Lindh, Frank (Law); Litteneker, Randall (Law);
> Niven, Andrew (Law)
>  Cc: Guliasi, Les; Hapner, Dede
>  Subject: Commissioner Lynch Comments at the CCPUC Meeting on
> Monday
>
>  At Monday's CCPUC conference, Commissioner Lynch outlined objectives
> and priorities as President of the Commission.  I thought you might be
> interested in her remarks, especially as they relate to our Gas Accord II
> settlement efforts.
>
>  Commissioner Lynch identified several general objectives she would
> pursue as Commission President:
>
>  1) Decision-making under her leadership will be arrived at based
> upon well developed facts and arguments - not theories.
>  2) The Commission will rely on legal principles for guidance, not
> ideology.
>  3) Future decisions must recognize the diversity of society
> interests, not just those of the applicants and interveners.  The
> Commission will take proactive steps to generate community support,
> especially among those groups who have been "overlooked" in the past.
>  4) The Commission must understand and account for their decisions in
> the real world.  Therefore, decisions will not be voted out until the
> Commission has evaluated their impact in the broader sense: on the
> community, on the state, on the general welfare.
>  5) The Commission's priorities (described below) need to be better
> articulated and communicated to all of California's citizens.
>
>  With those objectives stated, Commissioner Lynch went on to describe
> her personal priorities at the Commission.
>
>  1)  The public interest is the paramount and guiding principle of
> her administration.  Commissioner Lynch emphasized that decisions must
> benefit all Californians and stated that recent decisions haven't
> reflected this.  She noted that many groups are under-represented (such as
> environmentalists) and stated that decision-makers bear a responsibility
> to inject the public interest into the decisions of those not represented
> before the Commission.  Taking a swipe at the Republican majority, she
> noted that recent Commission's have been enamored with competition.  To
> her, "...competition is merely a tool, not an end unto itself.  Had the
> impact of electric competition been better understood,  decisions would
> have been made differently."
>
>  2)  Certain practices at the Commission must change, especially
> those involving a utilities' right to withdraw an Advice Letter after
> submittal.  Without mentioning names (although many concluded she was
> aiming at Sempra's withdrawal of a number of AL's over the last few
> months), Commissioner Lynch stated that utilities should not be allowed to
> withdraw an AL to avoid a draft resolution they don't like.  She stated
> that draft resolutions must be voted out and not be subject to veto by the
> utilities.  She stated that the Commission was looking at changing the
> General Order allowing utilities their right to withdraw AL's.
>
>  3)  Settlement rules do not allow the Commission to make sure that
> the public interest is considered sufficiently.  According to Commissioner
> Lynch, under the current settlement rules non-settling parties have the
> burden of proving that a settlement is not in the public interest.  She
> wants to change the settlement rules to reverse that concept - applicants
> must bear the burden of proving settlements truly are in the public
> interest.  Specifically, she does not like the fact that the settlement
> rules bar the public or non-settling parties from settlement conferences.
> As such, she believes settlements halt the development of an evidentiary
> record and present facts to the Commission that cannot be tested.  Going
> further, Commissioner Lynch stated that she was not interested in
> maintaining the "peace" and would reverse settlements contrary to the
> "public interest" (without defining the public interest).  She also stated
> that her staff was currently working on revisions to the settlement rules.
>
>
>  4)  The Commission will be less reactive and more proactive.  That
> is, the Commission cannot rely upon parties to articulate pressing issues
> nor can the Commission rely on parties to resolve issues on a piecemeal
> basis.  Commissioner Lynch's recommended solution is that there needs to
> be more consolidated dockets and decisions to prevent, ".. disjointed,
> choppy decisions" from being made.  In an effort to make the Commission be
> more proactive, Commissioner Lynch stated that we will see more OII and
> OIR's coming out of her administration.
>
>  5)  The Commission will follow the law as written - period.
> Commissioner Lynch stated that there was no need for the Commission to
> "interpret" the law.  Her discussion here focused on mergers and
> acquisitions.  She stated that 24 (?) out of the last 24
> merger/acquisition decisions voted by the Commission approved the
> merger/acquisition request.  She believes that this proves the Commission
> is relying upon expediency at the expense of the law with regards to
> transfers of control. (My notes are fuzzy here, so perhaps someone else
> who attended can better articulate her position).
>
>  6)  Decisions must be based upon facts - not theories or
> convictions.  Electric restructuring was again held out as the prime
> example of a Commission decision focused on "..convictions, based upon
> ideological theories, not fact-based thinking".  Commissioner Lynch stated
> that she wanted to hear reasoned arguments, not excuses or vague claims of
> financial distress.  She stated that she will take real claims of
> financial distress seriously, but they must be backed up by concrete
> evidence, not rhetoric and anecdotes (although $2.9 Billion seems pretty
> concrete to me....editors note....).   She also stated that she would not
> tolerate an absence of a sufficient evidentiary record nor would she allow
> lobbying to "interfere with the process".  Robust records and clearly
> articulated briefs must be the norm if parties want the Commission to act
> upon their claims.
>
>  6)  Consumer protection is PARAMOUNT.  Commissioner Lynch stated
> that she supports the Telco "Bill of Rights" and would like to see it
> applied across industries.  She once again stated that competition can
> never assure that customers will get what they really need.  Therefore,
> the Commission needs to extend its hand to local community-based
> organizations for input into the decision-making process.  She also stated
> that consumer abuse, in any form, should be prosecuted to the fullest
> extent of the law by the Commission and the Courts.
>
>  It's a lot to think about, especially as we move forward in our Gas
> Accord II settlement discussions.
>
>
>
>
>