NOTICES
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
Default Order
[37 Pa.B. 1287]
[Saturday, March 17, 2007]Public Meeting held
March 1, 2007Commissioners Present: Wendell F. Holland, Chairperson, James H. Cawley, Vice Chairperson; Kim Pizzingrilli; Terrance J. Fitzpatrick
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Law Bureau Prosecutory Staff v. Factoryville Bunker Hill Water Co. (2006.0116); C-20066155; A-210113
Order By the Commission:
On April 6, 2006, Law Bureau Prosecutory Staff filed a Formal Complaint against Factoryville Bunker Hill Water Co. (Respondent or Factoryville), a jurisdictional water company certificated at A-210113, for failure to file its 2004 Annual Report. On November 15, 2006, the Commission entered a Default Order that sustained the complaint and imposed a $1,000 civil penalty for Factoryville's failure to file its 2004 Annual Report or an answer to the Formal Complaint. Notice of the Default Order was published on December 2, 2006, at 36 Pa.B. 7371 with a 20-day comment period. On December 4, 2006, Factoryville filed its delinquent report with its petition for reconsideration requesting that the $1,000 penalty be withdrawn or reduced.
Discussion The Public Utility Code (Code) establishes a party's right to seek relief following the issuance of our final decisions pursuant to subsections 703(f) and (g), 66 Pa.C.S. § 703(f) and § 703(g), relating to rehearings, as well as the rescission and amendment of orders. Such requests for relief must be consistent with section 5.572 of our regulations, 52 Pa. Code § 5.572, relating to petitions for relief following the issuance of a final decision. The standards for granting a petition for reconsideration were set forth in Duick v. Pennsylvania Gas and Water Co., C-R0597001 et al., 56 Pa. PUC 553, 1982 Pa. PUC LEXIS 4, 12-13 (1982):
A petition for reconsideration, under the provisions of 66 Pa.C.S. § 703(g), may properly raise any matters designed to convince the Commission that it should exercise its discretion under this code section to rescind or amend a prior order in whole or in part. In this regard we agree with the Court in the Pennsylvania Railroad Company case, wherein it was said that,Parties . . . , cannot be permitted by a second motion to review and reconsider, to raise the same questions which were specifically decided against them . . .What we expect to see raised in such petitions are new and novel arguments, not previously heard, or considerations which appear to have been overlooked or not addressed by the Commission.Additionally, a petition for reconsideration is properly before the Commission where it pleads newly discovered evidence, alleges errors of law, or a change in circumstances.
We note that any issue which we do not specifically address herein, has been duly considered and will be denied without further discussion. It is well settled that we are not required to consider expressly or at length each contention or argument raised by the parties. Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Pa. P.U.C., 625 A.2d 741 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993); see also, University of Pennsylvania v. Pa. P.U.C., 485 A.2d 1217 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984).
In its petition, Factoryville states that it did not knowingly or intentionally fail to file its 2004 Annual Report. Factoryville explains that it located a copy of the 2004 Annual Report which led it to believe that the original had been filed. Unfortunately, Factoryville was unable to locate a cover letter or any other indication of a date it had been mailed. Respondent notes that it has hired a local tax accountant to prepare its annual reports.Factoryville believes that somehow the original report must have been misplaced during the tax season of 2006. Respondent notes that it has a history of responding to commission requests in a timely manner and that this is the first time that it has filed its annual report late. Based upon its past compliance history, Factoryville requests that the $1,000 penalty be either reduced or withdrawn.
A review of Commission records reveal that Respondent was certificated in 2003. Other than the instant complaint, no other complaints have been instituted against Respondent. That review of records also revealed that Factoryville filed its electronic copy of the 2004 Annual Report on April 27, 2005. However, Respondent failed to file a hard copy of its report as required by 66 Pa.C.S. § 504. Factoryville's failure to file its hard copy triggered the filing of the Formal Complaint.
Based upon our review of the petition, Factoryville has alleged considerations which appear to have been overlooked by the Commission, as required by Duick. Accordingly, the petition for reconsideration is hereby granted. Because Factoryville has now filed the hard copy of its 2004 Annual Report, we will rescind the November 15, 2006 Default Order. In addition, because Factoryville's compliance violation was not intentional, we will exercise our discretion and not require Factoryville to pay the $1,000 civil penalty imposed in the Default Order. However, we caution Factoryville that all future Annual Reports must be timely filed and all Commission correspondence must be answered in a timely manner. The Commission hereby puts Factoryville and the rest of the industry on notice that we will not hesitate to invoke our authority under the Code to ensure timely compliance with our regulations and orders, including the ordering of such other remedy as the Commission may deem appropriate; Therefore,
It Is Ordered that:
1. The Default Order entered November 15, 2006, against Factoryville Bunker Hill Water Co. at this docket is hereby rescinded.
2. The petition for reconsideration is granted.
3. A copy of this Order be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
JAMES J. MCNULTY,
Secretary
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 07-475. Filed for public inspection March 16, 2007, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
