It is a rare occurance when all heck breaks loose in a PUC hearing room. But the Sunrise case has consistently proven itself to be unpredictable, bordering on absurd. So in a scene that could have been ripped-off from "My Cousin Vinny", SDG&E conceded major errors in the model that it relied upon to prove that its $1.3 billion project would save money.

This was no surprise to UCAN, as its June testimony identified at least 10 major errors that rendered the economics of the Sunrise project seriously suspect. But one of those errors -- that showed Sunrise facilitated the import of over 1000 MW of coal power from the Southwest -- was so embarrassing for the utility that it felt compelled to try to revise its model in midstream.

UCAN cross-examined the SDG&E witness, Jan Strack, who reluctantly conceded that the coal power error that UCAN identified and reiterated in its opening statement was the catalyst for SDG&E's decision to re-examine its model. He claimed there might be other major errors as well (well, yeah, they are listed in UCAN's testimony beginning on page 142 of David Marcus' testimony). Strack admitted that he'd not really given the UCAN testimony much attention until the opening day of hearings. Oops! So SDG&E wanted to try to revise its case and erase the modeling gaffes.

Legally, such tactics are frowned upon and usually are found to be improper. But SDG&E is apparently desperate. After witnessing its case disintegrate with each passing day in the hearing room, the utility screamed "Uncle" and reported to the ALJ that it wanted to revise its model runs. The ALJ appropriately suspended the hearings immediately -- if the utility could not stand by its own model, then proceeding further was a waste of time. The PUC staff brought a motion to dismiss the case but it may have been a bit premature as the full extent of the errors in the model hadn't been revealed yet.

So the hearings have been indefinitely suspended. SDG&E is expected to present revised model runs to the parties on July 25th. The following day, the parties will meet and discuss how to proceed. One thing is for sure....this case is getting more interesting and more surprising each day. Fireworks are sure to erupt on the 26th.

-Michael

Listen to Michael Shames discuss UCAN's opposition to Sunrise.

Watch cross-examination from the Sunrise Hearings.