Sign in Subscribe
Public utilities

Joint Prehearing Conference Statement: Patterson Point LP vs. Southern California Edison Company

Strategic Insights

— 2 min read

A dispute between Patterson Point LP and Southern California Edison Company has reached a critical juncture, with both parties presenting their arguments in a Joint Prehearing Conference Statement. The issue at hand revolves around individual metering requirements in statute and tariff rules for a proposed multi-unit residential structure. Patterson Point LP seeks to have the Southern California Edison Company (SCE) provide a service configuration that is deemed consistent with state law and public policy.

Key Takeaways:

  • The Joint Prehearing Conference Statement is a crucial document in the proceeding, outlining the parties' positions on various issues, including the proposed scope of the proceeding, settlement discussions, and the need for hearings.
  • Patterson Point LP claims that SCE has denied the service configuration sought by the company, contrary to state law and public policy favoring placement of unhoused persons into safe, inexpensive housing.
  • The parties disagree on various points, including the characterization of the project, the applicability of individual metering requirements, and the need for hearings.
  • Southern California Edison Company (SCE) intends to file a motion to dismiss, while Patterson Point LP will oppose it and prefers a resolution without hearings.
  • The parties propose a proceeding schedule with proposed key dates, including opening testimony within 90 days of the prehearing conference and rebuttal testimony within 30 days of opening testimony.
  • The material facts in dispute include the characterization of the project and the applicability of individual metering requirements, while the legal issues in dispute include the interpretation of tariff rules and statutory requirements.
  • Patterson Point LP disputes that SCE does not have a residential rate that allows for a single meter for multiple residential units and that the company must be served at a residential rate.

Statistics:

  • The proposed multi-unit residential structure contains 23 tenant units and one manager's unit.
  • The project will include 7 electronic vehicle (EV) charging ports and permanent kitchens.
  • Patterson Point L.P. will require limited discovery regarding other structures served by SCE.
  • SCE intends to file a motion to dismiss, but if the Complaint is not dismissed, SCE believes discovery would be completed by the deadline for Rebuttal Testimony.
  • The joint prehearing conference statement was submitted by Angela Whatley for Southern California Edison Company and Thomas J. MacBride, Jr. for Patterson Point, L.P. on August 15, 2025.

Sources:

  • Parties' responses to the requested information as presented in the Joint Prehearing Conference Statement.
  • Rule 1.8(d) of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California.
  • Public Utilities Code Sections 453 and 532.
  • Tariff Rule 16 and ESR-5.
  • Downey Brand LLP.
  • Whatley Public Utilities Law.

Read more