ALJ/EDF/oma Date of Issuance 8/4/2010
Decision 10-07-045 July 29, 2010
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Approval of 2008 Long-Term Request for Offer Results and for Adoption of Cost Recovery and Ratemaking Mechanisms (U39E). |
Application 09-09-021 (Filed September 30, 2009) |
DECISION ON PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S 2008 LONG-TERM REQUEST FOR OFFER RESULTS AND ADOPTING COST RECOVERY AND RATEMAKING MECHANISMS
Table of Contents
Title Page
DECISION ON PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S 2008 LONG-TERM REQUEST FOR OFFER RESULTS AND ADOPTING COST RECOVERY AND RATEMAKING MECHANISMS 1
1. Summary 2
2. Background 2
2.2.1. Party's Initial Positions 7
3. Discussion 9
3.1. Introduction 9
3.2. Is PG&E seeking authorization of any other projects or contracts, in
any other proceeding, pursuant to the authorization granted in
D.07-12-052? 10
3.3. Was PG&E's conduct of the 2008 LTRFO reasonable and consistent
with Commission directives? 15
3.3.1. PG&E's 2008 LTRFO Process 15
3.3.2. Consistency with D.07-12-052 18
3.3.3. California Environmental Quality Act Issues 21
3.3.4. Consistency with D.09-10-017 22
3.4. How much of the 800 - 1,200 megawatts which D.07-12-052
authorized should PG&E be allowed to procure in this proceeding? What criteria should be used to determine when, if ever, it would
be appropriate for PG&E to procure any remaining megawatts? 23
3.4.1. Compliance with Commission-Mandated Planning Reserve
Margin (PRM) Requirements 24
3.4.2. The 2009 CEC Demand Forecast 26
3.4.3. Export Assumptions in D.07-12-052 28
3.4.4. Energy Efficiency Considerations 29
3.4.5. The 2010 LTPP Proceeding 30
3.4.6. The Retirement Schedule in D.07-12-052 31
3.4.7. The Need for Conventional Generation to Integrate Renewable Resources 32
3.4.8. Conclusion 33
3.5. Which of the PPAs and PSA proposed by PG&E are reasonable and
in the best interest of PG&E's customers and thus, should be
approved by the Commission? 34
3.5.1. The Mariposa PPA 34
3.5.2. The Marsh Landing PPA 35
3.5.3. The Contra Costa 6 & 7 PPAs 36
3.5.4. The Oakley PSA 37
3.5.5. The Midway Sunset PPA 38
3.5.6. Conclusion 39
3.5.6.1. Fit with PG&E's GHG Reduction Strategy 42
3.6. Should PG&E be authorized to recover costs incurred pursuant to
the PPAs in the Energy Revenue Recovery Account (ERRA) and to recover any stranded costs associated with the agreements? 43
3.7. Should PG&E's rate recovery and initial annual revenue requirement proposals, as modified by the Partial Settlement Agreement dated February 17, 2010, be approved? 43
3.7.1. The Partial Settlement Agreement 43
3.7.2. Arguments in Favor of the Partial Settlement Agreement 45
3.7.3. Opposition to the Partial Settlement Agreement 47
3.7.4. Conclusions Related to the Partial Settlement Agreement 50
4. Revised Need for Hearings 50
5. Comments on Proposed Decision 50
6. Assignment of Proceeding 51
Findings of Fact 51
Conclusions of Law 53
ORDER 55
Appendix A - Motion for Approval of Partial Settlement Agreement Between and Among Pacific Gas and Electric Company, The Division of Ratepayer Advocates, The Utility Reform Network, The Coalition of California Utility Employees, and California Unions for Reliable Energy
DECISION ON PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY'S 2008 LONG-TERM REQUEST FOR OFFER RESULTS AND ADOPTING COST RECOVERY AND RATEMAKING MECHANISMS
