ALJ/DUG/hkr Date of Issuance 3/27/2009
Decision 09-03-043 March 26, 2009
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Integrate Procurement Policies and Consider Long-Term Procurement Plans. |
Rulemaking 06-02-013 (Filed February 16, 2006) |
DECISION GRANTING INTERVENOR COMPENSATION
TO WOMEN'S ENERGY MATTERS
FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONTRIBUTION TO DECISION 07-12-052
This decision awards Women's Energy Matters (WEM) $51,912.50 in compensation for its substantial contributions to Decision 07-12-052. This amount represents a decrease of $16,237.50 from the amount requested due to mathematical errors in the compensation request, an hourly rate being awarded that is lower than that requested for WEM's consultant, and a reduction being made to the hours allowed for travel and preparation of the compensation request. Today's award payment will be allocated to the affected utilities. This proceeding shall remain open pending resolution of related matters.
1. Background
In Decision (D.) 07-12-052 this Commission reviewed, critiqued and adopted, with modifications, Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company's (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company's (SDG&E) Long-Term Procurement Plans (LTPP), for the 10-year period 2007-2016, and provided direction to the utilities on preparing their conformed 2006 LTPPs compliance filings.
Our primary focus in reviewing the LTPPs was whether the utilities are procuring preferred resources as set forth in the Energy Action Plan, in the order of energy efficiency, demand response, renewables, distributed generation and clean fossil-fuel. In addition, we affirmed California's position as the pioneer in the nation, and in some areas of the world, by emphasizing and implementing policies that promote the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG), especially in the production and delivery of electric resources by the utilities we regulate. Each utility prepared different candidate plans that indicated how the utility would meet its renewable portfolio standard targets, demand response as a percentage of resource adequacy requirements, energy efficiency savings from committed and uncommitted programs,1 and then showed how each plan minimized environmental impacts, at what cost to ratepayers, and at what reliability level.
1 See D.06-07-029, fn. 1, for a full discussion of the different usages of the terms "committed" and "uncommitted," and their agency specific meanings.
