FINDINGS

1. D.96-08-025 authorized SCE's EDR tariffs and agreements, but does not permit the shifting of costs from EDR customers to non-EDR customers.

2. EDR tariffs provide rate discounts from the rates in business customers' OATs to attract new customers, retain existing customers, or to encourage customers to expand load in SCE's territory.

3. It is currently not desirable to increase California's electric load without demand responsive components.

4. The EDR tariffs should be closed to new customers.

5. Current EDR agreements require EDR customers to pay a minimum charge even if that minimum charge exceeds the charge under the customers' OAT.

6. Recently high electricity costs have caused minimum charges in EDR agreements to exceed charges under the customer's OAT.

7. SCE has billed EDR customers a rate capped at the OAT rather than the minimum charge in EDR tariffs because SCE interpreted the minimum charge provision as being capped by the OAT.

8. By Advice Letter 1461-E, SCE requests approval of its interpretation that minimum charge provisions of EDR tariffs and agreements should not result in rates higher than rates under the EDR customer's OAT, along with authorization to revise the EDR tariffs and agreements consistent with this interpretation.

9. ORA protested Advice Letter 1461-E, claiming SCE's proposal would shift costs from EDR customers to non-EDR customers.

10. SCE's interpretation of the tariff should not be adopted.

11. SCE's filed EDR tariffs are not in compliance with the floor price provision adopted in D.96-08-025, which requires that the minimum charge be based on the lower of the SRAC or the PX price.

12. SCE's EDR customers must be charged minimum rates consistent with those adopted by the Commission, rather than the single floor price provision incorrectly filed in SCE's tariffs.

13. SCE should be permitted to let shareholders fund the difference between the minimum charge and the OAT rate before December 7, 2000, to the extent described in the discussion section of this resolution.

14. As a result of the suspension of Advice Letter 1461-E by the Energy Division Director, the tariff sheets attached to the Advice Letter never became effective.

15. On August 1, 2001, applicant petitioned for modification to Resolution E-3707, proposing that EDR customers be permitted to opt-out of EDR agreements effective December 7, 2000, with all liquidated damages waived.

16. Responses and comments in support were filed and received, while no responses or comments in opposition were filed or received.

17. Dramatic events after December 7, 2000 justified extraordinary action with regard to interruptible rate programs, and similarly justify granting applicant's request to the extent provided herein.

18. Not adopting special or unique ratemaking treatment means recovery is not authorized from ratepayers of any revenue adjustments, or lost revenues, that may result from granting applicant's request.

19. The rate freeze itself prevents shifting revenue adjustments, or lost revenues, that may result from granting applicant's request to other ratepayers for the duration of the rate freeze.

20. Revenue shortfalls include any revenue adjustments, or lost revenues, resulting from this resolution, and, as the Commission provided in D.96-08-025, revenue shortfalls are excluded from costs to be subtracted or netted out before sharing. (67 CPUC2d 297, 324.)