4. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and comments were allowed under
Rule 14.3 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Joint opening comments were filed by PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E on December 3, 2009 (Joint Comments), and reply comments were filed by the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) on December 8, 2009.

The Joint Comments reflect four primary concerns with the proposed decision: (1) that the proposed decision errs because the methodology for releasing the information is not aggregation and the information released remains market sensitive; (2) that the proposed decision should apply equally to all retail sellers; (3) that the proposed decision should specify the source of the bilateral contract information to be released; and (4) that the proposed decision errs in how it defines "market sensitive."

The first concern raised in the Joint Comments too narrowly construes the term "aggregation" as intended by this decision. Modifications have been made to clarify that the term "aggregation" is used in this decision to encompass the full range of data modifications available under D.06-06-066 to facilitate disclosure of information without releasing market sensitive information.

As to the IOUs' assertions that the data proposed to be released by this decision is market sensitive because of the inclusion of the bus bar location, the CAISO states: "The ISO does not believe that the bus bar ID locations associated with particular renewable technologies in the various renewable zones will lead to gaming and market manipulation described by the Joint Utilities."¹⁶
The CAISO clarifies:

A bus ID is not a geographic location about the specific location of the renewable projects. A bus ID is an electrical location that indicates the point where renewable energy is going to be delivered. Between the bus and the location of renewable projects, there are tie-lines of certain distance. ...
To summarize, although a bus ID corresponds to a specific location of a substation, the bus ID does not indicate the site of the renewable project(s).¹⁷

For these reasons, among others, the examples of potential market manipulation that the IOUs claim will occur as a result of disclosure of the information have no merit.

As to the IOUs' second concern, they are correct that the decision should apply equally to IOUs and Electric Service Providers (ESPs). However, as a practical matter, no ESP data will be included in the data release because there is no similar ESP data available for the 2003 through 2009 solicitation years.

To address the IOUs' third concern, this decision has been modified to specify the that the sources of the bilateral contract information to be released will be filed contracts and the IOUs' RPS Project Development Status Reports.

Clarifications have been made to address the IOUs' fourth concern, that the proposed decision errs in defining market sensitive.

¹⁶ CAISO Reply Comments on Proposed Decision, December 8, 2009, at 4.

¹⁷ Id.