3. Procedural History

On May 18, 2009, PG&E filed this application. In its Application, PG&E stated that the Program will not meet the contracting and enrollment goals established in D.06-12-032 by December 31, 2009 due to various challenges. PG&E did not request additional A&M funds from PG&E ratepayers during the extension period, but rather proposes to use the unspent A&M funds collected in 2008 and 2009 to fund the extension.⁹

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) filed a timely protest to the Application. A prehearing conference (PHC) was noticed and held on July 29, 2009. At the PHC, PG&E, TURN, and the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) requested that the parties be given time to meet and seek consensus on some or all aspects of the proceeding prior to setting a firm procedural schedule. A second PHC was noticed and held on September 23, 2009.

At the second PHC, parties informed the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) that they were unable to reach a consensus. PG&E also raised a concern that this proceeding would not conclude before the sunset date adopted in D.06-12-032. PG&E requested that the Commission issue a day-to-day extension order until the Commission reaches a decision on the merits of the Application.

The Scoping Memo and Ruling of Assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge (Scoping Memo) issued on September 29, 2009 requested comments from parties on the requested day-to-day extension order. The Scoping Memo was also served on the service list of Application 06-01-012, the proceeding which resulted in D.06-12-032. DRA/TURN supported the day-to-day extension so long as PG&E was not permitted to use any of the unspent A&M funds during the extension period.

On October 22, 2009 a workshop was held. In preparation for the workshop, PG&E filed a Pre-Workshop Statement of Pacific Gas and Electric Company. The workshop provided an opportunity for PG&E to address questions and concerns posed by intervening parties and provided an opportunity for intervening parties to further express and clarify their concerns.

On November 20, 2009, the Commission issued D.09-11-018, granting PG&E a day-to-day extension of the ClimateSmart Demonstration Program and Tariff Option. However, because this proceeding is addressing the extent to which PG&E's marketing program should be modified should the Application be granted, PG&E was only allowed to expend the unspent funds collected from ratepayers for essential administration and compliance activities.¹⁰

⁹ The estimated amount of unspent A&M funds as of December 31, 2009 was $4.078 million. (D.09-11-018 Finding of Fact 6.)

¹⁰ To the extent PG&E believed marketing expenditures are necessary during the extension period, funding for these expenditures were to have come from its shareholders.