4. Position of Parties
The CCSF Comments on the ALJ Ruling note that the release of the Structure Report makes the "step of temporarily suspending SmartMeter installations until the Commission completed its investigations into SmartMeters"41 a "specific relief"42 that is "no longer available."43 CCSF then argues that the "Commission should now use this proceeding to review the Structure Group Report."44 Specifically, CCSF argues that "The Commission cannot reasonably rely on findings in the report unless it reviews the report"45 and further contends that the "Commission does not typically accept the findings presented in a report by any party ..."46 CCSF then cites a series of examples in which the Commission solicited public input before accepting the results of a study.
In addition, CCSF expresses support for the position that "the Commission must closely examine whether or not PG&E's SmartMeter deployment costs are reasonable in light of PG&E's history of problems."47
DRA recommends that the Commission continue its review of PG&E's SmartMeter program and recommends that the Commission take four steps to complete its investigation:
1. Examine the Structure Report,48
2. Determine whether known problems have been addressed satisfactorily,49
3. Determine whether there are any additional problems or concerns that need to be addressed,50 and
4. Issue a decision setting forth the Commission's findings, and what, if any, further action needs to be taken to ensure that the SmartMeter program delivers the benefits promised, and does not harm customers.51
DRA further argues:
Some months ago, the Commission announced it would engage an independent consultant to investigate the reasons for the extraordinary number of customer complaints it has received concerning PG&E's SmartMeter program. Now that the Report has been made available, the Commission must evaluate it (in a public proceeding, with participation of interested parties), decide whether to adopt the Report's findings, and obtain any additional information that may be required to answer all questions pertinent to the Commission's investigation. The Commission should then issue a decision setting forth its findings and conclusions, and ordering any further action it deems necessary.52
TURN also supports the continuation of this proceeding. TURN argues:
The Commission should allow parties time to review the Structure Report, obtain any data used by Structure in doing its evaluation, and (if necessary) provide testimony concerning any analytical weaknesses or problems with the Report. TURN suggests that a prehearing conference be held to ascertain the intent of any party to conduct such analysis and determine a proper procedural schedule.53
PG&E, in contrast, argues that the Commission should deny CCSF's Petition because "the Structure Report expressly refutes the allegations of flawed technology that formed the basis of CCSF's Petition."54 PG&E further asserts that CCSF's argument that the Commission does not ordinarily accept findings in a submitted report "is misplaced."55 PG&E states that the "unique circumstances around the Structure Report distinguish it from the examples that CCSF cites as precedent ..."56 PG&E contends that opening a review of the Structure Report and continuing this proceeding "is beyond the relief requested in CCSF's Petition ..."57 Finally, PG&E concludes by arguing that "neither CCSF nor any other parties submitting comments have satisfied the standard required for the Commission to grant CCSF's petition to modify."58 PG&E contends that "neither CCSF nor any other party has identified material new facts that would support suspension of deployment."59
Like PG&E, TechNet continues to oppose the Petition. TechNet argues that the "Structure Report repudiates the CCSF Petition's core premise concerning the accuracy of PG&E's SmartMeters."60 TechNet argues further that "suspending the deployment of SmartMeters would not serve any valid purpose."61 TechNet argues further that:
... the Commission should remove the threat of a suspension and thereby free up PG&E's employees, the employees of PG&E's SmartMeter vendors, Commission staff members, and well-intentioned consumer advocates to focus on what they do best, namely identifying and resolving any real but resolvable issues that may arise in connection with this technologically innovative and logistically challenging infrastructure upgrade project.62
In summary, CCSF, DRA and TURN argue for this proceeding to continue with a review of the Structure Report, while PG&E and TechNet oppose CCSF's Petition.
41 CCSF Comments on ALJ Ruling at 1.
42 Id. at 2.
43 Id.
44 Id.
45 Id.
46 Id.
47 Id. at 5.
48 DRA Comments on ALJ Ruling at 2.
49 Id. at 3.
50 Id. at 4.
51 Id.
52 Id. at 4-5.
53 TURN Comments on ALJ Ruling.
54 PG&E Comments on ALJ Ruling at 4.
55 PG&E Reply Comments on ALJ Ruling at 3.
56 Id. at 3.
57 Id. at 4.
58 Id. at 4.
59 Id. at 5.
60 TechNet Comments on ALJ Ruling at 2.
61 Id.
62 Id. at 3-4.
