2. Procedural History
The Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) for this proceeding was adopted by the Commission on May 5, 2011. Comments on the OIR were filed by more than 40 parties on May 31; reply comments were filed by 13 parties on June 9, 2011. A prehearing conference was held on June 13, 2011. The Scoping Memo and Ruling of Assigned Commissioner (Scoping Memo) was issued July 8, 2011.
The Scoping Memo noted that SB 2 (1X) makes significant changes to the renewables portfolio standard (RPS) program.2 The Scoping Memo identified four "highest priority" issues for immediate attention in the Commission's implementation of the new statute. One of these issues is implementing the new RPS procurement portfolio content categories set forth in new § 399.16, attached as Appendix A.
On July 12, 2011, the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) Ruling Requesting Comments on Implementation of New Portfolio Content Categories for the RPS Program (Ruling) asked parties to comment on the interpretation of the new statutory provisions and to make suggestions about how the Commission should integrate the new portfolio content categories in its administration of the RPS program.
Comments were filed on August 8, 2011 by 41 parties.3 Reply comments were filed on August 19, 2011 by 28 parties.4 Many commenting parties participated in the development of a "reference proposal" outlining areas of broad consensus and issues these parties consider to be "open" about the interpretation of new § 399.16, which is attached to the comments of several parties.5
2 The RPS is codified at Pub. Util. Code § 399.11-399.20. Unless otherwise noted, all further references to sections are to the Public Utilities Code.
3 Comments were filed by Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM); Arizona Public Service Company (APS); BP Wind Energy North America Inc. (BP); California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA); California Wastewater Climate Change Group (CWCCG); Calpine Corporation (Calpine); Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies (CEERT); Center for Resource Solutions (CRS); City and County of San Francisco (CCSF); Clean Energy Renewable Fuels, LLC (Clean Energy); Coalition of California Utility Employees (CUE); County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Sanitation Districts); Davenport Newberry Holdings LLC (Davenport); Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA); Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy); enXco Development Corporation (enXco); Evolution Markets; Green Power Institute (GPI); Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (Iberdrola) ; Independent Energy Producers Association (IEP); Large Scale Solar Association (LSA); Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP); LS Power Associates, L.P (LS Power); Marin Energy Authority (Marin Energy); NextEra Energy Resources, LLC (NextEra); Noble Americas Energy Solutions LLC (Noble Solutions); Northwest Energy Systems Company; NV Energy, Inc.; Ormat Technologies Inc. (Ormat); Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E); Powerex Corporation (Powerex); San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E); Sempra Generation; Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. (Shell); Sierra Club California; SolarReserve, LLC; Southern California Edison Company (SCE); The Utility Reform Network (TURN); TransWest Express LLC (TransWest); Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS); and Western Power Trading Forum (WPTF).
4 Reply comments were filed by AReM; CMUA; California Wastewater Climate Change Group; Calpine; CCSF; CUE; Sanitation Districts; Davenport; DRA; Duke Energy; Iberdrola; LSA; LS Power; Noble Solutions; NV Energy; PG&E; PacifiCorp; Powerex; SDG&E; SolarReserve; SCE; Solar Alliance, California Solar Industries Association, Vote Solar (jointly; collectively, Solar Alliance); TURN; TransWest; UCS; and WPTF.
5 The Reference Proposal Outlining Areas of Broad Consensus and Open Issues ("Reference Proposal") lists CUE, DRA, enXco, First Solar, Iberdrola, IEP, LSA, NextEra, PG&E, SDG&E, SCE, TURN, and UCS as parties participating in these discussions.
