Responses to Petition

SCE and the Commission's Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) oppose FCE's petition. SCE acknowledges that it cancelled the CSU Long Beach fuel cell project in early 2011 when it could not reach agreement with the university on the lease of campus space. According to SCE, CSU Long Beach requested certain project management fees that the other universities had not requested. SCE opposes FCE's suggestion that the Commission direct SCE to seek an alternate location. Specifically, SCE asserts that it has already completed a feasibility study for the fuel cell project to identify optimal sites for fuel cell cogeneration and the CSU Fullerton and California State Polytechnic University at Pomona sites mentioned by FCE as "runners up" are not feasible within the Commission approved budget or conditions.

Moreover, SCE maintains that D.10-04-028 authorizes SCE to install up to three fuel cell facilities, and SCE is responsible to exercise competent managerial discretion in implementing the program. SCE claims it would be inappropriate for the Commission to grant the proposed modification when SCE has updated the costs in its 2012 GRC to remove the costs of the fuel cell project at CSU Long Beach. Nevertheless, SCE explains it remains committed to completing development of fuel cell facilities at the other locations in its original application, CSU San Bernardino and UC Santa Barbara.

DRA recommends the Commission deny the FCE petition on the basis that the project is unnecessary and will provide no benefit to ratepayers. DRA contends the project is duplicative of existing fuel cell demonstration projects and will be unnecessarily costly to ratepayers who already fund SGIP to provide incentives to fuel cell and wind technologies. DRA suggests, however, that should the Commission approve FCE's petition, the Commission should specify that the cost of the project at the new site shall not exceed the original amount approved in D.10-04-028.