IV. Approval of Updated Plans

In its comments, ORA states that it supports the approval of each utility's procurement plan for the purpose of allowing the utilities to resume procurement. However, ORA notes there are many areas that require ongoing review and potential revision and adjustment. Therefore, it requests that the Commission should make clear that acceptance of the utilities' plans does not preclude the adoption of adjustments or revisions to those plans.

Our approval of the updated procurement plans, as revised by each utility's adopted confidential appendix, is to put in place the upfront standards and practices under which each utility will conduct procurement. Any adjustments or revisions that are requested by the utilities or other parties will be considered only on a prospective basis. As set forth in the utilities' procurement plans, D.02-10-062, and this decision, periodic compliance reviews and forecast proceedings will be undertaken.

TURN states that it finds PG&E's filing replete with characterizations and interpretations of the terms of AB 57/SB 1976 that TURN does not necessarily agree with or accept. TURN requests that the Commission specifically state that its approval of a procurement plan for PG&E does not in any way imply agreement with the utility's legal interpretations. TURN recommends that the focus here should be on the substance of the plan, not on legal arguments over theoretical disputes that may never arise in practice.

We agree with TURN. The legal interpretation of AB 57/SB 1976 is found in the Commission's decisions and the procurement plans must be in compliance with that interpretation. Several parties have filed applications for rehearing of Commission decisions in this proceeding. The legal merits of those challenges will be addressed by the Commission in separate decisions and, if appropriate, changes will be ordered to the procurement plans based on rehearing decisions.

On November 26, 2002, the Independent Energy Producers Association filed a petition for Commission review of redacted materials, seeking public disclosure of the basic range of assumptions regarding supply and demand conditions and utility expected requirements so that entities considering new project development or future marketing of existing generation can reasonably anticipate whether, in fact, there will be a market for their products and services.⁶ Opposition to IEP's motion was filed December 4 by Edison, December 9 by PG&E, and December 12 by SDG&E.

The material sought by IEP is market-sensitive information. We decline to perform the in-camera review requested by IEP. We deny the motion without prejudice and will allow IEP to renew its motion in the long-term planning phase.

We are concerned with specific language in the procurement plans that addresses DWR contracts and DWR/utility coordination procedures that may be contrary to other Commission orders. Nothing in the approved procurement plans should be contrary to the procedures adopted in the DWR/utility servicing agreements and operating agreements and the underlying decisions adopting those agreements. To the extent any material in the procurement plans filed by the respondent utilities is contrary to the referenced agreements and decisions, those sections are not approved here. We have identified and addressed such conflicts in the confidential appendices. In the event we have failed to resolve any conflicts, we instruct affected parties to bring such conflicts to our attention.

The confidential appendices list the specific modifications that this decision orders to the November procurement plans filed by the respondent utilities. These appendices are filed under seal and are subject to the May 1, 2002 protective order governing access to and the use of all protected materials in this proceeding. In addition, the utilities are not authorized access to each others' appendices. Confidential Appendix A modifies PG&E's November 12, 2002 Plan and November 22, 2002 supplemental revision, confidential Appendix B modifies Edison's November 12, 2002 procurement plan, and confidential Appendix C modifies SDG&E's November 15, 2002 procurement plan. Each respondent utility should obtain a copy of its individual appendix from Interim Chief Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Carol Brown, or her designee, and is responsible for providing copies to all individuals authorized to receive this material within 5 days. The attorneys for ORA and TURN may obtain copies of all appendices directly from ALJ Brown, or her designee.