7. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of ALJ Mattson in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and Rule 14.2(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed on February 1, 2007 by PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, CalWEA, Caithness, Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), The Utility Reform Network (TURN), and the Green Power Institute (GPI). Reply comments were filed on February 6, 2007 by PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, TURN and GPI.

We make several changes to the proposed decision based on comments and replies. These include modifying the schedule; declining to adopt the proposed administrative structure, but retain our existing advice letter process for review of RPS contracts; clarifying that currently executed contracts need not be renegotiated for SB 107 provisions, but contracts submitted after the date this order is mailed should include SB 107 provisions where and as relevant; declining to direct SCE to modify its Pro Forma Agreement to include all standard terms and conditions from D.04-06-014; deferring consideration of modification to standard terms and conditions to the petition for modification of D.04-06-014; and improving the adopted language for Green Attributes and RECs for increased consistency with D.04-06-014.