13. Reasonableness of the Settlement

As described in Sections 9 through 11 above, the settlement agreement adopted here is reasonable in light of the whole record, and is in the range of outcomes that would be expected if the elements of the case were fully litigated.

The settlement agreement is consistent with law and state policy and is in the public interest, providing for adoption of a cost effective AMI system that meets the Commission's minimum functionality requirements and can reasonably be expected to support state energy policy objectives such as increasing demand response, energy conservation, and load control, and providing near-term energy usage information to customers, and increasing the availability of dynamic rate options. The balancing account mechanism and associated cost recovery provisions of the settlement agreement are uncontested by parties and are reasonable, consistent with law, and consistent with the record. The settlement agreement is also cost effective and will provide net benefits of between $9 million and $304 million of net benefits over the project's expected useful life.

SCE's AMI application and the Settlement Agreement include ratepayer expenditures for marketing, education and outreach regarding the AMI program.  Our decision today approves funding for this purpose.  Today we also consider the California Long-Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan ("Plan") which includes goals and strategies to better integrate California's Demand Side Management (DSM) activities, including AMI, and in particular marketing, education and outreach.  For example, the Plan calls for integrated marketing of DSM opportunities with AMI deployment.  We direct SCE to work with Commission staff to ensure SCE's AMI marketing, education and outreach program is consistent with the goals and strategies set forth in the Plan regarding DSM integration and coordination of marketing, education, and outreach.