2. Procedural Background
The Commission set the initial parameters for the MPR in Decision (D.) 03-06-071. The method for calculating the MPR was first developed in D.04-06-015. In D.05-12-042, the methodology for calculating the MPR was expanded and stabilized. This methodology has been used for the resolutions implementing the MPR for 2005 (Resolution (Res.) E-3980 (April 13, 2006)) and 2006 (Res. E-4049 (December 14, 2006)). For 2007, in D.07-09-024, the Commission adopted an interim method to account for the costs of the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG adder). The 2007 MPR was implemented in Res. E-4118 (October 4, 2007).1
D.07-09-024 authorized the use of the GHG adder for the 2007 MPR only. That decision also authorized an examination of the MPR for 2008 and later years, to determine whether any changes should be made to the MPR methodology, including how the costs of regulation of GHG emissions should be reflected in the MPR in 2008 and later years.
The 2008 review process began with the comments filed March 6, 2008 in response to the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) Ruling Requesting Pre-Workshop Comments on 2008 Market Price Referent for the Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (February 8, 2008) (pre-workshop ruling).2 On March 27, 2008, Energy Division staff held a workshop where parties discussed potential modifications to the MPR methodology, inputs, and assumptions for 2008 and later years. Post-workshop comments were requested by the ALJ's Ruling Requesting Post-Workshop Comments on 2008 Market Price Referent for the Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (May 20, 2008) (post-workshop ruling) and were filed on June 6, 2008.3 Reply comments were filed on June 18, 2008.4
The ALJ's pre-workshop ruling noted that "[a]fter considering the information developed in the workshop and all comments and reply comments, the Commission may modify any of its prior MPR decisions, or issue a new decision on the MPR, or it may conclude that no changes warranting a decision are needed." This decision effectuates the second option, issuing a new decision that incorporates all revisions to the MPR methodology necessary for 2008 and later years, subject to any new developments that may warrant further changes.
1 The MPR model for 2007 may be found at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/electric/RenewableEnergy/mpr.
2 Pre-workshop comments were filed by California Wind Energy Association (CalWEA), California Cogeneration Council, and the Concentrated Solar Power Companies, jointly; Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies (CEERT); Central California Power (CCP); Energy Producers and Users Coalition (EPUC) and Cogeneration Association of California, jointly (collectively, EPUC); Green Power Institute (GPI); GreenVolts, Cleantech America, and Community Environmental Council, jointly; Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E); San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E); Solar Alliance and California Solar Energy Industries Association, jointly (collectively, Solar Alliance); Southern California Edison Company (SCE); The Utility Reform Network (TURN); and Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
3 Post-workshop comments were filed by CalWEA, California Cogeneration Council, Large-scale Solar Association, and Solar Alliance, jointly (collectively, CalWEA); CCP; Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA); EPUC; GPI; PG&E; SDG&E; Shell Energy North America (US), L.P (Shell).; SCE; TURN; and UCS.
4 Post-workshop reply comments were filed by CalWEA; CEERT; CCP; GPI; PG&E; SCE; TURN; and UCS.
