ALJ/CAB/hkr Date of Issuance 12/5/2008
Decision 08-12-018 December 4, 2008
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Integrate Procurement Policies and Consider Long-term Procurement Plans. |
Rulemaking 06-02-013 (Filed February 16, 2006) |
DECISION GRANTING INTERVENOR COMPENSATION
TO AGLET CONSUMER ALLIANCE
FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONTRIBUTION TO DECISION 07-09-044
This decision awards Aglet Consumer Alliance $20,350.05 in compensation for its substantial contributions to Decision 07-09-044. Today's award payment will be allocated to the affected utilities. This proceeding remains open.
1. Background
In Decision (D.) 06-07-029, the Commission adopted a cost-allocation methodology that allows the advantages and costs of new generation to be shared by all benefiting customers in an investor-owned utility's (IOU) service territory. The decision designated that the IOUs should procure the new generation through long-term power purchase agreements (PPA). The capacity and energy from the PPA are unbundled and the rights to the capacity are to be allocated among all the load serving entities in the IOU's service territory.
The energy revenues are to be determined by the results of periodic energy auctions for the PPA energy rights.1 The Commission ordered in D.06-07-029 that the utilities develop implementation proposals for the energy auctions and that the Energy Division hold workshops "prior to the IOUs' filing their Implementation Proposals, and subsequent workshops as needed."2
On September 25, 2006, an Assigned Commissioner's Ruling/Scoping Memo was issued that directed the utilities to file their implementation proposals for the energy auction by October 20, 2006. The IOUs made their filing on October 20, and a workshop for all parties was subsequently conducted on November 1, 2006.
On November 17, 2006, the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a ruling establishing a schedule for the submission of new or revised energy auction proposals on December 12, 2006, to be followed by a workshop on December 18, 2006. At the December 18 workshop, it became evident that there were many complex, interrelated issues related to the energy auction. As a result, the parties agreed that it would be appropriate to refer issues regarding the energy auction process and products to mediation in an effort to resolve many of the underlying issues.
On January 3, 2007, ALJ Kenneth Koss was appointed to oversee mediation efforts to develop the energy auction process and products. After the first noticed mediation session, the parties agreed to continue meeting to work towards the development of a settlement agreement. From January 2007 forward, a number of parties were actively involved in negotiating numerous aspects of the energy auction process and products. The parties engaged in almost 20 negotiating sessions, either face-to-face or telephonic, and exchanged detailed draft proposals. As a result of these intensive mediation efforts, a multi-party settlement was reached regarding principles for the process and products for the energy auction.3 The auction described in the settlement agreement is essentially a sealed bid auction with an undisclosed minimum bid price.
The motion to approve the Settlement regarding Energy Auction Principles was filed on May 11, 2007. During the 30-day comment period, no comments were filed on the proposal. The Settlement has been uncontested since its presentation.
In D.07-09-044, the Commission adopted all provisions of the Joint Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement/Settlement) presented by Settling Parties outlining Principles for the process and products to be included in the energy auction established by the Commission in D.06-07-029, except for two specific clarifications of the Settlement's proposed allocation of resource adequacy capacity and several other general clarifications.
1 D.06-07-029 at 31, Item #16.
2 Id.
3 The Settling Parties include Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc., Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. (Constellation), Western Power Trading Forum (WPTF), the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), Aglet Consumer Alliance (Aglet), J. Aron & Company, The Utility Reform Network (TURN), Mirant Corporation; Mirant California, LLC, Mirant Delta, LLC (collectively Mirant), Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM), and Barclays Bank, PLC.
