2. Procedural History
The Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) for this proceeding was adopted by the Commission on May 5, 2011. The Scoping Memo and Ruling of Assigned Commissioner (Scoping Memo) was issued July 8, 2011. The Scoping Memo noted that Senate Bill (SB) 2 (1X) (Simitian), Stats. 2011, ch.1, makes significant changes to the renewables portfolio standard (RPS) program.1 The Scoping Memo identified four "highest priority" issues for immediate attention in the Commission's implementation of the new RPS statute. One of them is "implementing the most urgent new compliance rules and resolving initial `seams' issues between compliance rules for the 20% RPS program and new 33% RPS program compliance rules set by SB 2 (1X)." (Scoping Memo at 3.)
On July 12, 2011, the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) Ruling Requesting Comments on Implementation of New Portfolio Content Categories for the RPS Program asked parties to comment on the interpretation of the new statutory provisions in Section 399.16. Comments were filed on August 8, 2011.2 Reply comments were filed on August 19, 2011.3 On July 15, 2011, the ALJ's Ruling Requesting Comments on New Procurement Targets and Certain Compliance Requirements for the Renewables Portfolio Standard Program asked parties to comment on the interpretation of several new statutory provisions, including the new provisions related to RPS compliance. Comments were filed on August 30, 2011.4 Reply comments were filed on September 12, 2011.5 The ALJ's Ruling Requesting Supplemental Comments on Reporting and Compliance Requirements for the Renewables Portfolio Standard Program (February 1, 2012) gave parties the opportunity to comment on additional issue related to RPS compliance under SB 2 (1X). Supplemental comments were filed on February 10, 2012.6 Supplemental reply comments were filed on February 21, 2012.7
The issues addressed in this decision were submitted on February 22, 2012.8
1 The RPS is codified at Pub. Util. Code § 399.11-399.31. Unless otherwise noted, all further references to statutory sections are to the Public Utilities Code.
2 Comments were filed by Alliance for Retail Energy Markets (AReM); Arizona Public Service Company (APS); BP Wind Energy North America Inc. (BP); California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA); California Wastewater Climate Change Group; Calpine Corporation (Calpine); Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies (CEERT); Center for Resource Solutions (CRS); City and County of San Francisco (CCSF); Clean Energy Renewable Fuels, LLC (Clean Energy); Coalition of California Utility Employees (CUE); County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Sanitation Districts); Davenport Newberry Holdings LLC (Davenport); Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA); Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy); enXco Development Corporation (enXco); Evolution Markets; Green Power Institute (GPI); Iberdrola Renewables, Inc. (Iberdrola); Independent Energy Producers Association (IEP); Large Scale Solar Association (LSA); Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP); LS Power Associates, L.P (LS Power); Marin Energy Authority (Marin Energy); NextEra Energy Resources, LLC (NextEra); Noble Americas Energy Solutions LLC (Noble Solutions); Northwest Energy Systems Company; NV Energy, Inc.; Ormat Technologies Inc. (Ormat); Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E); Powerex Corporation (Powerex); San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E); Sempra Generation; Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. (Shell); Sierra Club California; SolarReserve, LLC; Southern California Edison Company (SCE); The Utility Reform Network (TURN); TransWest Express LLC (TransWest); Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS); and Western Power Trading Forum (WPTF).
3 Reply comments were filed by AReM; CMUA; California Wastewater Climate Change Group; Calpine; CCSF; CUE; Sanitation Districts; Davenport; DRA; Duke Energy; Iberdrola; LSA; LS Power; Noble Solutions; NV Energy; PG&E; PacifiCorp; Powerex; SDG&E; SolarReserve; SCE; Solar Alliance, California Solar Industries Association, Vote Solar (jointly; collectively, Solar Alliance); TURN; TransWest; UCS; and WPTF.
4 Comments were filed by AReM; CMUA; California Pacific Electric Company (CalPeco); California Wind Energy Association and LSA (jointly) (collectively, CalWEA/LSA); Calpine; CCSF; DRA; GPI; IEP; LADWP; Marin Energy; Noble Solutions; PacifiCorp; PG&E; L. Jan Reid (Reid); SDG&E; Shell; Sierra Club California; SCE; TURN and CUE (jointly) (collectively, TURN/CUE); TransWest; and UCS.
5 Reply comments were filed by AReM; CalPeco; CalWEA/LSA; Calpine; CEERT; CCSF; DRA; GPI; Noble Solutions; PG&E; PacifiCorp; Reid; SDG&E; SCE; and TURN/CUE.
6 Supplemental Comments were filed by AReM; Bear Valley Electric Service and CalPeco (jointly); CMUA; CalWEA; Calpine; CCSF; DRA; GPI; LADWP; Marin Energy; Noble Solutions; PacifiCorp; PG&E; Powerex; SDG&E; SCE; and TURN.
7 Supplemental reply comments were filed by California Association of Small and Multi-Jurisdictional Utilities; CalWEA; CCSF; GPI; Noble Solutions; PG&E; SDG&E; and SCE.
8 See Rule 13.14 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.
