9. Next Steps

As determined earlier in this opinion, important elements of the comprehensive RAR program that we envision for California require consideration in further proceedings. These include topics that were identified in D.04-10-035 as "second generation" RAR topics as well as matters such as local RAR that were considered but not fully developed in Phase 2 of the RAR portion of this rulemaking. Also, while we believe that today's decision is fully consistent with AB 380, we need to ensure that we take all actions necessary to fully implement the legislation. For example, the program we implement today applies to the three major California IOUs, but AB 380 encompasses all LSEs, including the smaller IOUs.

However, R.04-04-003 has been open since April 1, 2004. Instead of keeping this docket open for consideration of additional RAR issues, when the outstanding non-RAR issues in R.04-04-003 are completed we will close this docket.

We note that our staff has already taken significant steps towards initiation of a rulemaking to consider the development of a centralized capacity market, and we direct staff to continue those efforts. (See Footnote 7, supra.) In addition, we ask that our staff present us with a proposal to initiate a new, focused rulemaking proceeding that would complete our efforts to establish a comprehensive RAR program. To give effect to our intention that local capacity requirements be implemented for compliance year 2007, we intend to complete our review of such requirements by June 2006. This staff proposal should include a recommendation on whether a single rulemaking should address both capacity markets and other unfinished business for RAR, or whether separate, parallel proceedings should be initiated. As part of this effort, we believe it would be helpful for our staff to present a general order that compiles into a single source document the elements of the RAR program.

Previous PageTop Of PageNext PageGo To First Page