DISCUSSION
This advice letter raises two questions: 1) what is the appropriate trade-off between discounts and obligations for program participants, and 2) what obligation does SCE and this Commission have to program participants when considering a program change?
SCE customers voluntarily choose to participate in the air conditioning cycling program, presumably after an analysis of the offered discount and the potential for curtailments. This proposal changes the basis for that analysis by increasing the customer's obligations without a change in discount. We would expect that some program participants would choose to leave the program rather than accept the new terms and some potential participants would forgo the program because of the change in terms. We assume that SCE has considered this affect and it believes the benefits of increased flexibility outweigh the potential loss of participants. We will not second guess SCE at this time.
Premier's protest concerns the ability of program participants to be notified of and react to the proposed change. We share premier's concern that program participants may not be aware of the proposed change and its affect on their electric service. Program participants should receive notice that the conditions they agreed to have changed. If SCE wishes to implement this change they must send written notices to all program participants explaining the program change and informing participants of their right to switch tariff schedules.
Having received notice, program participants also need the ability to act if the program change is not acceptable to them. The majority of participants in this program have been on tariff schedule D-APS or GS-APS for more than 12 months. According to SCE's tariffs, these participants can change rate schedules if they do not believe the program is in their interest. If not modified, participants who have been on the program less than 12 months may not change schedules. This is not acceptable. SCE's proposed tariff schedules should be modified to allow participants a 30-day window, from the time they receive written notice of the program change, to leave the program without penalty. Premier's request, in its protest, that participants be given notice and the opportunity to exit the program without penalty is granted.
SCE requests that the 30-day comment period be reduced. In this case, the 30-day comment period falls during the summer peak season.1 Rule 77.7(f)(9) requires this Commission to engage in a weighing of interests.2 We have balanced the public interest in avoiding the possible harm to public welfare flowing from delay in considering the Resolution against the public interest in having the full 30-day period for review and comment, as required by Rule 77.7(f)(9). We conclude that reducing the public comment period will serve the public interest while minimizing public harm.
By letter dated September 13, 2000, the Energy Division Director suspended the tariff sheets attached to Advice Letter 1479-E for up to 120 days. We hereby ratify the Energy Division Director's suspension of the tariff sheets attached to Advice Letter 1479-E and determine that the advice letter and attached tariff sheets, as originally filed, never went into effect.
1 Opinion Proposing Changes to Original Proposal for New and amended Rules on Public Review and Comment, D.99-11-052, mimeo at 8, n.5 (November 18, 1999).
2 Rule 7.7(f) and Rule 7.7.(f)(9) together provide as follows: ". . . the Commission may reduce or waive the period for public review and comment . . . (9) for a decision where the Commission determines, on the motion of a party or on its own motion, that public necessity requires reduction or waiver of the 30-day period for public review and comment." Rule 7.7(f)(9) goes on to explain that "[f]or purposes of this subsection, `public necessity' refers to circumstances in which the public interest in the Commission adopting a decision before expiration of the 30-day review and comment period clearly outweighs the public interest in having the full 30-day period for review and comment."
