2. Procedural Background

In Decision (D.) 06-03-024, the Commission approved demand response activities and budgets for Southern California Edison Company (SCE), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for 2006 through 2008, and required these utilities to file utility-specific demand response program and budget applications for the 2009 to 2011 time period by June 1, 2008.

In D.09-08-027 (the decision), the Commission approved demand response activities and budgets for SCE, SDG&E and PG&E for 2009 through 2011. On March 18, 2010, SCE filed a petition for modification (the petition) of several aspects of the decision, including authority to eliminate its previously planned Energy Options Program, authority to shift funds from the Energy Options Program to the Capacity Bidding and Demand Bidding Programs, approval to transition its existing Participating Load Pilot to a Proxy Demand Resource pilot program, authority to redirect $2,535,000 of Demand Response Portal funding and $1,000,000 of customer aggregation group funding to develop support systems necessary for Proxy Demand Resource participation, and clarification of rules for direct participation of aggregators in the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) markets. No parties filed comments on or protests to that Petition for Modification.

On June 3, 2010, D.10-06-002 in Rulemaking (R.) 07-01-041 addressed issues related to direct participation, including the procedure for SCE to create a Proxy Demand Resource pilot, and adopted preliminary policies on direct participation. Development of more detailed rules for direct participation is continuing in Phase 4 of R.07-01-041.

In August 2010, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) assigned to this proceeding issued a ruling requesting information on what portions of the March petition were moot or under consideration in other proceedings, and whether SCE had any other changes to the details of the petition since its filing in March. On August 16, 2010, SCE filed a response to this ruling stating that several issues raised in the initial petition were either moot or under consideration in another proceeding and no longer at issue in this request. In this filing, SCE reiterated its desire for direction on rules for direct aggregator participation in CAISO markets in the appropriate proceeding, R.07-01-041. Also in this supplemental filing, SCE clarified that the remaining issues requiring a decision in this proceeding are the elimination of the Energy Options Program, and its fund shifting requests. The September 16, 2010 filing also modified the amounts of some of SCE's original fund shifting requests. No parties commented on or protested the initial SCE Petition or the supplemental filing as allowed in the ALJ ruling, so the matters addressed in this decision are uncontested.