7. Assignment of Proceeding

Mark J. Ferron is the assigned Commissioner and Melissa K. Semcer is the assigned ALJ in this proceeding.

1. CARE filed its petition for modification within the one year timeframe allowed for under Rule 16.4.

2. The Mariposa, Tracy, LECEF, and Marsh Landing Projects, totaling 1,157 MWs, are intended to fill PG&E's need for new capacity through 2015.

3. The Commission approved the Oakley Project in D.10-12-050 for the period 2016 and beyond.

4. PG&E filed three separate applications, A.09-09-021, A.09-10-022, and A.09-10-034, in addition to the Mariposa Settlement Agreement (A.09-04-001), for approval of contracts to meet its 2006 LTPP need authorization.

5. The Commission has a stated preference for a simple and streamlined long-term need authorization application process in order to support decisional consistency and discourage parsing of projects into different applications as a means to circumvent our rulings.

6. The Tracy and LECEF Projects were evaluated as part of PG&E's 2008 LTRFO process.

7. In determining which projects to approve to meet PG&E's 2006 LTPP need authorization, the Commission evaluated all applications filed by PG&E both individually and collectively.

8. The Mariposa PPA was approved on its own merits in D.09-10-017.

9. CARE's March 5, 2012 Motion for Leave to File Confidential Materials Cited in Reply Comments seeks confidential treatment for citations from the Direct Testimony of Kevin Woodruff on behalf of TURN in A.09-09-021. By ruling issued on September 8, 2010 in A.09-09-021, ALJ Darwin E. Farrar allowed this material to be filed under seal and remain confidential for three years from the date of the Ruling.

1. CARE's petition for modification was timely filed and is therefore not prejudicial.

2. Approval of the Oakley Project by D.10-12-050, in addition to the Tracy, LECEF, Mariposa, and Marsh Landing Projects, does not result in PG&E procuring more new generation than authorized by D.07-12-052 or D.10-07-045 and does not result in a violation of Condition A of the Mariposa Settlement Agreement.

3. PG&E's filing of three separate applications, A.09-09-021, A.09-10-022, and A.09-10-034, in addition to the Mariposa Settlement Agreement (A.09-04-001), for approval of contracts resulting from its 2008 LTRFO process, exceeds the number of contracts (one) allowed for under Condition B of the Mariposa Settlement Agreement.

4. PG&E violated Condition B of the Mariposa Settlement Agreement.

5. The Commission was able to effectively evaluate all applications filed by PG&E to meet its 2006 LTPP authorization, both individually and collectively.

6. The act of filing multiple applications, while a violation of Condition B of the Mariposa Settlement Agreement, does not diminish or change our original finding in D.09-10-017 that the Mariposa PPA approved via the Mariposa Settlement Agreement is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with the law, and in the public interest.

7. A stay or suspension of the Mariposa PPA is unreasonable because it would unnecessarily and unfairly harm Mariposa LLC for subsequent actions taken by PG&E.

8. CARE's March 5, 2012 Motion for Leave to File Confidential Materials Cited in Reply Comments should be granted as set forth herein. The confidential material in question should remain protected under the timeframe provided for in ALJ Farrar's Ruling in A.09-09-021, i.e., three years from September 8, 2010, the date the Ruling was issued.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The October 11, 2010 Petition of CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc. to Modify Decision 09-10-017 is denied.

2. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) must file the minimum number of applications possible (recognizing that occasionally circumstances may warrant the filing of multiple applications) to meet any future long-term procurement need authorization. PG&E must adhere to the following rules when filing multiple applications to meet future long-term procurement need authorizations:

a) PG&E must include a table in each application cross-referencing all other applications filed to meet a Commission approved long-term need authorization including application number, project names, project size, and anticipated project online date.

b) In the event that a filed application precedes future anticipated filings, PG&E must state that future applications will be filed along with an estimated filing date.

3. The March 5, 2012 Motion of CAlifornians for Renewable Energy for Leave to File Confidential Materials Cited in Reply Comments is granted. The confidential material in question shall remain protected for three years from September 8, 2010, the date the material was originally granted confidential status in Application 09-09-021 by assigned Administrative Law Judge Darwin E. Farrar.

4. Application 09-04-001 is closed.

This order is effective today.

Dated March 8, 2012, at San Francisco, California.

I abstain.

/s/ MICHEL PETER FLORIO

Previous PageTop Of PageGo To First Page