COM/MP1/avs Mailed 8/24/2007
Decision 07-08-008 August 23, 2007
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking into Implementation of Public Utilities Code Section 390. |
Rulemaking 99-11-022 (Filed November 18, 1999) |
OPINION ADOPTING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AND INDICATED
QUALIFYING FACILITY SWITCHERS
I. Summary
Today's decision grants the Joint Motion of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), The Utility Reform Network (TURN), the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) and Indicated Qualifying Facility (QF) Switchers (Indicated QF Switchers) (Settling Parties) for Commission adoption of the Settlement Agreement between PG&E and Indicated QF Switchers (Settlement Agreement)1 entered into by some of the owners and/or operators of QFs that had purchase power agreements with PG&E in 2000.
In granting the Joint Motion of Settling Parties (Motion), we also apply the terms of the Settlement Agreement to all QF Switchers,2 including those QF Switchers that have not entered into the Settlement Agreement. Thus, today's decision resolves the QF Switcher Dispute for all QF Switchers who have not previously settled with PG&E.3
Today's decision also resolves the Remand Dispute4 for all QFs which were settling parties in D.06-07-032, and all other QF Switchers. However, there remain a small group of QFs who have not yet resolved the Remand Dispute with Southern California Edison Company (SCE).
1 See, Appendix A.
2 QF Switchers are QFs which switched to the California Power Exchange Corporation (PX) zonal day-ahead market clearing price in lieu of the Commission determined short-run avoided cost (SRAC) energy price.
3 On July 20, 2006, Decision (D.) 06-07-032 in Rulemaking (R.) 04-04-003, R.04-04-025, and R.99-11-022 adopted a settlement agreement that resolved the QF Switcher dispute for 36 of the 58 QF Switchers. However, 22 QF Switchers were not parties to that settlement agreement.
4 See, Remand Dispute, Section II. B.
