5. Conclusion

We evaluated SCE's application for approval of the CPV PPA in light of the following factors: conduct of the RFO; need for new capacity in SCE's service territory; need for new capacity by August 1, 2010; applicability of SB 1368 and GHG emissions; whether the CPV project could be considered since it was on a Greenfield site, not a Brownfield site; transmission delivery; compliance with the EAP loading order; and LCBF evaluation. In summary, we make the following findings:

1. SCE's conduct in respect to the fast-track RFO and the selection of CPV was reasonable;

2. The CPV PPA is needed to preserve system reliability, and there is no precise certainty as to whether the need for power from CPV will be significantly greater in 2011 than in August 2010 when CPV is scheduled to come on-line;

3. The CPV facility will be a peaking, not a baseload resource, so the greenhouse gas EPS does not apply here;

4. The most recent CAISO's Deliverability Study indicates that the power from the CPV facility will be fully deliverable under the study's conditions;

5. SCE's 2006 LTPP indicated that SCE complied with the EAP loading order in assessing what resources were needed to meet the needs of its service territory; and

6. SCE utilized a LCBF methodology in evaluating the CPV bid against other bids in the fast-track RFO.

We therefore approve SCE's application for approval of the CPV PPA. Consistent with the PPA, payments to CPV will begin when the project comes on-line. In addition, we find that the CPV payments are recoverable in full through rates, subject only to SCE's prudent administration of the contract, and that the costs and benefits of the CPV PPA are to be allocated to all benefitting customers in accordance with D.06-07-029.