8. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of Administrative Law Judge Brown in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code and comments were allowed under Rule 14.3 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed on February 5, 2009 by TURN, AReM, and SCE and reply comments were filed on February 9, 2009 by DRA and SCE.

The comments by SCE, TURN and DRA convinced us that the proposed decision did not adequately consider whether parties were on notice that the Commission would consider and potentially adopt a proposed modification to the cost allocation. Further, the comments convinced us that the proposed decision did not adequately consider the fairness and equity of allocating the costs to all benefiting customers. Finally, the August 9, 2006 recommendation by the CAISO was a significant factor in issuing the ACR because the proposed units would enhance grid reliability benefitting all customers. Accordingly, this decision is modified as necessary so that the costs at issue will be allocated to all benefiting customers, not just bundled service customers.