2. Policy Group Goal Setting
This rulemaking was initiated in order to address, comprehensively, policies designed to develop demand flexibility as a resource to enhance electric system reliability, reduce power purchase and individual consumer costs, and protect the environment (OIR 02-06-001, mimeo., p. 1). At the outset there is clear consensus that these three goals are our guiding principles. While each agency has its own set of responsibilities,5 each policy decision or program developed in this proceeding must further these goals.
During this discussion a question arose as to whether we should pursue demand response programs designed simply to achieve more price responsiveness, or whether policy makers should also seek some direct load control options. This is an issue that was initially resolved in the assigned commissioner's August 16 Ruling and Scoping Memo by eliminating consideration of "emergency" strategies such as those being addressed in the CPUC's interruptibles docket Investigation (I.) 00-10-002) and directing the scope of our efforts towards "Flexible/Dispatchable" strategies (see, OIR, mimeo., p. 3). However the assigned commissioner's office may be open to considering a broader approach (WS-1 RT 15:17-24), recognizing that direct load control can encompass more than mere emergency response (e.g., economic dispatch issues). Commissioner Rosenfeld encourages such broadening, opining that we should consider both elements in the interests of designing a rational overall system (WS-1RT 15:25-27). Commissioner Rosenfeld would like to explore at least three different forms of dynamic tariffs in each customer working group (time-of-use, critical-peak and real-time pricing tariffs) (WS-1 RT 23-25). The CPA also proposes that demand response programs be considered in an integrated way (WS-1 RT 16:6-16).
One of the policy making themes that pervades the August 26th discussion is the notion of preserving options and not foreclosing good choices that will further our three key policy goals. Naturally that must be balanced by a realistic dose of decisiveness if we are to make progress. And as a result, we will look broadly at the available options as we proceed, and parties should feel free to explore demand response options that simultaneously address both response to emergencies as well as provide a price response to market costs and a targeted contribution to resources. This expanded view is in no way designed to undercut or modify any decision of the CPUC issued in R.00-10-002. That outcome is not our intent and we do not intend to modify existing interruptible programs here. We simply wish to provide the creative thinkers who will be developing program and tariff options in later stages of this proceeding the flexibility necessary to think broadly and comprehensively. Again, we encourage parties to comment on this permutation to the assigned commissioner's August 16th ruling and scoping memo.
5 Item 2, "Mutual Agency Goals" prepared by CPUC Energy Division staff, is attached to this ruling.
