LTC/jva 9/5/02
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking on policies and
practices for advanced metering, demand
response, and dynamic pricing.
Rulemaking 02-06-001
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING
FOLLOWING THE FIRST MEETING OF WORKING GROUP 11. Summary
This ruling summarizes the key points considered and discussed at the first meeting1 of Working Group 1, the interagency policysetting group which is comprised of commissioners and staff from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the California Energy Commission (CEC), and the California Consumer Power and Conservation Financing Authority (CPA). At its initial meeting this working group addressed four broad topics: 1) Policy Group Goal Setting; 2) Demand Response Goal Setting; 3) Principles for Tariff and Program Design; and 4) Remaining Proceeding Scope Issues.2 These matters are addressed sequentially, followed by a discussion of the next steps contemplated by the policy group, which meets again on September 16, 2002. We also include preliminary guidance to Working Groups 2 and 3 in this ruling. The policy group invites written comments on this ruling from the parties to this proceeding; such comments are not mandatory, but, if filed, are due on September 12, 2002.3 These comments will enhance the public debate of these issues and will necessarily assist the policy group in providing additional guidance to Working Groups 2 and 3.4
We understand that, aside from the brief time available during the August 26th meeting, this comment opportunity is the first occasion many parties will take to share their detailed views with us. In large measure this is due to the fact that we are following an unusual record building approach in this Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR). First and foremost, this is an interagency effort which requires the CPA, CEC and CPUC to work together to build a common understanding of the nature and scope of the issues to be decided. However, the approach is also somewhat more complex. At least initially in our policy setting exercise, we wish to take an active approach and frame the issues from a broad statewide perspective. This accounts for our decision to ask interagency staff to frame the basic issues at the outset, for we did not want to be in the position of reacting initially to proposals submitted to us by respondent IOUs and other interested parties. We have instead attempted to set a statewide context to assist the respondents and interested parties who must now work to develop programs that are consistent with the policies and goals we articulate for use as guiding tools during the course of the proceeding. We do need the parties' reactions to our efforts in order to ensure that the direction we take will lead to a sound decision. In that vein, we anticipate, and will reflect seriously on, the written comments that will be filed.
1 The first meeting of Working Group 1 was held on August 26, 2002 in San Francisco.
2 The Agenda for the August 26, 2002 meeting, which was published on the CPUC website prior to the meeting, is attached to this Ruling as Item 1. All written materials distributed at the meeting by staff members who are supporting Working Group 1 are identified by sequential item numbers and are attached to this ruling for the use of the parties who plan to file written comments.
3 In addition to the written materials appended to this ruling, parties preparing comments are free to rely on the 100-page Reporter's Transcript of this working group meeting, designated as WS-1 RT.
4 Working Group 2 will focus on large customer (>200 kilowatts (kWs) in average monthly demand) issues, and Working Group 3 will focus on small commercial/residential customer issues (see, generally, Ruling Following Prehearing Conference, pp. 4-7; and Assigned Commissioner's Ruling and Scoping Memo, pp. 3-5)
