CXW/BWM/jgo 9/21/2001
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking into the operation of interruptible load programs offered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Edison Company and the effect of these programs on energy prices, other demand responsiveness programs, and the reliability of the electric system. |
Rulemaking 00-10-002 (Filed October 5, 2000) |
PHASE 2 SCOPING MEMO AND RULING OF
PRESIDING OFFICER AND ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER
Pursuant to Article 2.5 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules), and the December 12, 2000 Scoping Memo and Ruling, this Phase 2 Scoping Memo and Ruling addresses: (1) issues, (2) need for hearing, (3) schedule, (4) final oral argument, and (5) electronic service.
1. Issues
As identified in both the Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) and the December 12, 2000 Scoping Memo and Ruling, the issues to be addressed in this proceeding are:
1. An examination of the role of customers on a utility's interruptible tariffs to ensure reliable and reasonably priced electric service within California.
2. Coordination of the variety of interruptible, curtailable and demand responsiveness programs being offered and proposed in California.
3. Identification of alternative means for customers to reduce their energy usage during periods of peak demand.
4. Revision and an update to the Commission's priorities for curtailing customers during times of energy shortages.
Phase 1 addressed these issues for Summer 2001. Phase 2 will address these matters for the period after Summer 2001.
The specific issues that will be addressed in Phase 2 are identified in Attachment A. These issues are developed from the OIR, Phase 1 proceedings, Phase 2 Prehearing Conference (PHC) Statements, the September 7, 2001 Phase 2 PHC, correspondence from the California Energy Commission (CEC) dated September 12, 2001, and a response from respondent utilities dated September 13, 2001.
Respondent utilities shall file and serve reports on hospitals less than 100 beds, and skilled nursing facilities, as ordered in Decision (D.) 01-04-006, and as identified in Attachment A. Respondent utilities shall file and serve proposals to implement priorities for customers experiencing extreme temperatures (Senate Bill 68, Pub. Util. Code Section 2772), including the presentation of expert medical opinion, a review of appropriate literature and research, and anything else necessary to reasonably implement this legislation. Further, respondent utilities shall file and serve proposals and comments on all issues. Other parties may file and serve proposals and comments on any or all issues.
Some issues merit a brief discussion. For example, the Commission has separately directed respondent utilities to conduct a workshop to develop a more complex Optional Binding Mandatory Curtailment (OBMC) circuit aggregation program for Commission consideration through a petition for modification by March 1, 2002. (D.01-06-087, Ordering Paragraph 3.) Further, the Commission invited parties to also address the 10-day baseline measurement issue for OBMC programs at that workshop. (D.01-06-087, mimeo., page 14.) Respondent utilities suggest that these issues be included in workshops conducted in Phase 2. I agree. As a result, these issues are included in Attachment A, and should be considered in Phase 2 workshops. Absent Commission modification of D.01-06-087, however, the Commission-ordered procedure for consideration of these issues must be followed. That is, recommendations for program changes regarding these two issues must be presented through a petition for modification. While a petition for modification may be filed at any time, the schedule includes dates for a petition and responses that allow the matter to be considered within the Phase 2 decision.
Industrial customers1 recommend that Phase 2 issues include whether or not Southern California Edison Company (SCE) has accurately determined the number of interruption events remaining under the Schedule I-6 program for 2001. This is a compliance issue, and should be raised in another forum (e.g., the filing of a complaint, wherein a complainant would allege that SCE is in violation of a provision of law, or an order or rule of the Commission). Moreover, a Phase 2 decision is not scheduled until early 2002. Industrial customers do not propose a decision on this issue before the end of 2001, but one would seemingly be necessary for the decision to have an effect on implementation of Schedule I-6 events during 2001. If the issue deserves Commission consideration, industrial customers may file a complaint or other pleading, and move for an expedited schedule or other expedited relief, to the extent necessary and reasonable.
The CEC recommends that Phase 2 presume some form of real time prices (RTP) are in effect during 2002. According to CEC, RTPs must be adopted by December 31, 2001 (Pub. Util. Code Section 353.3), and will be considered in the rate stabilization proceedings (A.00-11-038 et al., and A.00-11-045 et al.) Respondent utilities point out that RTP proposals were submitted on August 17, 2001 in A.00-11-038 et al. Respondent utilities recommend that the Commission coordinate RTP issues so that the August 17, 2001 proposals can be acted upon in a time frame consistent with the schedule adopted in this proceeding. I encourage parties2 to make recommendations in this proceeding that are consistent and compatible with recommendations made in A.00-11-038, so that the Commission may coordinate outcomes.
The CEC also recommends a review of several "high" or "global" level policy issues, such as the purpose of demand reduction (DR) programs, criteria for adopting the appropriate mix of DR programs, cost recovery issues, and others. By letter dated September 12, 2001, CEC recommends addressing issues at "micro" and "macro" levels by adding two additional phases. CEC proposes that Phase 2 be devoted to short-term program options and be completed by January 2002, Phase 3 be opened to consider long-term policy issues and be completed by December 2002, and Phase 4 be opened to address customer specific curtailment issues and be completed by August 2003.
I decline to adopt this recommendation. The proposed "global" issues go beyond the scope adopted by the Commission in the OIR. Further, both the OIR and the December 12, 2000 Scoping Memo contemplate that this proceeding will be completed by April 5, 2002. I seek to reach that goal.
Any person, however, may file a petition asking the Commission to consider adopting, amending, or repealing a regulation. (Pub. Util. Code Section 1708.5.) Nonetheless, I agree with concerns raised by respondent utilities, and ask persons to considering waiting until the final Phase 2 decision is issued before identifying additional issues, and filing a petition seeking consideration of a future proceeding.
The University of California and the California State University (UC/CSU) recommend ongoing consideration of essential customer status issues. In particular, UC/CSU identify potentially inconsistent treatment by respondent utilities and the Commission in the essential customer classification of police and fire services among various campuses, and other customers (e.g., State Center Community College District). I decline to add further review of essential customer status for police and fire customers. On the other hand, a police, fire, or other customer may file a complaint if the customer believes it has not been properly classified within an essential customer classification in violation of law or any order or rule of the Commission, or may file a pleading that seeks other appropriate relief.
Finally, parties and persons may use the workshops to discuss ideas and develop consensus. The Commission also encourages parties and persons to meet and confer in any other way that facilitates reasonable and timely resolution of issues. Proposals and comments must be presented through the process, pleadings and schedule adopted herein, however, to enable efficient and timely consideration of these matters by the Commission.
