STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
505 VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298
May 20, 2003 Agenda ID #2258
TO: PARTIES OF RECORD IN RULEMAKING 01-10-024
This is the proposed decision of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Allen, previously designated as the principal hearing officer in this proceeding. It will not appear on the Commission's agenda for at least 30 days after the date it is mailed. This matter was categorized as ratesetting and is subject to Pub. Util. Code § 1701.3(c). Pursuant to Resolution ALJ-180 a Ratesetting Deliberative Meeting to consider this matter may be held upon the request of any Commissioner. If that occurs, the Commission will prepare and mail an agenda for the Ratesetting Deliberative Meeting 10 days before hand, and will advise the parties of this fact, and of the related ex parte communications prohibition period.
The Commission may act at the regular meeting, or it may postpone action until later. If action is postponed, the Commission will announce whether and when there will be a further prohibition on communications.
When the Commission acts on the proposed decision, it may adopt all or part of it as written, amend or modify it, or set it aside and prepare its own decision. Only when the Commission acts does the decision become binding on the parties.
Parties to the proceeding may file comments on the proposed decision as provided in Article 19 of the Commission's "Rules of Practice and Procedure." These rules are accessible on the Commission's website at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov. Pursuant to Rule 77.3 opening comments shall not exceed 15 pages. Finally, comments must be served separately on the ALJ and the assigned Commissioner, and for that purpose I suggest hand delivery, overnight mail, or other expeditious method of service.
/s/ ANGELA K. MINKIN
Angela K. Minkin, Chief
Administrative Law Judge
ANG:hkr
ALJ/PVA/hkr DRAFT Agenda ID #2258
Ratesetting
Decision PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJ ALLEN (Mailed 5/20/2003)
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking to Establish Policies and Cost Recovery Mechanisms for Generation Procurement and Renewable Resource Development. |
Rulemaking 01-10-024 (Filed October 25, 2001) |
ORDER INITIATING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SENATE BILL 1078
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
ORDER INITIATING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SENATE BILL 1078
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD PROGRAM 22
Preliminary Issue: Creditworthiness 44
Preliminary Issue: Renewable Energy Credits 88
Flexible Rules for Compliance 3434
Standard Contract Terms and Conditions 4646
Comments on Proposed Decision 5050
ORDER INITIATING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SENATE BILL 1078
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD PROGRAM
California Senate Bill (SB) 1078 established the California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, with a stated intent of attaining a target of 20 percent renewable energy for the State of California. To reach that goal, the legislation requires an increase in procurement of renewable energy of at least one percent per year. The Legislature found that increasing California's reliance on renewable energy resources may have significant economic, social, health, and environmental benefits. (Pub. Util. Code § 399.11.) SB 1078 requires the Commission to adopt, not later than six months after its effective date: 1) a process for determining the market price of electricity; 2) a process that provides criteria for the rank ordering and selection of least-cost and best-fit renewable resources to comply with the annual obligations of the RPS program; 3) flexible rules for compliance in cases of excess or inadequate annual procurement; and 4) standard contract terms and conditions. (Pub. Util. Code § 399.14(a)(2).) This decision takes these first steps in the process of implementing SB 1078.
Procedural Background
Consistent with SB 1078, the Commission is working collaboratively with the California Energy Commission in this proceeding. (See, Administrative Law Judge's Ruling Issuing Workplan and Collaboration Guidelines, dated February 3, 2003.)
Because of the statutory deadline, this proceeding had a highly expedited schedule, particularly given the complexity of the tasks involved:
February 25, 2003 Workshop: Developing Flexible Compliance
Mechanisms
March 4 Workshop: Determining the Market Price Referents
March 11 Workshop: Establishing Standard Contract Terms and
Conditions
March 18 Workshop: Defining Least Cost and Best Fit and Bid
Ranking Criteria
March 27 Testimony
April 7-16 Evidentiary Hearings
April 28 Concurrent Opening Briefs
May 5 Concurrent Reply Briefs
May 20 Proposed Decision
