Rule 77.7(f)(9) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure provides in relevant part that:
"...the Commission may reduce or waive the period for public review and comment under this rule...for a decision where the Commission determines, on the motion of a party or on its own motion, that public necessity requires reduction or waiver of the 30-day period for public review and comment. For purposes of this subsection, "public necessity" refers to circumstances in which the public interest in the Commission adopting a decision before expiration of the 30-day review and comment period clearly outweighs the public interest in having the full 30-day period for review and comment. "Public necessity" includes, without limitation, circumstances where failure to adopt a decision before expiration of the 30-day review and comment period...would cause significant harm to public health or welfare. When acting pursuant to this subsection, the Commission will provide such reduced period for public review and comment as is consistent with the public necessity requiring reduction or waiver."
PG&E initially asked that the Commission rule on its petition within three days of the date it was filed.
We balance the public interest in quickly amending D.01-04-006 against the public interest in having a full 30-day comment cycle on the proposed amendment. We conclude that the former outweighs the latter. We must respond quickly to provide additional assurance (beyond that already provided by the memorandum accounts initially adopted in D.01-04-006) of cost recovery so that respondent utilities may successfully implement the orders in D.01-04-006. Failure by respondent utilities to fully implement the orders in D.01-04-006 jeopardizes public health and safety by significantly increasing California's exposure to rolling blackouts in Summer 2001. We seek valuable public review and comment of our proposed change, and find that a reduced period balances the need for that input with the need for timely action before Summer 2001.