IV. Comments on Draft Decision

The draft decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Pub. Util. Code § 311(g)(1) and Rule 77.7 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed on February 21, 2006, and reply comments were filed on February 27, 2006. We have taken the comments into account as appropriate, in clarifying and finalizing this order.

In its comments on the Draft Decision, SCE argues that under Corona's interpretation, a city could qualify for an exemption by acting as an ESP and Meter Service Provider even if the qualifying customers were located in other states outside of California. We agree that in seeking to determine eligibility for the CRS exemption, it would make no sense to count out-of-state customers that would not be subject to Commission jurisdiction nor to the CRS in any event. It is not clear how likely it is that a city would attempt to include such customers in seeking to meet the 100-customer exemption criterion. In any event, in the interests of clarity on this point, we explicitly state that the 100 customer criterion used to meet the exemption eligibility refers to customers that are located within the service territory of the IOU in which CRS would otherwise apply.