2. CONSENT AGENDAPlease see complete Consent Agenda here (pages 2-8, items 1-20).
Items #2 and 3 held for 6/18 Agenda; Items #17 and 18 Withdrawn; Items #23, 30-33, 35-39 taken up with Consent Agenda
[view discussion of item 2] 1 minutes 7 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
3. REGULAR AGENDA
Regular Agenda - Energy Orders
21
[8515]
R08-08-009 - Order Instituting Rulemaking to Continue Implementation and Administration
of California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program.
PROPOSED OUTCOME: (1) Conditionally accepts 2009 Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS)
Procurement Plans of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison
Company (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), subject to the filing of an
amended Plan including: (a) a special Imperial Valley bidders conference; (b) a more standardized
project viability methodology and calculator; (c) not requiring a bidder to execute an exclusivity
agreement for negotiations before notification to all bidders of their shortlist position; (d) removal of
discussion regarding use of Tradable Renewable Energy Credits (TRECs) until the Commission
authorizes the use of TRECs; (e) removal of language that would prohibit a bidder from submitting a
bid for a contract term in excess of 20 years; (f) removal of language regarding PG&E Pilot Program
for Pre-approvals; (g) removal of language regarding SCE Program for Pre-approvals of short-term
contracts; (h) acceptance of SCE’s RPS Standard Contract Program for projects up to 20 MW as
part of SCE’s 2009 RPS Procurement Plan (with encouragement for other utilities to adopt a similar
program); (i) acceptance of SDG&E conducting an Imperial Valley sub-solicitation within its 2009
general RPS solicitation; (2) Accepts 2009 Supplements to Integrated Resource Plans of PacifiCorp
and Sierra Pacific Power Company, but directs PacifiCorp to improve its showing on its plan to reach
20% by 2010 in its next RPS filing; (3) Adopts schedule for 2009 RPS solicitation for largest utilities;
(4) Each utility shall file and serve an amended RPS Procurement Plan within 14 days and, unless
suspended by staff, shall begin using its Plan within 21 days.
ESTIMATED COST: No immediate, direct costs are foreseen, but changes to current rates may
occur when costs are later incurred from RPS contracts signed pursuant to 2009 RPS Procurement
Plans and solicitations.
(Comr Peevey - ALJ Mattson)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Ratesetting.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385456
[view discussion of item 3] 8 minutes 44 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
4. 22
[8522]
R08-08-009 - Order Instituting Rulemaking to continue implementation and administration of
California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program.
PROPOSED OUTCOME: (1) Establishes a fast track procedure for review of procurement contracts
of less than 10 years duration (short-term contracts) entered into by investor-owned utilities (IOUs)
under the renewables portfolio standard (RPS); (2) Establishes price reasonableness benchmarks for
short-term contracts eligible for fast-track review and for recovery of the cost in IOUs' rates; (3)
Establishes requirements for terms and conditions of short-term contracts eligible for fast-track review;
(4) Affirms that short-term contracts not eligible for fast-track review will continue to be reviewed
using the Commission's standard procedures for RPS contracts; (5) Establishes methods for
Commission review of reasonableness of RPS procurement contracts negotiated by IOUs outside of a
competitive RPS solicitation.
ESTIMATED COST: None foreseen.
(Comr Peevey - ALJ Simon)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Ratesetting.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=E21556
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
5. 23
[8523]
A08-06-006 - Southern California Gas Company and San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
PROPOSED OUTCOME: (1) Public Utilities Code § 1709 bars the air quality, gas quality, Wobbe
Index, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) issues from being relitigated in this
proceeding; (2) An environmental review of A.08-06-006 is not required under CEQA; (3)
A.08-06-006 remains open to address the remaining issues.
ESTIMATED COST: None foreseen.
(Comr Simon - ALJ Wong)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Ratesetting.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385651
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
6. 24
[8524]
A06-08-010 - San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E).
PROPOSED OUTCOME: Approves, with a minor clarification and with specified reporting
requirements to permit the Commission to monitor compliance, a settlement of Phase 3 of this
proceeding by the Consumer Protection and Safety Division and SDG&E. Settlement provisions
include: (1) SDG&E does not admit to any violation of Rule 1.1 of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure but acknowledges its failure to fully comply with Rule 8.3 and tenders an apology for
imprecision in its communications with decision-makers in connection with certain ex parte meetings
held during Phase 2; (2) SDG&E commits shareholder funds for specified charitable contributions,
reimbursement to the Commission for expenses related to this proceeding, and payment to the State's
General Fund; (3) SDG&E commits shareholder funds for developing a professional responsibility
class and an ex parte best practices manual, both in consultation with identified Commission staff.
ESTIMATED COST: Shareholders will (1) make payments of $200,000 to specified charities,
$220,000 to the Commission as reimbursement of expenses, and $500,000 to the State's General
Fund, and (2) fund a professional responsibility class for SDG&E staff, Commission staff, and outside
practitioners for up to $200,000.
(Comr Grueneich - ALJ Vieth)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Adjudicatory.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=E21538
Item held for 7/9 Agenda
7. Regular Agenda - Energy Resolutions and Written Reports
25
[8518]
Res E-4243 - Southern California Edison Company (SCE).
PROPOSED OUTCOME: This resolution affirms a prior Executive Director’s Action Resolution
E-4225 findings related to SCE’s proposed Moorpark-Newbury 66 kV Subtransmission line. This
resolution finds that: (1) SCE complied with the notice requirements for the proposed construction of
facilities; (2) The proposed facilities were exempt from Permit to Construct requirements; (3) Facts
claimed in protests to Executive Director’s Action Resolution did not support a finding that General
Order 131-D exemption criteria applied; (4) Protests should be dismissed.
ESTIMATED COST: Moorpark-Newbury 66kV Subtransmission Line was filed as Advice Letter
2272-E Notice of Proposed Construction Project Pursuant to General Order 131-D, therefore no
cost information is provided or required for Permits to Construct.
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=381223
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
8. 26
[8520]
Res E-4242 - Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric
Company (SDG&E), and Southern California Edison Company (SCE).
PROPOSED OUTCOME: Resolution adopts, with modifications, the Qualifying Facility (QF)
Standard Offer Contracts proposed by PG&E, SCE and SDG&E. Upon adoption, there will be one
QF Standard Offer Contract across all three electric Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs).
The new contract may be signed by new and existing QFs with expired contracts in addition to QFs
pursuing other contracting methods such as participating in an IOU’s Request for Offer process or
negotiating a bilateral contract.
ESTIMATED COST: Adoption of this resolution does not imply any specific cost; however, upon
adoption, the utilities may enter into contracts with new or existing QFs. These contracts will form part
of the utilities’ procurement costs for electricity. It is impossible to know in advance the total cost of
those contracts, but in the past, QF power has represented no more than 20% of the utilities’ portfolio.
Contracts executed with existing QFs should not result in any additional costs as the utilities were
already purchasing power from these QFs in the past. Contracts signed with new QFs will represent
new incremental expenditures, but this spending will be offset by the reduced need for new generation
as a result of contracting with the new QF.
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=382056
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
9. 27
[8529]
Res E-4246 - Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric
Company (SDG&E), and Southern California Edison Company (SCE).
PROPOSED OUTCOME: (1) Resolution implements a Market Index Formula (MIF) used in
calculating Qualifying Facility (QF) payments and originally defined by the Commission in
D.07-09-040; (2) Approves in part and rejects in part, with modification, the methodology and data
sets proposed by the utilities.
ESTIMATED COST: This resolution adopts a specific cost formula for QF contracts. Part of the
formula involves utilizing future market price indices, such that the cost impact of this decision, in
aggregate, is difficult to predict, either in direction or magnitude.
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=382592
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
10. Regular Agenda - Communication Orders
28
[8317]
R06-05-028 - Rulemaking on the Commission’s Own Motion to review the
Telecommunications Public Policy Programs.
In 2006, the Commission opened this Rulemaking to evaluate California’s universal service public
policy programs in light of the competitive forces that had irrevocably changed how consumers
purchase communication services. The Commission recognized that “business as usual” monopoly
regulatory practices around traditional voice telephone were not sustainable in a competitive
communication marketplace with various types of carriers with different technologies competing.
Through this Rulemaking, the Commission set out to reform California LifeLine in order to ensure
high-quality communication services were affordable and widely available to all. This decision
recognizes significant technological and regulatory changes in the telecommunications industry and the
flexibility of the statutory structure underlying the Moore Universal Telephone Service Act, which we
now refer to as the California LifeLine Program (California LifeLine or LifeLine). The decision reviews
the current state of California LifeLine including how, absent change, the fund will grow by more than
60% to almost $500 million over the next few years.
The decision recognizes that the current methodology is not in the best long-term interest of consumers
and reviews the options for change. The decision “de-links” California LifeLine from the AT&T basic
rate structure in order to ensure ongoing compliance with Section 874 of the Public Utilities Code, and
determines that a Specific Support methodology is the best option to continue to meet the goals of the
Moore Act and our overall universal service goals.
The decision sets a Specific Support discount at 55 percent of the highest basic rate of the State’s
communications companies without regard to the telecommunication provider or technology of service
selected. This has the advantage of providing each customer the same support amount and may
provide greater flexibility to low income customers to select services beyond basic residential landline
phone service, including voice services from cable providers or from wireless communications services.
Such an approach acknowledges the range of providers of voice communications services beyond
traditional landline telephones, and enhances technology neutrality by allowing a LifeLine customer to
choose the provider that best meets his or her unique needs. The initial California LifeLine discount
under the revised methodology will be $12.20 effective on April 1, 2010. The decision also expands
the LifeLine program to include data services for consumers that receive wireless equipment through
the CPUC's Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program (DDTP). Customers who meet the
eligibility requirements for both the DDTP and California LifeLine programs can apply their California
Lifeline discount to data services provided by carriers. The decision clarifies that wireless carriers may
be reimbursed by California LifeLine for providing discounted service to customers, and modifies the
income-based criteria to match the low income energy program (CARE) income-based criteria on an
interim basis pending the outcome of the review the CPUC is conducting of the interim CARE
income-based criteria. Finally, the decision eliminates extra payments to carriers for administration,
bad debt, and to make-up for forgone federal support. This proceeding is closed.
(Comr Chong - ALJ Bushey)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Quasi-Legislative.
Agenda 3232, Item 52 4/16/2009 (Grueneich);
Agenda 3233, Item 33 5/7/2009 (Grueneich);
Agenda 3234, Item 31 5/21/2009 (Peevey)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=384506
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
11. Regular Agenda - Communication Orders
29 (Rev.)
[8482]
R02-12-004 - Service Quality Standards for all Telecommunications Carriers and Revisions
to General Order 133-B
Order Instituting Rulemaking on the Commission’s own Motion into the service quality standards for all
Telecommunications Carriers and revisions to General Order 133-B. PROPOSED OUTCOME:
Adopts General Order (GO) 133-C to establish minimum service quality measures and standards for
the installation, maintenance and operator answer time (business office and repair) for local exchange
telephone service that: (1) Apply in their entirety to general rate case incumbent local exchange
carriers; (2) Apply in part to Uniform Regulatory Framework carriers; and (3) Exempt wireless,
Voice Over Internet Protocol and IP-enabled carriers and resellers and excludes medium and large
businesses from installation and answer time measures; Adopts in GO 133-C major service
interruption reporting for all facilities-based certificated and registered carriers the Federal
Communications Commission’s significant disruption and outage reporting (Network Outage Reporting
System) requirements with confidentiality protections; Requires wireless carriers to provide coverage
maps on their websites and at retail locations; Relieves Pacific Bell Telephone Company from
submitting out of service repair interval data under the standard established in Decision 01-12-021, but
requires Pacific Bell Telephone Company to report GO 133-C and Automated Reporting
Management Information System out of service data.
ESTIMATED COST:
No additional regulatory costs anticipated; compliance costs will vary by class of telephone carrier with
carriers in general experiencing slightly greater compliance costs initially as they modify reporting
requirements in response to positive reporting of new service quality measures and standards and
eliminate or phase out other measures and reporting requirements.
(Comr Chong - ALJ Grau)
Pub. Util. Code § 311 – This item was mailed for Public Comment.
Pub. Util. Code §1701.1 -- This proceeding is categorized as Quasi-Legislative.
Agenda 3234, Item 32 5/21/2009 (Staff)
06/02/2009 - This revision was not shown on the Agenda mailed to the public.
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385402
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
12. Regular Agenda - Legislative and Other Matters
30
[8573]
AB 51 (Blakeslee)
This bill would require the California Public Utilities Commission to limit to 10% the Investor-Owned
Utilities' administrative costs for energy efficiency programs. This bill would also make it clear that
"administrative costs" would apply to personnel and overhead, but not marketing, outreach, and
program evaluation. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Oppose Unless Amended)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=384995
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
13. 31
[8503]
AB 698 (Skinner)
This bill would streamline the Commission’s approval process for the sale, lease or other encumbrance
or disposition of public utility property. (Leg Sub Recommendation: SUPPORT)
Agenda 3233, Item 44 5/7/2009 (Simon);
Agenda 3234, Item 38 5/21/2009 (Bohn )
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=384624
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
14. 32
[8574]
AB 975 (Fong)
This bill would require water corporations regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission to
install water meters on new service connections and on unmetered connections by 2020, under certain
conditions. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Support)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385003
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
15. 33
[8575]
AB 1108 (Fuentes)
This bill would require the owner of a master-metered mobilehome park to transfer ownership and
operational responsibility for the gas or electric system to the gas or electrical corporation in the area in
which the park or community is located. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Oppose Unless Amended)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385076
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
16. 34
[8540]
AB 1110 (Fuentes)
This bill would modify the definition of “cogeneration” to apply more widely to fuel cell technologies.
The definition would change from the term “power production” to “generation of electricity” to be
more inclusive of fuel cells. The bill would also reduce the minimum thermal efficiency requirements to
be considered cogeneration from 42.5% to 40%, specifically for fuel cells. (Leg Sub
Recommendation: OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED)
Agenda 3234, Item 41 5/21/2009 (Staff)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=384615
Item held for 6/18 Agenda
17. 35
[8576]
AB 1536 (Blakeslee)
This bill would modify the existing Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) and renames it the Clean
Technology Incentive Program (CTIP). (Leg Sub Recommendation: Support with Amendments)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385004
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
18. 36
[8577]
SB 7 (Wiggins)
This bill would allow net energy metering customers to carry forward an annual bill credit for an
additional two years. This bill would also change the date of a required report to the Governor and the
Legislature on the costs and benefits of net energy metering from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010
and require the Commission to include an evaluation of the impact of net surplus electricity generation
and bill credits. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Support with Technical Amendments)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385082
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
19. 37
[8578]
SB 696 (Wright)
This bill would provide a limited California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption for
implementation of specific South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules creating or
providing air emission offsets from the SCAQMD’s internal air emissions bank within the District’s air
basin. This bill would also require the California Energy Commission to perform a need assessment
for a thermal power plant proposed to be located in the District. (Leg Sub Recommendation:
Support with Amendments)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385080
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
20. 38
[8579]
SB 712 (Padilla)
This bill would require an information and referral service provider to operate a "211" system in a
manner that is consistent with the applicable orders of the Federal Communications Commission and
the California Public Utilities Commission. This bill would designate the California Health and Human
Services Agency as the State's lead entity. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Support)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385033
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
21. 39
[8580]
SB 806 (Wiggins)
This bill would require the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to limit the Investor-Owned
Utilities' administrative costs for energy efficiency programs to five percent. This bill would also require
the CPUC to ensure that no incentive payments are made unless the energy efficiency savings meet
certain conditions. (Leg Sub Recommendation: Oppose Unless Amended)
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Cyberdocs/AgendaDoc.asp?DOC_ID=385084
Item taken up with Consent Agenda
22. Regular Agenda - Commissioner's Reports
Commissioner Simon Report
[view discussion of item 22] 1 minutes 21 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
23. Commissioner Grueneich Report
[view discussion of item 23] 2 minutes 48 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
24. Commissioner Bohn ReportNone
25. Commissioner Chong Report
[view discussion of item 25] 3 minutes 12 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
26. President Peevey Report
[view discussion of item 26] 39 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
27. Regular Agenda - Management Reports and Resolutions
Executive Director Paul Clanon Report
Announcement of Commission Awards
[view discussion of item 27] 2 minutes 38 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
28. Moment of Silence
Moment of silence observed for the passing of Commission friends and colleagues, including Roz Rosenfeld, wife of California Energy Commissioner Art Rosenfeld
[view discussion of item 28] 1 minutes 56 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
29. Regular Agenda - Management Reports and Resolutions
(if needed)
30. CLOSED SESSION
Please see complete Closed Session agenda here (pages 2-8, items 1-20).
Approved Consent Items #44 and #45
[view discussion of item 30] 54 seconds
[Send item as an eclip]
