Author: CPUC

ELECTRIC RESTRUCTURING STATUS		updated  05-06-98

State of California	Public Utilities Commission
		San Francisco
M E M O R A N D U M
		www.cpuc.ca.gov

Date    :	May 6, 1998

To      :	Commissioners

From    :	Douglas Long/Gurbux Kahlon
	Electric Restructure Coordinators

Subject :	Status of Electric Restructuring Matters, and Upcoming Milestones, 
		for Commissioner Reports Discussion

	Attached to this cover memo is a status report on electric restructuring activity since the Commission Meeting held on April 23^rd  including upcoming events and filings.

	In our continuing effort to provide more information to the public, this report will be placed on the Commission's Web site following the Commission conference at: 
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/electric_restructuring/status/status_index.shtml.  

cc:	W. Franklin
	P. Arth
	L. Carew
	P. Clanon
	W. Meyer
	ERT

I. Agenda Items, Proposed Decisions, and Final Decisions	
II. Ratesetting	
A. Performance‑Based Ratemaking (PBR)	
1. Generation PBR, A. 96-07-009, A. 96-07-018	
2. Distribution PBRs - Applications Ordered by D.95-12-063, Ordering Paragraph 17.	
B. Unbundling, D. 97-08-056 (A.96-12-009; A96-12-011; A.96-12-019)	
1. Unbundling Revenue Cycle Services	
2. Unbundling Tariffs	
C. Streamlining	
III. Filings Necessitated By Delay In Implementation of the ISO/PX	
IV. Transition Costs	
A. CTC:  A. 96-08-001 et. al.	
B. AB 1890 Rate Reduction Bonds	
C. Qualifying Facilities (QF) Issues	
V. Divestiture Proceedings	
A. SDG&E Sec. 851 “Divestiture” Application 97-12-039	
B. PG&E, Second Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 98-01-008	
C. PG&E, Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 96-11-020	
D. Southern California Edison, Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 96-11-046	
VI. Direct Access	
A. General	
B. Load Profiling	
C. Tariffs and Service Agreements for Direct Access	
D. Meter and Data Communication Standards	
E. Retail Settlements and Information Flow	
F. Registration of Electric Service Providers (ESP), 415-703-3779	
VII. FERC‑Related Issues	
A. Settlement Negotiations Continue in the Must-Run Cases	
B. A Prehearing Conference was held on April 15, 1998	
C. FERC held a two day public conference on ISOs on April 15-16, 1998	
D. FERC Issues Order Authorizing the ISO to Issue Up to $310 Million in Long-Term Debt	
E. The PX files two Amendments	
F. The ISO and the PX file Revised Staging Plans at the FERC	
G. ISO files settlement with the FERC on its Grid Management Charge	
H. The ISO and the PX Commence Operations on March 31, 1998	
I. The ISO files Amendment No. 7	
J. FERC issues orders on various FERC Electric Restructuring Dockets	
K. FERC issues order on PX Tariff Amendments	
L. FERC issues orders on ISO Tariff Amendment Nos. 1 - 6	
M. PG&E, SDG&E and Edison Refile their Transmission Owner Tariffs	
N. Settlement Negotiations in the ISO’s Grid Management Charge	
O. Prehearing Conferences held March 17-18 in Various Dockets	
P. Variety of New Filings and Amendments by the ISO/PX	
Q. A Prehearing Conference Held on February 17, 1998	
R. ISO and PX file Notices of Delay in Start of Operations	
S. ISO files a Variety of Negotiated Agreements at the FERC	
T. 	Purchasers of Edison’s Plants filed Amendments Must-Run Agreements	
U. 	Recent FERC Decisions……………………………………………………………………………………………30
VIII. The Electricity Oversight Board, ISO, and PX	
IX. Unbundling Cost of Capital	
X. Public Purpose Programs	
A. California Board for Energy Efficiency Programs (CBEE)	
B. Governing Board For Low-Income Programs (LIGB)	
XI. Hedging Energy Costs	
A. PG&E	
B. EDISON	
C. SDG&E	
XII. Small and Multi Jurisdictional Utilities	
XIII. CEQA Issues Related to Divestiture of Fossil Generation	
XIV. Reliability	
A. Inspection, Reporting, & Repair Standards for Reliability	
B. Emergency Standards for Reliability	
C. Performance Standards	
D. Interstate Issues	
XV. Customer Education	
A. “Plug In, California!”	
B. The Commission’s Outreach Plan	
C. The Electric Education Trust	

I.	Agenda Items, Proposed Decisions, and Final Decisions

On the Agenda for May 7^th

05-07-98

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Kramer Junction Company (Kramer) and LUZ Solar Partnerships III through VII (LUZ).
For approval of the reserved portion of the applicants’ settlement agreement.  In D.97-05-074, the Commission adopted a settlement agreement between PG&E, Kramer, and LUZ.  The Commission reserved for later any ratemaking adjustment resulting from the settlement.  Since the instant application was served on the service list for PG&E’s current Biennial Cost Adjustment Proceeding, A.97-03-002, and no protests have been filed, the Commission now makes the finding that there will be no disallowances imputed to PG&E resulting from the settlement.  This proceeding is closed.
(Com Neeper - ALJ Patrick)

CA-15

A98-02-037

05-07-98

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
For authority to identify and separate components of elctric rates, effective January 1, 1998.  A.96-12-011, A.96-12-019 - Related matters.  This decision denies the petition to modify D.97-08-056 filed by New Energy Ventures seeking changes to the method adopted by the Commission for calculating the Power Exchange credit on utility bills.  This order also grants the petition to modify D.97-08-056 filed by The Utility Reform Network and Utility Consumers Action Network regadring the allocation of costs related to the California Alternative Rates for Energy program.
(Coms Duque/Conlon - ALJ Malcolm)
(Agenda 2989, Item CA-20, 3/26/98; Agenda 2990, Item H-1, 4/9/98; Agenda 2991, Item H-2, 4/23/98; Red - Commission)

H-2

A.96-12-009

05-07-98

Order instituting rulemaking on the Commission’s proposed policies governing restructuring California’s electric services industry and reforming regulation. I94-04-032 - Related matter.
This decision denies extends the term for interim utility administration of energy efficiency and low-income assistance programs until December 31, 1998 and December 31, 1999, respectively.
(Com Neeper - ALJ Gottstein)
(Agenda 2990, Item 6, 4/9/98; Agenda 2991, Item H-6, 4/23/98; Req - Commission)

H-4

R.94-04-031

05-07-98

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
This decision conditionally grants the application PG&E for approval of an agreement to sell a portion of its distribution and transmission system to Modesto irrigation District.  This decision also approves the application with the condition that PG&E allocate to its ratepayers 75% of the gains from the sale of facilities and that the parties remove from the agreement provisions which would restrict competition between them for 25 years.
(Com Conlon - ALJ Malcolm)

1

A.97-07-030

05-07-98

Southwest Gas Corporation (Southwest).
This decision dismisses the application of Southwest to modify D.95-04-075 and applicant is ordered to proceed with all deliberate speed to fulfill its obligations set forth in D.95-04-075 and D.94-12-022.  This proceeding is closed.
(Com Duque - ALJ Wright)

6

A.97-07-015

05-07-98

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
This resolution approves a $10 million increase in its 1998 base revenues to implement a settlement between itself, the County of San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Coastal Unified School District.
(Advice Letter 1745-E, filed February 13, 1998)

E-1

E-3535

05-07-98 | Disposition of application for rehearing of Resolution G-3288 by Suncor Energy Inc. (Suncor).  Suncor alleges that the Commission has broadened the scope of the commensurate discount rule.  Suncor argues that the rule should be applied so that whenever Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) offers a discount for transportation service on the Malin path, PG&E must offer the same discount for the same transportation service on the Topock and California path. | EX-4 | A.97-12-035
05-07-98 | Disposition of applications for rehearing of D.97-12-093 filed by Sierra Pacific Power Corporation and PacifiCorp.  D.97-12-093 addresses the application of AB 1890 to smaller and multi-jurisdictional utilities including such matter as direct access, bill unbundling, transition cost recovery, the operation of transmission and public purpose programs.  The applications allege a number of error including claims that rates are unreasonable and that AB 1890 and/or D.97-12-093 do not meet constitutional requirements relating to confiscation and equal protection. | EX-7 | A.97-05-011, A.97-06-046, A.97-07-005, A.97-08-064
05-07-98 | Disposition of application for rehearing of D.97-12-024 filed by Sesco, Inc., which authorized Southern California Edison Company and Southern California Gas Company to enter into a contract for DMS Services. | EX-12 | A.97-03-045

Final Decisions from the April 23^rd Meeting

04-23-98

Southern California Edison Company (Edison).
For authority to increase its authorized level of base rate revenue under electric revenue adjustment mechanism for service rendered beginning January 1, 1992 and to reflect this increase in rates. I91-02-079 - Related matter. This decision approves a settlement of Phase 5 issues between Edison and the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. Edison will credit ratepayers with $9.9 million plus interest. These proceedings are closed.
(Com Duque - ALJ Stalder)  (Section 311)

CA-3

D.98-04-043

A.90-12-018

04-23-98

Order instituting rulemaking on the Commission’s proposed policies governing restructuring California’s electric services industry and reforming regulation. I94-04-032 - Related matter.
This decision directs Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company and San Diego Gas & Electric Company to submit proposals for the Energy Reliability Index in their respective applications for reviewing as-available capacity payments to Qualifying Facilities.
(Com Conlon - ALJ Malcolm)

CA-6

D.98-04-046

R.94-04-031

04-23-98

Order instituting rulemaking on the Commission’s proposed policies governing restructuring California’s electric services industry and reforming regulation. I94-04-032 - Related matter.
This decision denies Independent Energy Producers Association’s (IEP) petition to modify the Preferred Policy Decision. IEP’s petition is moot in light of AB 1890 and San Diego Gas &Electric’s A97-12-039, which seeks authority to divest electric generation facilities and power contracts.
(Com Conlon - ALJ Minkin)

CA-13

D.98-04-053

R.94-04-031

04-23-98

Southern California Edison Company (Edison).
For authority to increase its authorized level of base rate revenue under the electric revenue adjustment mechanism for service rendered beginning January 1, 1995 and to reflect this increase in rates. I94-02-002 - Related matter. This decision approves a Settlement Agreement regarding The Utility Reform Network’s (TURN) Rate Design Window proposal in this proceeding. The parties proposing the Settlement Agreement are TURN, Southern California Edison Company (Edison), California Industrial Users, California Large Energy Consumers Association, and California Manufacturing Association. Under the Settlement Agreement, Edison will provide its interruptible service program customers official notice that, after March 31, 2002, it will no longer provide a discount for interruptible service under existing tariffs. This decision adopts tariff language revisions to reflect these termination provisions. This decision does not preclude the development, adoption, and implementation of a different interruptible service program applicable to customers after March 31, 2002. These proceedings are closed.
(Com Conlon - ALJ Gottstein)

CA-14

D.98-04-054

A.93-12-025

4-23-98

Order instituting rulemaking on the Commission’s proposed policies governing restructuring California’s electric services industry and reforming regulation. I94-04-032 - Related matter.
This order conditionally approves the policy rules and request for proposal (RFP) proposed by the California Board for Energy Efficiency, with certain modifications. Approval of these documents is conditioned upon our subsequent determination that the approach to administration of energy efficiency programs we adopted in D97-02-014 and subsequent decisions is feasible. We will not take any action to implement today’s adopted policy rules or issue the RFP until this condition is met. If we do not find that this approach is feasible by June 30, 1998, we will consider alternatives, including the option of continued utility administration of these programs.
(Com Neeper - ALJ Gottstein) 
(Agenda 2990, Item 4, 4/9/98; Req - Commission)

H-5

D.98-04-063

R.94-04-031

04-23-98

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
For approval of valuation and categorization of non-nuclear generation-related sunk costs eligible for recovery in the competition transition charge. A96-08-006, A96-08-007, A96-08-070, A96-08-071, A96-08-072 - Related matters. This decision denies, in part, and grants, in part, PG&E’s, Southern California Edison Company’s and San Diego Gas & Electric Company’s joint petition to modify D97-11-074. We grant the petitioners’ request to delay filing applications for the Annual Transition Cost Proceedings. We deny petitioners’ request to delay market valuation of inventories and to further delay filing applications to establish principles to appraise retained assets, beyond the extension granted by the Executive Director.
(Coms Conlon/Bilas - ALJ Minkin)

3

D.98-04-065

A96-08-001

04-23-98

Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Commission.
For a Commission opinion on the effect of the proposed reorganization of Patterson Water District (PWD) within Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E) service territory. This resolution finds that the proposed PWD will substantially impair PG&E’s ability to provide adequate service at reasonable rates in the remainder of PG&E’s service territory unless PG&E’s distribution system is either leased and/or purchased by PWD.

E-2

Res E-3528

II.	Ratesetting
A.	Performance‑Based Ratemaking (PBR)
1.	Generation PBR, A. 96-07-009, A. 96-07-018 
Recent Activity 
•	An Administrative Law Judge’s ruling calling for comments on the proposed closure of this consolidated proceeding was issued on May 1, 1998.  Comments are due May 20, 1998.  Any party proposing consideration of additional issues in this proceeding shall (1) identify the issue(s) which would be addressed, (2) show why this is the appropriate proceeding for doing so, and (3) include a proposed procedural schedule.  Replies to comments may be filed by May 29, 1998.

Upcoming   
•	In accordance with the May 1, 1998 ruling, in the absence of proposals for consideration of additional issues in these proceedings, a proposed order closing the proceeding (once pending intervenor compensation requests are decided) will be submitted to the Commission for disposition.

Other Past Activity/Information of Interest
•	PG&E’s application for rehearing of D.97-12-096 was denied by D.98-03-037.
•	On January 20, 1998, PG&E field an application for rehearing of D.97-12-096.
•	D.97-12-096 (PG&E) and D.97-12-012 (Edison) issued on December 16, 1997.  As alternatives to the performance-based ratemaking (PBR) mechanisms which were originally planned, the Commission adopted mechanisms for determining PG&E’s hydroelectric and geothermal generation revenue requirements and Edison’s hydroelectric revenue requirement beginning in 1998.
•	D.97-11-017 dismissed with prejudice Edison's request for approval of a contingency cost recovery plan for its non-must-run fossil plants pending divestiture of those plants.  
•	D.97-07-037 denied PG&E's petition for modification of D.97-04-042.
•	A June 25, 1997 Joint Ruling of Assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge  determined that PBR for generation was not on a critical path and limited the scope of issues to be heard.  
•	D.97-04-042 clarified the scope of issues to be heard by addressing its role and those of the Independent System Operator and  the FERC with respect to transmission system reliability and related market power issues.

2.	Distribution PBRs - Applications Ordered by D.95-12-063, Ordering Paragraph 17.
Recent Activity  
•	D.97-12-041, which addressed the midterm evaluation of SDG&E's 1994-1998 base rate PBR experiment, directed SDG&E to include a cost-of-service showing with its application. This decision eliminates future SDG&E general rate cases and directs SDG&E to include a gas and electric cost-of-service showing in its PBR application.
•	December 12:  A workshop was held at which SDG&E presented an overview of what will be included in its January 16 filing.
•	January 16, 1998: SDG&E filed its distribution PBR application (A.98-01-014), including a cost-of-service showing.

Upcoming Events  
•	PG&E:  It is expected that PG&E will file its distribution PBR during the first quarter of 1998.
•	SDG&E:  A prehearing conference is scheduled for March 17, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. with Commissioner Neeper and ALJ Minkin.
•	Edison: On December 31, 1997, Edison filed A.97-12-047 to update its distribution PBR for the customer service and reliability requirements established in D.96-09-045 and D.96-11-021.  A prehearing conference is scheduled for February 23 with Commissioner Duque and ALJ Minkin.

Other Past Activity/Information of Interest:
D.97-04-067 authorized PG&E to file its distribution PBR proposal on or after December 15, 1997, and SDG&E to file a distribution PBR application during the last quarter of 1997.  The requirement that Edison file a new distribution PBR application was vacated, since D.96-09-092 dated September 20, 1996 adopted a transmission and a distribution PBR for Edison and provided for its adaptation to a distribution-only PBR.

B.	Unbundling, D. 97-08-056 (A.96-12-009; A96-12-011; A.96-12-019)
1.	Unbundling Revenue Cycle Services

PG&E A.97-11-004; SCE A.97-11-011; SDG&E A.97-12-012:  These are applications filed in compliance with D.97-05-039 to determine the net cost savings resulting when billing, metering and related services are provided by an entity other than the utility distribution company and propose a means for ensuring that customers are not charged by the distribution utilities for those services in such circumstances.  The Commission’s goal is to issue a decision approving unbundled charges for these services no later than January 1, 1999.  By Assigned Commissioners Ruling (ACR), a two phase ratesetting proceeding was adopted.

Recent Activity
•	Phase 1:  On February 6, SCE, SDG&E, and PG&E amended their phase 1 testimony to reflect a common methodology for categorizing, segmenting and calculating revenue cycle bill credits. On February 27, ORA served its phase 1 testimony.  On March 4, TURN/UCAN, So Cal Gas, California City-County Street light Association, and Enron served their phase 1 testimony.  On March 18 rebuttal testimony was filed by SDG&E, PG&E, SCE, SoCalGas, ORA and Enron. Hearings on phase 1 matters took place on April 1 and 7.
	 
	PG&E’s billing problems:  On March 20, 1998, PG&E notified all parties that it would not be able to provide revenue cycle service (RCS) credits on end-use customers’ bills by January 1, 1999.  This was discussed at a March 24 workshop, and addressed at the prehearing conference that same day.  On March 30, PG&E, ENRON, ORA, and QST Energy filed concurrent supplemental testimony proposing solutions to PG&E’s billing limitations.  Responses were filed by PG&E and ENRON on April 6 and this matter was heard on April 7.
	
•	Phase 2:  On February 13, PG&E, SCE and SDG&E provided information on fully allocated costs for providing revenue cycle services, as required by the January 26 ACR.  On March 9, the three utilities amended their phase 2 testimony.  On March 30, the ALJ clarified the scope of the proceeding and required SCE to file amended phase 2 testimony by April 15.  On March 31, SCE filed an errata, correcting errors in its March 9 testimony revising many assumptions and PG&E filed a supplement to its February 13 filing.  ORA filed its testimony on April 6.  The following intervenors filed phase II testimony:  California Large Energy Consumers Association/California Manufacturers Association; ENRON, Cellnet Data Systems, Southern California Gas Company, TURN/UCAN, and the California Energy Commission.  Utilities filed supplemental testimony on April 15 addressing full consolidated billing.  On May 4, intervenors filed PG&E numbers and utilities field rebuttal testimony.

Upcoming Events  

•	May 11	Pre-hearing conference
•	May 11	Parties rebut SCE phase 2 amendments filed April 15
•	May 14 	PG&E files its rebuttal to May 4 testimony 
•	May 18-
•	June 5	Phase2 hearings
•	Jun 26	Opening briefs for phase 2
•	July 10	Reply briefs for phase 2

2.	 Unbundling Tariffs
On August 1, 1998, the Commission adopted D.97-08-056, which disaggregated utility rates into various components, including generation, transmission, distribution, public purpose programs and nuclear decommissioning.

Recent Activity
•	Tariff filings:  Pursuant to D.97-08-056, PG&E, SDG&E and Edison filed compliance advice letters in August, 97.  After receiving several protests to these advice letters and conducting a workshop, the Energy division directed the utilities to file supplemental advice letters.  The Energy Division reviewed those advice letters and resolved several issues related to them in Resolution E-3510, which was adopted on December 16, 1997.  Pursuant to resolution E-3510, SDG&E and Edison filed compliance filings on December 23 and December 24, 1997 respectively.  On December 17, 1997 PG&E sought an extension until December 31, 1997 to file its compliance filing.  The extension was granted on December 19, 1997.  PG&E sought another extension on January 9, 1998. PG&E’s second request for extension was granted.  PG&E made its compliance filing on January 28, 1998.
•	Pursuant to Resolution E-3510, on March 2, 1998, PG&E and SDG&E filed Advice Letters to unbundle their bills by June 1, 1998.  The Energy Division is in the process of reviewing these filings.
•	Petitions to Modify D.97-08-056:  Several parties have filed petitions to modify D.97-08-056.  The Commission has already addressed several of these and is reviewing remaining petitions:  (1)New Energy Ventures petition to modify D.97-08-056 to change the calculation of the PX credit.  A proposed decision on this matter is on the Commission’s meeting agenda;  (2) PG&E Energy Services petition to modify D.97-08-056 to clarify certain matters relating to the calculation of the PX credit; (3) PG&E’s petition to modify D.97-08-056 to permit it to provide billing information to customers which identifies the cost of each utility function in percentages of total bill rather than dollar charges.  The Commission is also considering the appropriate forum for reviewing the Energy Reliability Index pursuant to comments filed by PG&E, Edison, SDG&E, and ORA.
•	On December 16, 1997 the Commission adopted D.97-12-109, which addressed one petition to modify D.97-08-056 from Edison and another from SDG&E asking for special ratemaking treatment for “must-run” costs.  In the same decision, the Commission also considered a petition filed by ORA requesting clarification of SDG&E’s ERAM balances, a joint petition by Edison, PG&E and SDG&E with regard to the appropriate and lawful entries in their Catastrophic Event Memorandum Accounts and a petition by TURN requesting an order from the Commission which would require the utilities to identify on customer bills the costs associated with rate reduction bonds.
•	On March 9, l998, PG&E filed a petition to modify D.97-12-109 (which it titled a “motion”) to clarify the Commission’s intent to permit the recovery of must-run costs.  Edison and SDG&E support PG&E’s petition to modify.  This petition was granted on April 9, 1998.
•	Pursuant to D.97-08-056 the assigned Commissioner issued a ruling on December 16, 1997, authorizing PG&E, SDG&E, and Edison to propose reallocating fixed Administrative and General costs to distribution rate in their respective divestiture applications.  The ruling required the utilities to demonstrate in their filings the reasonableness of the costs they would reallocate to distribution and provide that the costs are fixed and continuing, consistent with D.97-08-056. Pursuant to ruling dated March 20, l998, the assigned Commissioner granted PG&E’s request to have the matters reviewed in its general rate case, A.97-12-020.
•	On March 26,l 998, the Commission  issued D.98-03-050 which granted PG&E’s petition filed on October 29, 1997 to modify D.97-08-056 regarding the treatment of the nuclear decommissioning revenue requirement and averaging of PX costs.  It also granted  Western Mobilehome Parkowners Association’s petition filed on November 25, 1997 to modify D.97-08-056 seeking clarification of the application of the 10% rate discount in master meter tariffs. 
•	
Upcoming Events
The Energy Division is in the process of final review of utilities’ compliance filings.

Other Past Activities and Information of Interest
•	November 19^th:  The Commission issued D.97-11-073 which resolved three petitions to modify D.97-08-056 addressing ratemaking issues.
•	November 5^th:  The Commission issued D.97-11-026 which resolved two petitions to modify D.97-08-056 addressing methods for calculating the CTC. 
	
C.	Streamlining
This proceeding eliminates those accounts and procedures which are no longer necessary as electric industry regulation enters a new phase and establishes certain new accounts.  The streamlining proceeding has resulted in the elimination of ECAC, ERAM, and several other accounts, and has established a new account called the Transition Revenue Account (TRA) to facilitate calculation of headroom.

Recent Activity  
•	March 26, l998:  The Commission issued D.98-03-059 denying PG&E’s petition to modify D.97-10-057 to make an except to the rule that the utility may not carry over costs incurred during the transition period.  The order granted PG&E's request regarding the disposition of balances in certain regulatory accounts.
•	December 23, l997:  The utilities filed Advice Letters complying with Resolution E-3514.
•	December 16^th:  The Commission adopted Resolution E-3514 which accepted certain parts of the utilities’ November 3 Advice Letter filings, but required Edison and PG&E to refile the new TRA tariffs.
•	November 25^th:  PG&E filed a petition to modify D. 97-10-057 with regard to recovery of account balances which remain after the rate freeze period. Edison filed in support of the petition to modify.  The Commission has not yet acted on the petition to modify.
•	November 17^th:  Deadline for parties to file comments addressing the appropriate forum in which to consider all matters relating to the Energy Reliability Index (ERI).  This call for comments was in the streamlining proposed decision.
•	November 3^rd:  Utilities filed Advice Letters to comply with the streamlining decision, D.97-10-057.
•	October 22^nd:   The Commission issued D.97-10-057  which “addresses several issues relating to “streamlining” electric utility tariffs and regulatory accounts.  We initiated this review in Decision (D.) 96-12-077 which approved the utilities’ cost recovery plans pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 1890. We herein direct the utilities to eliminate certain regulatory accounts which are no longer useful with the ratemaking changes we have implemented pursuant to AB 1890.  We find that AB 1890 does not permit the utilities to accumulate costs incurred during the rate freeze period for the purpose of affecting rates during or following the rate freeze period.  We also state our intent to embark on an exploration of the type of ratemaking that will be in place following the rate freeze or transition period.”  (D.97-10-057 p.1) 

Other Past Activity
The streamlining proceeding began in response to an Advice Letter (1005-E) filing by SDG&E in December 1996 in which it sought to eliminate several accounts, including its ERAM, and to establish an account to handle rewards and penalties from its PBR.  On February 20, 1997, the CPUC Energy Division held a workshop addressing the streamlining of various accounts and procedures.  An informational hearing was held on August 25, 1997, at which the utilities provided information regarding existing and proposed ratemaking mechanisms.

Upcoming Events
The December 23^rd Advice Letter filings are being reviewed by Energy Division for compliance with Resolution E-3514.
	
III.	Filings Necessitated By Delay In Implementation of the ISO/PX

Pursuant to D.97-12-131, PG&E, Edison and SDG&E filed advice letters on January 28, 1998, to address the delayed implementation of the ISO and the PX.  The advice letters contain revisions to the utilities’ tariffs which were filed previously in various proceedings related to the electric restructuring (e.g., Transition Costs, Unbundling, Direct Access, Streamlining).  The revisions address rate recovery, cost and revenue accounting or any other activities that must take place during the interim period of January 1, 1998, to the commencement of the ISO/PX.  The advice letters also establish an ISO/PX Implementation Delay Memorandum Account for each utility.  Review of these advice letters is continuing and will be addressed concurrently with the tariff proposals previously filed by the utilities in ER-related dockets.

IV.	Transition Costs
A.	CTC:  A. 96-08-001 et. al.
Transition costs are generation asset related uneconomic costs that utilities will have an opportunity to recover through the Competition Transition Charge (CTC).  The transition cost proceeding (A.96-08-001 et. al.) has addressed most transition cost and CTC terms and conditions issues in two phases and 5 decisions.

Recent Activity
•	A.96-08-001:  Parties filed testimony on April 6 responding to specific questions in a March 16 ALJ ruling related to the application of CTC charges to new customer load under PU Code Section 369.  Hearings were held on April 13 and 14, and an ALJ proposed decision is expected by the end of July.

Upcoming Events
	
•	Resolutions addressing utility transition cost balancing and memorandum account tariff compliance filings are expected to be addressed at the Commission meeting on May 21, 1998.

Other Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	On December 19^th Energy Division held a workshop to discuss utility terms and conditions and balancing and memorandum account compliance filings.
•	On December 15^th utilities filed transition cost balancing and memorandum account tariffs.
•	On December 12^th utilities filed CTC terms and conditions tariffs.
•	On December 10^th parties filed comments on application of CTC to standby service.
•	On December 4^th Commissioner Conlon issued a ruling asking for comments on interpretation of section 369 of the PU Code.  The primary issue to be addressed is application of CTC to standby service.
•	On December 3^rd, 1997 the Commission issued the transition cost tariff issues decision.  This decision provides clarification to CTC terms and conditions tariff issues that were not addressed in the Phase I decision.  This decision also addresses tracking of transition cost obligations and calculation of departing load customer lump sum penalties.
•	On November 19^th, 1997 the Commission issued the transition cost phase II decision (D.97-11-074).  This decision addresses the transition cost eligibility of utility costs and a method to determine the amount of these costs that are eligible for transition cost recovery.
•	Energy Division “Report on Workshop to Address Selected Issues in A.96-08-001 et. al.”:  This document reports discussion that occurred at the Energy Division tariff issues workshop held August 26^th – 29^th, 1997.  The report was filed on September 16^th, 1997.
•	D.97-07-059 was issued in July.  This decision ordered utilities to establish memorandum account to track the reduced rate of return applicable to costs for which utilities seek transition cost eligibility.  It was issued on July 16^th. 
•	Transition cost Phase I decision  (D.97-06-060)  was issued on June 11^th.  This decision addresses accounting mechanisms to apply CTC revenues to transition costs, resolving questions such as which uneconomic costs can be amortized first and how accelerated amortization works.  The decision also establishes broad guidelines regarding transition cost eligibility of certain utility cost items and CTC terms and conditions issues.

B.	AB 1890 Rate Reduction Bonds

Recent Activity
•	January - February 1998:  Tariff language regarding the FTA and the 10% rate reduction continues to be fine-tuned.  
•	January 1, 1998:  The Trust Transfer Amount (TTA, a.k.a. Fixed Transition Amount Charges (FTAC), became effective, along with the 10% rate reduction for residential and small commercial customers.

Past Activity and Information of Interest

Initial Fixed Transition Amount -- FTA (a.k.a. Trust Transfer Amount -- TTA) | | |
| PG&E | Edison | SDG&E
| As Filed | As Filed | As Filed
| Cents/kWh | Cents/kWh | Cents/kWh
Residential | 1.6151 | 1.7230 | 1.5909
Commercial | 1.6883 | 1.8220 | 1.6786
Amount (Billions) | $2.901 | $2.463 | $0.658
•	December 16^th:  SDG&E issued $658 million in bonds.  
•	December 11^th:  Edison issued $2.463 Billion in bonds.  
•	December 8^th:  PG&E issued $2.901 Billion in bonds. 
•	On Or Before The Respective Bond Issuance Dates:  The Commission approved respective Advice Letters for PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E for, among other things, establishment of Rate Reduction Memorandum Accounts and Fixed Transition Amount Charges (FTAC).  
•	On The Respective Bond Issuance Dates:  Issuance Advice Letters filed five or more days prior became effective on the date of the bond issuances.  These ALs set forth the details of the respective transactions.
•	September 3^rd:  The Commission issued four bond-related decisions.  An Interim Opinion, or “Umbrella Decision” was issued first which addressed issues common to each utility.  The Interim Opinion also unconsolidated each of the applications.  After that, three Financing Orders, one for each utility (PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E) were issued in succession.  PG&E was authorized an aggregate principal amount of up to $3.5 billion.  Edison was authorized to recover $3.0 billion, and SDG&E was authorized to recover $0.8 billion.
	
C.	Qualifying Facilities (QF) Issues
Recent Activity
•	See the Energy Division QF Web Site Info as described under the Past Activity section below.
•	May 7, 1998:  Settlement Conference at 2pm at the Commission in San Francisco.  See Notice on the website.
•	April 29, 1998:  Reply Comments filed:  PG&E, Edison, SDG&E, IEP, CCC, NRG Energy Inc. (Jointly), ORA, Watson Cogeneration, and Enron.
•	April 21, 1998: Extension #3 and New Schedule. ALJ Econome granted an oral request by PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E for an extension of time to file Reply Comments on the February 6, 1998 Ruling. This request was made and granted in accordance with Rule 48a of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E are charged with sending.  The following schedule has been revised for the third time and is as follows: 
•	Opening Comments (include request for evidentiary hearings) March 25th, 1998 (unchanged).
•	Reply Comments (include request for closing argument) Now April 29, 1998.
•	Proposed Decision Now No later than July 29, 1998 
•	March 25, 1998: Eight sets of comments were received from: PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E, IEP/CCC, ORA, Watson Cogen., Calif. Integrated Waste Management Board, NRG Energy, Inc., Enron, and SoCalGas in response to the February 6^th Ruling.
•	February 6^th:  Assigned Commissioner and ALJ Ruling Regarding Review of QF Contract Restructurings and Modifications.  This ruling sets forth a procedural schedule for addressing at least four key issues necessary to resolve in order to further facilitate QF contract restructurings or modifications and review thereof.  Opening Comments due on March 9^th.  Reply Comments due on March 23^rd.  Proposed Decision anticipated no later than June 22^nd.  It is not anticipated that hearings will be called for on these issues.  For more information, contact Dave Gamson (dmg@cpuc.ca.gov) or Theo Kemos (tsk@cpuc.ca.gov).
	
Past Activity
•	For past and current activity in this issue area, see the Energy Division Qualifying Facility (QF) Issues Information Page at the following address: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/QF_issues/qf_main_page.htm.
	
V.	Divestiture Proceedings  

Recent Activity 
A.	SDG&E Sec. 851 “Divestiture” Application 97-12-039
Filed December 19, 1997 for the sale of its fossil fuel plants and 20% interest in SONGS. Protests were due February 4, 1998. Protests or responses were filed by the City of Carlsbad, the California Cogeneration Council, and the Independent Energy Producers Association.  SDG&E filed a reply on February 17, 1998, and it filed direct testimony on February 26, 1998.  An ALJ Ruling was issued March 9, 1998, which permits interested parties to file a response on or before March 30, 1998, subsequently extended to April 6, 1998.  A prehearing conference was held on April 30, 1998, and a scoping memo is under preparation for consideration for the assigned Commissioners.
B.	PG&E, Second Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 98-01-008
Filed January 14, 1998, for the sale of Hunters Point, Potrero Hill, Pittsburg, and Contra Costa fossil-fuel plants and the Geysers geothermal plant.  Protests or responses were filed by ORA; Calpine Geysers Company L.P. and Calpine Corporation; the City and County of San Francisco; the Southeast Alliance for Environmental Justice; and Union Oil Company of California, NEC Acquisition Company and Thermal Power Company.  PG&E’s reply was filed on February 27, 1998, and a scoping memo was issued on March 12, 1998.  Phase I briefs were filed on March 23, 1998, and March 30, 1998, and a proposed decision was circulated for internal comment on April 3, 1998.
C.	PG&E, Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 96-11-020
•	This proceeding remains open to deal with intervenor compensation issues.  ACR on eligibility has been prepared and is under review by the assigned offices.
•	December 16^th:  D 97-12-107 approved sale of three fossil plants by PG&E to Duke Energy Power Services, Inc. for the highest bid of $501 million.  Of the three plants, two (Moss Landing and Oakland) are required for the reliable operation of the electrical system.  Pursuant to Code Section 362, the Commission must ensure that such plants remain available and operational.  The sale is subject to the new owners signing an agreement with the Independent System Operator in the form filed with the FERC on March 31^st and substantially approved by the FERC on October 30, 1997.  ORA was the only party to file a protest.  ORA supported approval of the sale but objected to PG&E's request for reinstatement of the cut in return on equity (ROE) on fossil plants that the Commission's policy decision had imposed. 
•	September 3^rd:  D.97-09-046 was issued.
•	Oct 22^nd:  D.97-10-058 was issued certifying the mitigated negative declaration.
D.	Southern California Edison, Sec. 851 "Divestiture" Application 96-11-046

~~•~~	Edison filed its transaction documents for the Long Beach Plant on February 6, 1998.  ORA filed a protest on February 17, 1998, and Destec, Inc. (the buyer) filed a response in support.  An interim decision approving the sale was signed out on March 24, 1998.  Edison has announced the sale of its final plant, the Ormand Plant, and Edison filed its transaction documents for Commission approval on April 17, 1998, and a draft decision is circulating within the Commission.
•	December 16^th:   D.97-12-106 approved sale of 10 fossil plants by Edison.  Sale of two additional plants has not yet been completed.  Edison has sold the 10 plants for a total of $1.115 billion.  The buyers are AES, Houston Industries, NRG Energy/Destec, and a subsidiary of Thermo Electron.  Ormond and Long Beach did not sell.
•	December 1^st:  Edison filed its application under Section 851 for approval of sale of its fossil plants.  The deadline for protests on Edison’s application was December  8^th.  ORA was the only party to file a protest.  ORA's protest pointed to Edison not having provided sufficient information on bids received for ORA to determine whether sale price was reasonable.
•	November 19^th:  D.97-11-074 was issued for authority to sell 12 gas-fired electrical generation facilities by Edison.  This Decision required as a condition of sale of the Alamitos, El Segundo, Etiwanda, Huntington Beach, Mandalay, and Redondo plants that the successful bidder enter into an agreement with the Independent System Operator (ISO) substantially in the form filed by the ISO with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on March 31, 1997 or provide a certificate of the ISO to the effect that it has determined that the related plant is not required for the ISO’s purposes.  It also required the successful bidder to disclose to the Commission all other kgeneration assets in California under common ownership or control with the bidder.
•	September 3^rd:  D.97-09-049 was issued.
•	October 22^nd: The Commission issued D.97-10-059 certifying the mitigated negative declaration.

VI.	Direct Access
A.	General
Recent Activity
•	April 15^th:  Direct Access Implementation Activity Reports were filed by PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E.  These reports will be filed on the 15^th of every month.  Check the following URL for electronic copies: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/library.htm
	
•	NEW  March 25^th:  The Universal Node Identifiers System Working Group (UNISWG) filed its final report with the Commission.  A copy may be downloaded from this address: http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/uni/msg00011.htm  Parties filed comments on the report on April 20, 1998.
	
•	To date, the following workshops have been conducted by the Energy Division to address a number of ongoing Direct Access Implementation issues in 1998.  See summaries under subject area headings below.

Date Conducted | Subject Area | Workshop Topics
1/26/98 | Load Profiling | Technical and Methodological Issues
1/28/98 | Tariffs | Formation of a “Rule 22” Tariff Review Group
1/29/98 | Retail Settlements | Formation of a “Universal Node Identifier System” Working Group
1/30/98 | Metering | Formation of a “Permanent Standards Working Group”
2/9/98 | Load Profiling | Discussion of further “segmentation” of load profiles within customer classes
2/10/98 | Load Profiling | Discussion of whether “dynamic” load profiling should be implemented for agricultural customers
2/11/98 | Load Profiling | Discussion of the data and information that should be gathered by the Energy Division in order to assess and improve load profiling
2/27/98 | Retail Settlements | Formation of a “Data Quality and Integrity” Working Group
3/25/98 | Retail Settlements | Formation of a “Distribution Loss Factor” Working Group

Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	1997 Decisions resulting from the Direct Access Implementation Issues Workshops
•	(1) Load Profile Methodologies.			D.97-10-086  (10-30-97)
•	(2) Direct Access Implementation Plan.		D.97-10-087  (10-30-97)
•	(3) Meter & Data Communications Standards.	D.97-12-048  (12-03-97)
•	(4) Retail Settlement & Information Flow.	D.97-12-090  (12-16-97)
•	(5) Customer Information Data Base.     	D.97-10-031  (10-9-97)
	
•	On May 6^th, 1997 the Commission issued its Direct Access Decision 97-05-040, which addressed threshold issues of direct access, required no phase-in of direct access, established a registration program for Electric Service Providers (ESPs), and adopted metering requirements.  Customers may choose Direct Access by January 1, 1998.
•	Pursuant to D.97-05-040, the Direct Access threshold issues decision, the Energy Division scheduled and participated in a series of workshops on direct access implementation issues.  The workshops were held and reports issued on the following issues areas.  See http://162.15.5.2/wk-group/dai.

Upcoming

•	The Energy Division expects to mail its report on the Load Profiling workshops held pursuant to D. 97-10-086 no later than April 30^th, 1998.
•	The “Rule 22 Tariff Review Group” will hold its monthly meeting May 5^th, 1998 at the CPUC.
B.	Load Profiling
Recent Activity
•	February 11^th: the Energy Division conducted a workshop to discuss the data and information that should be gathered by the Energy Division in order to assess and improve load profiling.  A workshop report is being prepared.
•	February 10^th: the Energy Division conducted a workshop to discuss whether “dynamic” load profiling should be implemented for agricultural customers.  A workshop report is being prepared.
•	February 9^th: the Energy Division conducted a workshop to discuss further “segmentation” of load profiles within customer classes. A workshop report is being prepared.
•	January 26^th:  As ordered in the January 13^th  Assigned Commissioner Ruling (ACR), the Energy Division conducted a workshop to discuss technical and methodological issues.
•	January 13^th:  Assigned Commissioner Ruling was issued ordering an additional Load Profiling Workshop, to discuss the technical and methodological issues that are common to previously scheduled workshops.
•	October 30^th, 1997:  D.97-10-086 was issued. This decision addresses the proposals contained in the June 16, 1997 workshop report on load profiling, and the two supplemental load profiling reports dated July 25, 1997 and August 1, 1997.  Alternate pages (H-13a) were withdrawn. Cmmr. Conlon filed a concurring opinion.

Upcoming 1998 Implementation Activities Ordered by D.97-10-086

Load Profiling  --  D.97-10-086
Ordering Paragraph | Who: | What Tasks: | Date Due:

2.b.

PG&E and SDG&E

Shall file and serve a status report as to the reasons why dynamic load profiling cannot be instituted for their residential and small commercial and industrial customers by 1/1/98.

Filed 
12-01-97
REVISED DATE

3. | Kirkwood, PacifiCorp, Sierra Pacific, SC Water Co. | Shall file a status report explaining their intentions with respect to the offering of load profiles to their customers who have a maximum demand of less than 20 kW, their reasoning for their actions, and what their timetable is for implementing load profiles. | 11/30/97

6.

Energy Division

Shall convene a workshop, in conjunction with the UDCs and other interested parties, within 100 days from today, to discuss the process for segmenting the current customer rate schedules into more segmented rate categories.

02-09-98
REVISED DATE

7. | Energy Division | Shall convene a workshop with the UDCs and other interested persons no latter than 5/30/98, to assess the impact of the metering requirement on 20 to 50 kW customers, to determine whether the load profiles should continue past 9/30/98, and to examine the inconsistencies in the load profile cut-off points. | 5/30/98
8. | Energy Division | shall convene a workshop with the UDCs and other interested persons no latter than 2/15/98, to determine whether there should be dynamic load profiles for agricultural customers. | 2/10/98

10.

Energy Division

The Energy Division Should hold a workshop to discuss with the UDCs and other market participants the type of information that the UDCs and other market participants should be required to maintain, to assess the effects of load profiling, and to determine how load profiling methodologies and administration can be improved.

2/11/98
REVISED DATE

C.	Tariffs and Service Agreements for Direct Access
Recent Activity
•	April 7th:  The “Rule 22” Tariff Review Group held its second regular monthly meeting.  The next meeting is scheduled for May 5^th.  See http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/tariff for additional information and updates.
•	January 28^th:  As ordered by D.97-10-087, the Energy Division held a workshop to discuss formation of a “Rule 22” Tariff Review Group.  This group will review the direct access tariffs and other tariffs and rate schedules that are affected by the direct access tariffs, and recommend possible changes.  The Commission stated its intention to open a new proceeding to review these changes; once this proceeding is opened, the Tariff Review Group will have 6 months to issue a report.
•	December 1^st, 1997:  PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E filed Advice Letters which conform their tariffs and service agreements to the terms and conditions set forth in D.97-10-087.  Effective January 9, 1998.
•	November 9^th, 1997:  Utilities must begin accepting Direct Access Service Requests (DASR) from ESPs.  These are requests to switch customers from utility service to ESP service.
•	October 30^th, 1997:  D.97-10-087 was issued. This decision addresses the direct access implementation plans and the pro-forma tariffs of the investor-owned electrical corporations that were submitted in response to D.97-05-040.

Upcoming 1998 Implementation Activities Ordered by D.97-10-087

Direct Access Implementation Plans and the 
Pro-Forma Tariffs  --  D.97-10-087

Ordering Paragraph | Who: | What Tasks: | Date Due:

3.e.

PG&E, SDG&E, Edison

PG&E, SDG&E, Edison are directed to make an advice letter filing which conforms all of the above-mentioned tariff provisions, tariff attachments, and rate schedules to this decision

12-01-97
Protests in 20 days (12-21-97)
Effective 01-09-98
REVISED DATES

5.a., 5.c., 5.d., 5.e. | PacifiCorp, Sierra Pacific, SoCal Water | After CPUC decisions on their transition plan applications, make AL filings which conform their respective DA tariffs, related rate schedules, other affected provisions, and service agreements to this decision, and the decision on their transition plan. | Within 45 days from effective date of decision on respective TP applications; protests due 20 days later; effective 90 days after filing unless CPUC acts
11 | Energy Division | Energy Division shall convene a meeting within 90 days from today to solicit persons who are interested in serving on the Rule 22 Tariff Review Group.  It is the Commission’s intent to establish a new proceeding to address possible changes to the direct access rules and tariffs. | 1/28/98

D.	Meter and Data Communication Standards

Recent Activity

•	ONGOING:  The Energy Division’s “Meter Service Provider Certification Unit” has been reviewing applications and provisionally certifying MSPs to install meters for ESPs in the UDC service territories.  Nine MSPs have been certified to date.
	
•	UPCOMING:  April 28, 29^th, and 30^th :  The third monthly meeting of the Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) and its four subgroups will be held.
	
•	April 14^th and 15^th : The four subgroups of the Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) held working meetings.
•	March 30, 31^st, and April 1^st: The second monthly meeting of the Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) and its four subgroups was held.
•	February 24^th, 25^th, and 26^th: The first monthly meeting of the Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) and its four subgroups was held.  Subgroups will continue to meet every 2 weeks, and the entire PSWG will meet monthly, with the goal of issuing a report recommending permanent metering standards to the Commission by July 29, 1998.
•	January 30^th:  Pursuant to D.97-12-048, the Energy Division conducted a workshop to determine who is interested in serving on a Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG), and to establish the various subgroups that may be needed to review particular kinds of meter standards.  Parties agreed to establish four subgroups, and meet monthly in order to produce recommendations on permanent metering standards by July 30, 1998. The four subgroups are:
	
1.	Meter Communications
2.	Meter Reading and Meter Data Management
3.	Meter Install, Testing and Calibration
4.	Meter Equipment

•	January 7^th:   Petition to Modify D.97-12-048 filed by Applied Metering Technologies, requesting that the requirement for MSPs to post a $500,000 bond be changed to require a like amount of insurance.  Comments in support of the petition were filed by ORA and PG&E.
	
•	Summary of Key Points from D.97-12-048, “Opinion on Meter & Data Communications Standards”:
a. 	Meter Service Provider Certification:  Decision 97-12-048 established a procedure to “certify” non-utility Meter Service Providers (MSPs). Prospective MSPs are required to submit a written application to the California Public Utilities Commission requesting “Provisional MSP Certification”.  Certification began as of December 3, 1997.  The list of provisionally and permanently certified MSPs will be posted on the Commission’s website.
b. 	Meter Data Management Agent “Acceptance” Process:  Decision 97-12-048 also established a procedure to allow Meter Data Management Agents (MDMAs) to be “accepted” by the utilities to perform activities related to reading meters and compiling data.  The Commission will not be involved in this process.
c. 	Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG):  A Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) is established, in order to review the interim metering standards adopted in this decision, particularly the existing UDC practices, as well as existing and proposed national standards and other applicable standards and qualifications.  The Commission’s Energy Division staff is directed to hold a workshop within 60 days to determine who is interested in serving on the PSWG, and to establish the various subgroups that may be needed to address particular kinds of standards.  Before the workshop is held the Assigned Commissioners may issue a ruling providing additional guidance to the PSWG.
Upcoming 1998 Implementation Activities Ordered by D.97-12-048

See chart below continued on next page

Meter & Data Communications Standards
Decision (D.) 97-12-048

Ordering Paragraph | Who: | What Tasks: | Date Due:
1.b | All UDCs, ESPs, and third-parties. | Interim metering-related standards and procedures shall apply until permanent standards are adopted and implemented. | Immediately
1.c.(1) | All UDCs | Are directed to incorporate the interim metering standards, procedures, and clarifications into the direct access tariff provisions adopted in (D) 97-10-087 by means of advice letter filings. | 1/2/98
1.c.(2) | All UDCs, ESPs, and third-parties. | Any protests to the advice letters shall be filed with the Energy Division within 20 days of such filing. | 1/22/98
1. c.(3) | All UDCs, ESPs, and third-parties | The effective date of the advice letters shall be the 40^th day after the filing of the advice letters. |
3. | All UDCs and MDMAs | Shall hold at least one initial general meeting to allow the UDCs and the MDMAs to discuss the assumptions and common understandings about each other’s meter data management capabilities as set forth in this decision and in the direct access tariff provisions within 21 days of the effective date of the decision. | 12/24/97

3.a.
and 
3.b.

All UDCs and MDMAs

Subsequent general meetings shall be held at least once a month, for the next 12 months, or each UDC may meet with the ESP and the ESPs MDMA as needed.

3.b.(1) | All UDCs, ESPs and MDMAs | Interested persons may comment on the meeting description by filing their comments and serving the people who attended the initial general meeting. | Within 15 days of being served.

4. 
and 
4.c.

PG&E, Edison, SDG&E

Shall file and serve a description of the meter records that they maintain within 30 days of the effective date of the decision.

1/2/98.

5. 
and
5.a.

PG&E, Edison, SDG&E

Shall file and serve a description of their respective meter maintenance schedules, and their recommendations for a uniform meter maintenance schedule within 60 days of the effective date of the decision

2/2/98

6. | PG&E, Edison, SDG&E | Shall file and serve a description of their respective electrical safety standards within 60 days of the effective date of the decision. | 2/2/98
6.a | All interested parties | may file comments regarding the above filing.  Comments are due in the Docket Office within 15 days from the date of service. | 2/17/98
7. | All interested Parties. | The Energy Division Staff shall hold a workshop to determine who is interested in serving on the Permanent Standards Working Group and to establish various subgroups that may be needed to review particular kinds of meter standards within 60 days of the effective date of the decision. | 1/30/98
7.b. | All interested Parties. | The Permanent Standards Working Group members shall recommend in a report what permanent metering-related standards should be adopted by the Commission within 180 days of the workshop. | 7/30/98
7.d | PG&E, SDG&E, Edison | Are directed to reproduce the report, file the report, service a notice of availability, and serve the Commissioners and staff with full reports. |

7.e.

All 
interested parties

May file comments on the full report..

Within 35 days of the date of service of the notice of availability.

E.	Retail Settlements and Information Flow
	NEW  March 25^th:  The Universal Node Identifiers System Working Group filed its final report with the Commission.  A copy may be downloaded from this address: http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/uni/msg00011.htm  Parties filed comments on the report on April 20, 1998.
	
•	March 25^th: The Energy Division conducted a workshop to organize the “Distribution Loss Factors” Working Group (DLFWG), which will examine how distribution loss factor methodologies can be improved.  See http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/dlf for updates.
•	February 27^th:  The Energy Division conducted a workshop to organize the “Data Quality and Integrity” Working Group, which will identify any gaps or flaws in the rules and procedures for information exchange, and prepare a report to the Commission.  See http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/dqi for updates.
•	January 29th:  Pursuant to D.97-12-090, the Energy Division conducted a workshop to organize the Universal Node Identifiers System Working Group (UNISWG).  This group will develop a proposal to assign a unique identifying number to each billable energy path or node in California, thus aiding in ensuring the accuracy of various electricity transactions in the deregulated market. The UNISWG will file its report March 30^th.  See http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/uni for updates.
•	December 16^th:  D.97-12-090 was issued by the Commission.  This decision addresses issues concerning the quality and integrity of data in the restructured electricity market, and orders the Energy Division to hold workshops to enable the formation of three “working groups” to address RSIF issues in greater detail in 1998.

Upcoming 1998 Implementation Activities Ordered by D.97-12-090

| | RSIF Related Tasks and Due Dates |
Ordering Paragraph | Who: | What Tasks: | Date Due:

1.a.(1) 
through 
1.a.(2)b

all interested parties and Energy Division staff.

The Energy Division shall convene a workshop within 45 days to solicit interest from those who are interested in participating on the Universal Node Identifiers System Working Group (UNISWG)

1-29-98

1.b
through
1.b(3)(b)

all interested parties and Energy Division staff.

Distribution Loss Factor Working Group (DLFWG) shall be formed to look into how the distribution loss factor methodologies can be improved. The Energy Division shall convene a workshop to solicit interest from those who are interested in participating on the DLFWG.

3-25-98

1.c
through
1.c(3)(b)

all interested parties and Energy Division staff.

The Data Quality and Integrity Working Group (DQIWG) shall be formed to identify any gaps or flaws in the rules and procedures for information exchange.  The Energy Division shall convene a workshop to determine DQIWG participants

2-27-98

2.
through
2.a(1)

all interested parties

Persons interested in commenting on the central repository concept shall file written comments at the Docket Office.

2-14-98

3. | all UDCs | All UDCs shall modify their direct access tariff provisions to reflect the changes discussed in the text of this decision. |

3.a

all UDCs

An advice letter to change the DASR form shall be filed with the Energy Division .

no later than 
2-20-98

3.b

all UDCs

An advice letter to reflect the notification to a meter data management agent shall be filed with the Energy Division.

no later than
1-15-98

3.c | all UDCs | An advice letter to reflect the inclusion of the customer rights language on the back of the electricity bill shall be filed with the Energy Division. | 1-15-98

F.	Registration of Electric Service Providers (ESP), 415-703-3779

ESPs Registered To Date
Corporations | 175
Government Entities | 19
Individuals | 56
Limited Liability Companies | 34
Partnerships | 34
Total to Date | 318

•	Updated.  As a result of D. 98-03-072 the requirements for registration have been expanded.  To market to residential and small commercial customers an ESP must have on file with the CPUC a service agreement with Utility Distribution Company in which it intends to provide service, an agreement with a Scheduling Coordinator, and a copy of the 394.5 Notice (terms and conditions of service).  Providers that fail to file these documents will either have to request placement on the “inactive” list or face suspension procedures.  Inactive status ESPs cannot market or provide services to customers.  Based on responses to a letter to all ESPs issued by Director Paul Clanon on March 3, 1998 only 25 ESPs were in full compliance with the most requirements.  The noncompliant ESPs have been given until April 15, 1998 to show full compliance or request inactive status.  Those that do neither will face suspension procedures.  In addition there is now a bonding requirement for all ESPs.  For the purpose of enhanced consumer protection all ESPs will be required to submit fingerprints with their applications.  A background check will be conducted before an ESP registration number will be issued.  For a list of ESPs with their business addresses and phone numbers, see the Registered Electric Service Providers page at: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/electric_restructuring/esp_registration/providers/provider_index.html

•	The ESP registration form can be downloaded from the Commission’s web site at:  http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/electric_restructuring/esp_registration/esp_index.shtml.
•	Pursuant to Commission Decision, D.97-05-040 and P.U. Code Sec.394(2), all non-utility Electric Service Providers (ESP) who intend to serve residential and small commercial customers must register with the Energy Division.

VII.	FERC‑Related Issues

Recent Activity

A.	Settlement Negotiations Continue in the Must-Run Cases

Settlement negotiations continue with respect to PG&E’s SDG&E’s and Edison’s Must-Run Rate Cases and Must-Run Terms and Conditions Cases (Docket Nos. ER98-441-000; ER98-441-001; ER98-495-000; ER98-495-001; ER98-496-000; and ER98-495-001 ).  Settlement Discussions are currently scheduled through May, and are expected to continue on into June.

B.	A Prehearing Conference was held on April 15, 1998
in Various Dockets with Respect to Participating Generator Agreements, Interconnected Control Area Operating Agreements, Responsible Participating Owner Agreements, Utility Distribution Company Operating Agreements, and Meter Service Agreements

On April 15, 1998, a Prehearing Conference was held in various ISO Dockets relating to Participating Generator Agreements, Interconnected Control Area Operating Agreements, Responsible Participating Owner Agreements, Utility Distribution Company Operating Agreements and Meter Service Agreements.  (FERC Docket Nos. ER98-899-000, et al., ER98-992-000, et al., ER98-1028-000, et al., ER98-1057-000, et al., and ER98-1499-000, et al.)  Procedural Schedules were set for these proceedings, with an informal settlement conference scheduled for May 4, 1998.
C.	FERC held a two day public conference on ISOs on April 15-16, 1998

The FERC held a public conference on ISOs on April 15-16, 1998.  Topics included: Basic Structure and Role; ISOs and Reliability; Regulation, Governance and Independence; Role of States; ISOs and Transmission Pricing; ISOs and Market Monitoring; and ISO and FERC Regulation. Commissioner P. Gregory Conlon spoke on the panel relating to the Role of States.

D.	FERC Issues Order Authorizing the ISO to Issue Up to $310 Million in Long-Term Debt

On April 14, 1998, the FERC issued an order in Docket No. ES98-9-001, authorizing the ISO to issue up to $310 million in long term debt, increased from its previous authorization for $260 million.  California Independent System Operator, 83 FERC ¶62,039 (1998).
E.	The PX files two Amendments

On April 10, 1998, the PX filed two Amendments to its PX Operating Agreement and Tariff (including Protocols).  Interventions and Protests are due on May 1.
F.	The ISO and the PX file Revised Staging Plans at the FERC

On April 6, 1998, the ISO filed its Revised Staging Plan No. 3 at the FERC.  The PX filed its Revised Staging Plan No. 2 on April 10, 1998.  Both Staging Plans inform the FERC of the remainder of the California restructuring proposal that would not be implemented on the ISO and PX Operations date  The Staging Plans also provide new projected timing changes of functions that are to be staged as a result in the delay in the start of initial operations.
G.	ISO files settlement with the FERC on its Grid Management Charge

On April 7, 1998, the ISO filed a settlement with the FERC of its Grid Management Charge, in FERC Docket No. ER98-211-000.  On April 17, 1998, the CPUC filed comments at the FERC in support of the settlement.

H.	The ISO and the PX Commence Operations on March 31, 1998

On March 31, 1998, the ISO and the PX successfully commenced operations.  Details on current market summary and ISO and PX prices can be obtained through the ISO and PX Home Pages.  The ISO’s Home Page internet address is: http://www.caiso.com/iso/index.html.  The PX’s Home Page internet address is : http://www.calpx.com/index.html.

I.	The ISO files Amendment No. 7

On March 31, 1998, the ISO filed Amendment No. 7 to the ISO’s Operating Agreement and Tariff, including the ISO Protocols.  Interventions and Protests are due May 1, 1998.
J.	FERC issues orders on various FERC Electric Restructuring Dockets

On March 30, 1998, the FERC issued three separate orders on various pending FERC Dockets.  In its “Order Accepting for Filing and Suspending Proposed Rates, Consolidating Proceedings, and Establishing Hearing Procedures,” Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 82 FERC ¶61,326 (1998), the FERC, accepted for filing with modifications, suspended, set for hearing and consolidated with ongoing proceedings numerous Participating Generator Agreements and A Utility Distribution Company Operating Agreement,, and modifications proposed Scheduling Coordinator Agreements filed by the ISO, as well as accepted for filing and suspended proposed amendments to Reliability Must0-Run Agreements filed by PG&E.  In its “Order Accepting for Filing and Suspending Proposed Rates, Consolidating Proceedings, and Establishing Hearing Procedures, California Independent System Operator, 82 FERC ¶61,325 (1998), the FERC accepted for filing with modifications and d suspended, subject to the outcome of pending proceedings, numerous ISO filings including Meter Service Agreements for ISO Metered Entities, Meter Service Agreements for Scheduling Coordinators, and the Transmission Control Agreement between the ISO and PG&E, SDG&E and Edison.  The FERC also accepted for filing and suspended subject to the outcome of pending proceedings, a proposed Meter Service Agreement filed by the PX.  In its “Order Accepting for Filing and Suspending Revised Open Access Transmission Tariffs, Establishing Hearing Procedures and Consolidating Proceedings, and Granting Hearing in Part and Denying in Part Rehearing of Prior Order,” San Diego Gas & Electric Company, 82 FERC ¶61,324 (1998), the FERC accepted for filing, suspended and set for hearing proposed revisions to the Tariff Administration “TA”) Charge of the PX, the proposed changes to the Transmission Owner (“TO”) Edison and SDG&E and also consolidated these proceedings with the pending hearing proceedings concerning the TA charge and TO Tariffs.
K.	FERC issues order on PX Tariff Amendments

On March 30, 1998, the FERC issued its “Order Conditionally Accepting For Filing and Suspending Proposed Tariff Amendments, Subject to Refund, and Subject to Further Orders, Establishing Procedures and Providing Clarification and Guidance,” California Power Exchange Corporation, 82 FERC ¶61,328 (1998).  In that order, the FERC indicated that its preliminary review of the PX Amendments indicated that these proposed tariff changes may be unjust and unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential.  Therefore, the FERC conditionally accepted the ISO’s proposed tariff amendments for filing and suspended them for a nominal period, to become effective on the date that the PX operations commence, as requested, subject to refund and subject to the conditions and modifications, and subject to further FERC orders.
L.	FERC issues orders on ISO Tariff Amendment Nos. 1 - 6

On March 27, 1998, the FERC issued an order accepting the ISO’s Amendment 1,and rejecting the ISO’s Amendment Nos. 2 and 3.  “Order Conditionally Accepting and Rejecting Proposed Amendments to the ISO Tariff and Protocols,” California Independent System Operator Corporation, 82 FERC ¶61,312 (1998). On March 30, 1998, the FERC issued its “Order Conditionally Accepting for Filing and Suspending Proposed Tariff Amendments, Subject to Refund, and Subject to Further Orders, Establishing Procedures and Providing Clarification and Guidance,” California Independent System Operator Corporation, 82 FERC ¶ 61,327 (1998) (“March 30 Order”), in which the FERC indicated that its preliminary review of the Amendment Nos.  4, 5, and 6 indicated that these proposed tariff changes may be unjust and unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential.  Therefore, the FERC conditionally accepted the ISO’s proposed tariff amendments for filing and suspended them for a nominal period, to become effective on the date that the ISO operations commence, as requested, subject to refund and subject to the conditions and modifications discussed in the March 30 Order, and subject to further FERC orders.
M.	PG&E, SDG&E and Edison Refile their Transmission Owner Tariffs

SDG&E and Edison refiled their Transmission Owner Tariffs Terms and Conditions on March 26, 1998.  (FERC Docket Nos. ER98-2371-000 and ER98-2322-000, respectively).  PG&E refiled its Transmission Owner Rate Case, including Terms and Conditions on March 29, 1998.  (FERC Docket No. ER98-2351-000.  The CPUC filed protests in each of these dockets.
N.	Settlement Negotiations in the ISO’s Grid Management Charge
Rate Case the PX’s Administrative Charge Rate Case and PG&E’s and SDG&E’s and Edison’s Must-Run Rate Cases 

Parties to FERC Docket Nos. ER98-210-000 (PX Administrative Charge Rate Case), ER98-211-000 (ISO rid Management Charge Rate Case), and Docket Nos. ER98-441-000; ER98-441-001; ER98-495-000; ER98-495-001; ER98-496-000; and ER98-495-001 (PG&E, SDG&E and Edison Must-Run Rate Cases) were held the week of March 16, 1998.  Additional settlement talks have been scheduled during March and April.
O.	Prehearing Conferences held March 17-18 in Various Dockets
with Respect to Participating Generator Agreements, Interconnected Control Area Operating Agreements, Responsible Participating Owner Agreements, Utility Distribution Company Operating Agreements, and Meter Service Agreements  

Three prehearing conferences took place last week at the FERC.  On March 17, 1998, a prehearing conference took place in FERC Docket. Nos. ER98-992-000; ER98-996-000; ER98-997-000; ER98-1002-000; ER98-1309-000; ER98-1310; ER98-1028-000; ER98-1029-000; ER98-1030-000; ER98-1032-000; ER981057-000; ER98-1058-000.  This prehearing conference related to Participating Generator Agreements, Interconnected Control Area Operating Agreements and Responsible Participating Owner Agreements.  On March 17, 1998, another prehearing conference took place in FERC Docket No. ER98-899-000, relating to Utility Distribution Company Agreements.  On March 18, 1998, a prehearing conference took place in FERC Docket Nos. ER98-1499-000; ER98-1500-000; ER98-1501-000; ER98-1502-000; and ER98-1503-000 relating to Meter Service Agreements. All three prehearing conferences have been continued until April 14, 1998. 

P.	Variety of New Filings and Amendments by the ISO/PX
to their Operating Tariffs and Protocols

On February 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 27, and March 3,6,9,18, and 23, 1998, the ISO and the PX have made numerous filings, including Scheduling Coordinator Agreements for ISO Metered Entities, Meter Service Agreements for Scheduling Coordinators, Meter Service Agreements for ISO Metered Entities, Participating Generator Agreements, Utility Distribution Company Operating Agreements, and Various Amendments to the ISO (Amendments 1-6)  and the PX (two amendments) Operating Tariffs and Protocols. 

Q.	A Prehearing Conference Held on February 17, 1998
to Schedule Non-Rate Terms and Conditions in Must-Run and Transmission Rate Cases into Generic Proceedings for all three California IOU’s

A procedural schedule was adopted in a new docket for the Transmission Owner Tariff Rate filings and adoption of a procedural schedule in any generic proceeding related to the Must-Run Contract filings was deferred.  PG&E and SDG&E announced that they were each close to partial settlement of issues with the ISO related to their Must-run filings.  They were ordered to provide those settlements on March 12, 1998 to the parties and a settlement conference was now been set to discuss these settlement offers on March 18 and 19, 1998.

R.	ISO and PX file Notices of Delay in Start of Operations
with the FERC  - March 31, 1998, is new Start-Up Date for the ISO and the PX.

On December 23, 1997, both the ISO and the PX filed notices of delay in the start of their respective operations with the FERC.  The FERC immediately issued an “Order Establishing Comment Date and Directing Notification,” establishing comment dates for various recent ISO filings and directing the ISO and the PX to provide the FERC at least 15 days notice before they will commence operations. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company and Southern California Edison Company, 81 FERC ¶ 61,378 (1997).  On December 30, 1997, the ISO and the PX filed a notice of a new date for start of operations with the FERC.  The ISO and the PX have advised the FERC that they will begin operations no later than March 31, 1997 or sooner if final testing is successfully completed.

S.	ISO files a Variety of Negotiated Agreements at the FERC

On December 9, 10, 12, and 30, 1997, and on January 16, 1998, the ISO filed over 50 negotiated agreements with various entities that vary from the pro forma must-run agreements and the ISO Tariff.  These agreements include a negotiated Interim Black Start Agreement, Agreements between the ISO and neighboring Control Area Operators, Agreement for the ISO to use PG&E’s, SDG&E’s and Edison’s system control facilities, Agreements between the ISO and Scheduling Coordinators and Agreements between the ISO and Participating Generators, and agreements between the ISO and ISO Metered Entities.  On December 16, 1997, the ISO filed a report regarding the selection of Must-Run Generating Stations.

T.	Purchasers of Edison’s Plants filed Amendments Must-Run Agreements

On December 4, and December 9, 1997, AES Alamitos, L.L.C., AES Redondo Beach, L.L.C., AES Huntington Beach, L.L.C. and El Segundo Power, L.L.C., the new purchasers of Edison’s divested plants filed Amendments to Edison’s Must-Run Agreements to designate the new owners of the Must-Run units to provide the service.  These amendments adopt the Must-Run Agreements as their own.

Other Past Activity and Information of Interest

•	FERC Conditionally Authorized Limited Operation of the ISO and PX in an Order issued on October 30, 1997.  The FERC issued:
“Order Conditionally Authorizing Limited Operation Of An Independent System Operator And Power Exchange, Conditionally Authorizing Transfer Of Control Of Facilities On An Interim Basis To An Independent System Operator, Granting Reconsideration, Addressing Rehearings, Establishing Procedures and Providing Guidance,” Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company and Southern California Edison Company, 81 FERC (1997).  

In its order, the FERC provides interim and conditional authorization under sections 203 and 205 of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) to the ISO and the PX to commence their operations, including interim conditional authorization of market-based rates for the PX.  The FERC will closely monitor the operations of the ISO and the PX and is requiring further studies and reporting of the ISO and the PX and will make modifications to the authorization in the future if circumstances warrant.

A key initial condition to its interim authorization is the requirement that the Chief Executive Officers of PG&E, Edison, SDG&E, the ISO and the PX each certify to the FERC to the date that ISO and PX operations commence, that all of the necessary features are in place to ensure reliable grid operations when the ISO and PX commence operations, and that sufficient pre-operational testing will be performed.  The FERC authorized the ISO and the PX to commence limited initial operations November 1, 1997, and conditionally granted interim section 203 authorization for the transfer of operational control of the Companies’ transmission systems to the ISO.

The FERC also conditionally approved the ISO’s and the PX’s proposed staging plan. However, the FERC is requiring that staged features of the proposal be initially removed  from the ISO and PX Tariffs and posted on the ISO’s electronic network (WEnet) and refiled under section 205 prior to implementation.  Although the FERC is requiring a compliance filing from the ISO and the PX, it is deferring it until after operations commence due to the interim nature of its approval.  The FERC also granted the ISO and the PX request to file a compliance filing incorporating the modifications to the proposals detailed in the FERC order after the service operation date. In the future, the FERC requires separate comprehensive compliance filings for the ISO and the PX.  The FERC will conduct a mid-course review after three years.

In short, the FERC has given its interim and conditional “green light” to move forward with California’s electric restructuring.  Assuming that the ISO and the PX are ready to begin staged operations on January 1, 1998, California’s electric restructuring initiative is poised to begin, effective January 1, 1998.

•	California State Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)  has filed six sets of comments on the March 31^st, June 23^rd, and August 15^th filings.
•	August 29, 1997:  "Comments of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Addressing the August 15, 1997, Filings of the California ISO, the California PX, PG&E, SDG&E and Edison.
•	July 22, 1997:  "Comments of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Addressing the June 23, 1997, Filings of Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison Company Pursuant to the FERC's June 26, 1997 Notice."
•	July 7, 1997:  "Comments of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Addressing the June 23, 1997, ISO and PX Reply Comments.”
•	June 19, 1997:  "Reply Comments of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California to the Parties' Initial Comments on the March 31^st Phase II Filings."
•	June 5, 1997:  "Initial Comments of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California on the March 31^st Phase II Filings".

•	   U.  Recent FERC Decisions

•	FERC Denies Edison’s Motion for Clarification

      On April 20, 1998, FERC issued an order in Docket Nos. EC96-19-001 et al., ER96-1663 et al., and ER97-2355-000 denying Edison’s Motion for Clarification.  Edison argued that since FERC approved the ISO Tariff in its October 30, 1997, order, no party may challenge the ratemaking principles approved in the ISO Tariff which are reflected in Edison’s Transmission Owner and Wholesale Distribution Tariffs, Docket No. ER97-2355-000.  Edison also argued that certain issues raised by parties in the TO/WDT proceeding should be deferred to later proceedings.  FERC observed that it set the TO and WD tariffs for hearing December 17, 1997, order and held that all issues not summarily disposed of by that Order could be pursued at hearing.  Southern California Edison Co. 83 FERC 61,033 (1998).

•	FERC Accepts for Filing Proposed Market-Based Rates filed by Three Edison New Owners

      On April 30, 1998, FERC issued an order accepting for filing, without suspension or hearing, market-based rates filed by the new owners of three divested Edison must-run plants, AES Huntington Beach, L.L.C., AES Alamitos, L.L.C., and AES Redondo Beach, L.L.C.  The applications sought authority to engage in wholesale sale of electric capacity in excess of their must-run obligations.  (These applications did not seek market-based rate authority for the sale of ancillary services).  FERC denied the applicants request for waiver of the requirement to file their long-term service agreements.  AES Huntington Beach et al, 83 FERC  61,100.

•	FERC Accepts PG&E’s March 4, 1998 TO Tariff Amendments for Filing, and Consolidates the Proceeding with the Pending TO Tariff Rate Case

       On May 1, 1998, FERC issued an order accepting PG&E’s March 4, 1998 TO Tariff amendments, Docket No. ER98-2087-000 for filing, and consolidated this docket with PG&E’s pending TO/WDT Tariff rate case, Docket No. ER97-2358-000.  An ALJ Order issued May 4 held that the trial schedule issued May 4 held that the trial schedule issued April 22 in ER97-2358 shall apply to these consolidated proceedings.  FERC has not yet acted on PG&E’s new TO/WDT rate case, Docket No. ER98-2351-000, which supersedes the 1997 filing and amendments.  Pacific Gas & Electric, 83 FERC  61,112 (1998).

•	FERC Accepts Proposed Amendments to SDG&E’s Master Must Run Agreement for Filing

      On May 1, 1998, FERC issued an order accepting for filing, suspending, and setting for hearing proposed amendments to SDG&E’s Master Must-Run Agreement, and consolidated the proceeding, Docket No. ER98-2160-000, with the ongoing proceeding, Docket No. ER98-496-000.  The proposed amendments would add black start service from some units to the ancillary service provided by SDG&E under its must run agreements; modify billing, payment and settlement procedures to conform to current ISO practices, and update and correct unit performance data.  San Diego Gas & Electric, 83 FERC  61,113 (1998).

•	FERC Announces Regional Conferences on ISO policy

       On April 27, 1998, FERC announced that it will hold seven public conferences to discuss regional factors relevant to its policy concerning Independent System operators (ISOs).  The regional conferences follow FERC’s two-day public conference on ISO’ held on April 15-16, 1998.  The Commission intends each regional conference to examine specific regional characteristics and institutional factors that bear upon the formation, governance, design, and functions of ISOs or other types of organizations formed to administer the elctric transmission grid on a regional basis.  It wishes to examine whether the incorporation of such considerations into the Commission’s policy on ISOs will foster more rapid ISO formation.  The Commission also wishes to examine whether regional factors present barriors to the formation of ISOs, including ISOs of appropriate size, scope, and membership as may be necessary to promote competition and reliability in bulk power markets and to support state initiatives providing for retail customer choice and direct access, and, if so, what actions can be undertaken to remove or reduce such barriers.  Regional conferences will be held in Phoenix, on May 28, and in Portland, on June 5.

VIII.	The Electricity Oversight Board, ISO, and PX

•	The ISO is headquartered in Folsom, California with a back-up office in Alhambra, (Southern) California, whereas, the PX is headquartered in Alhambra with a back-up office in Folsom.
•	On November 19^th , the CPUC issued  D.97-11-077 authorizing additional loan guarantees by PG&E, Edison and SDG&E for funding the PX and the ISO.
•	For more information on Oversight Board meetings (e.g., agendas, etc.), see their web site at:  http://www.energy.ca.gov/OSB/, or call the Interim Executive Director, Gary Heath, at 916-653-0761, or email a request to gheath@energy.ca.gov.
•	Oversight Board Web Site:  http://www.energy.ca.gov/OSB.  See Notices link on this web site for meeting information.
•	Independent System Operator Web Site:  http://www.caiso.com/iso/index.html.  See draft protocols under the Technical Information section of this web site.
•	Power Exchange Web Site: http://www.calpx.com/.

Upcoming Events 
•	Next Oversight Board meeting :  The next meeting will be on May 19^th in Sacramento at the State Capitol (11^th and L Streets) room 113.
•	Next full PX Board meeting :   May 14^th 
•	Next full ISO Board meeting:  May 28^th 

On-going 
•	ISO and PX Committee Meetings are on-going.
	See http://www.energyonline.com/wepex/meeting/ for more information.
•	Meetings of Associated Groups--PX Participant Group:  This is a forum for prospective buyers and sellers in the PX to provide input to the development of PX rules and procedures, to become certified to participate in the PX, to understand how to effectively participate in the PX, and to identify and resolve ongoing issues related to PX operations and participation.  See http://www.energyonline.com/wepex/px_group/pxpg714.html for more information.
•	Scheduling Coordinators Users Group:  All transactions will be scheduled through the ISO.  Only certified Scheduling Coordinators (SCs) may submit schedules.
      See http://www.energyonline.com/wepex/schedule/sch_meet.html for more information.
•	The ISO and PX is hiring staff.  See: http://www.careermosaic.com/cm/iso_px/
 
IX.	Unbundling Cost of Capital
Unbundling cost of capital involves developing appropriate rates of return for regulated utilities when these utilities are also providing unregulated services.

Unbundling cost of capital involves developing appropriate rates of return for regulated utilities when these utilities are also providing unregulated services.

Upcoming Events

•	April 10.The finalized workshop report will be distributed on April 10.

Recent Activity 
•	April 3. Comments on the Energy Division Draft Workshop Report were due April 3.
•	March 23.  The Energy Division Draft Workshop Report was distributed to interested parties on March 23.
•	March 6.  Parties submitted comments on unbundling positions.
•	Workshops on February 23-27.  The workshop setting allowed utilities and other parties to share their progress in unbundling costs of capital methodologies.  An area on the Commission’s website is being maintained for the workshop, in the Energy Division’s Library section.
•	Workshop on January 30.  This workshop allowed utilities and other parties to explore overviews on the topic areas to be discussed in detail in the February workshops. Whether or not there are investment risks associated with the distribution companies’ obligation to serve and whether or not there is procurement risk for the distribution companies are issues that were raised at the workshop.
•	Decision (D.) 97-12 -089, dated December 16, 1997, orders the Commission Energy Division to convene rate of return workshops on the topic of developing methodologies to match rate of return on equity to regulated and non-regulated utility services.  The decision notes that in 1998, the utilities' filings for rate of return and return on equity will propose unbundling of long-term debt, preferred stock, and shareholders' equity to correspond to the business realities of 1998 when largely regulated distribution assets must be separated from largely deregulated generation assets.

X.	Public Purpose Programs
Recent Activity

•	March 23, 1998.  Reply comments to the Assigned Commissioners’ Ruling (ACR), which were due by March 23, 1998, were filed by eight parties.
•	March 11, 1998.  By this date, twenty parties submitted comments on Commissioner Neeper’s February 24, 1998, ACR which sought input from parties in response to the State Personnel Board ruling.
•	February 24, 1998. Assigned Commissioners’ Ruling issued to give guidance to the California Board for  Energy Efficiency (CBEE) and Low Income Governing Board (LIGB), and to seek input from parties in response to recent developments involving the State Personnel Board.
•	February 4, 1998. Adopted CBEE and LIGB budgets and compliance filings,  including charter and bylaws, conflict of interest rules, and proposed trust agreements.

Other past activity and Information of interest

•	April 23^rd D.98-04-063 was issued.  Interim opinion on policy rules and request for proposals for energy efficiency program administrators.  This decision, concerning CBEE, is contingent upon the continuance of the new administrative structure established by D.97-02-014 and subsequent decisions, which is currently being reviewed by the Commission in light of a recent ruling by the State Personnel Board’s Executive Director.
•	December 16^th D 97-12-103 was issued.  Adopted policy rules, budgets, program design and shareholder incentives for the 1998 energy efficiency programs and addressed cost accounting, fund transfers and tracking of pre-1998 commitments and carryover funds for SDG&E, PG&E, SCE, and SoCal Gas.
•	December 16^th:  Resolution E-3515 was issued.  1998 Low Income Energy Efficiency Program Advice Letters from SDG&E, PG&E, SCE, and SoCal Gas were approved with modifications. 
•	November 5^th, D.97-11-022 was issued: This decision addresses disputed issues related to: The transfer of funding from Edison, PG&E, and SDG&E to the California Energy Commission (CEC) for research, development and demonstration (RD&D) and Funding responsibilities for renewable energy sources.
•	September 24^th:  D.97-09-117 was issued in R.94-04-031.  This decision addresses the initial round of start-up filings made by the CBEE and LIGB, pursuant to Commission direction.
•	February 5^th:  D.97-02-014 established the two advisory boards (CBEE and LIGB), and addressed certain threshold issues regarding the administration of public purpose programs under a restructured electric utility industry.

A.	California Board for Energy Efficiency Programs (CBEE)

	For information on the Board’s current activities and background, see the CBEE website at
http://www.cbee.org.

B.	Governing Board For Low-Income Programs (LIGB)

	For information on the Board’s current activities and background, see the LIGB’s website at
http://www.support.net/ligb

See the Commission’s Daily Calendar for CBEE and LIGB meeting dates and information at 
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/calendars/current/table_of_contents.htm
under Public Meetings and Workshops.

XI.	Hedging Energy Costs

Edison, PG&E and SDG&E contend that they need to hedge their costs of power generation and power procurement in order to protect themselves from unforeseen increases in the cost of gas, fuel oil and electricity.  They have concerns that increases in power costs could limit their recovery of transition costs by reducing headroom.  The utilities have filed applications for authority to use energy-related financial instruments (derivatives) to manage gas and electric price volatility during the rate freeze period.  These financial instruments include all financial instruments whose values change relative to a change in an underlying commodity or commodity transportation cost, including forward contracts, futures, options, and swaps.  The Energy Division has concerns with these ex parte applications, specifically with market power issues, violations of the mandatory buy/sell requirement and because granting the applications would result in modifications of the Preferred Policy Decision.
A.	PG&E

Recent Activity
•	March 26, 1998.  D.98-03-068  This decision conditionally approves PG&E’s request to use natural gas-based financial instruments to manage costs associated with natural gas purchased for utility electric generation.
•	February 20, 1998.  PG&E filed a response to ALJ Ruling requesting additional information in A.97-12-005, Power Purchase Agreements Hedging.
•	February 13, 1998.  PG&E filed a response to ALJ Ruling requesting additional information in A.97-12-004, Electric Generation Hedging.
•	February 10, 1998.  An ALJ Ruling was issued requesting additional information in A.97-12-005, Power Purchase Agreements Hedging.
•	February 2, 1998 An ALJ Ruling was issued requesting additional information in A.97-12-004, Electric Generation Hedging.
	
Other Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	December 3^rd:  PG&E filed an application for authority to use gas-based financial instruments to manage natural gas costs associated with the cost of electricity under existing power purchase agreements.
•	December 3^rd:  PG&E also filed a second application for authority to use natural gas-based financial instruments to manage costs associated with natural gas purchased for utility electric generation.
•	August 1:  D.97-08-058 was issued on August 1st.  The Commission declined to give PG&E the authority to use energy-related financial instruments including but not limited to: future contracts, options, and swaps, to manage gas and electric price risk volatility.  The decision closed this proceeding.

B.	EDISON
Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	December 16^th:  Edison. Resolution E-3511 was issued.  Resolution approves advice letter with modifications.   See Section II of this memo and the November 14^th description below.
•	 November 14^th:  Edison Resolution E-3506 was issued.  Edison filed Advice Letter 1259-E which would modify Resolution 3506 as issued on November 5^th.  The requested modifications would allow Edison to classify the gas instruments as defined in Resolution 3506 as contracts other than contracts for differences.  Edison also requests that it be allowed to enter into gas risk management instruments with its customers.  As of the November 5^th Resolution 3506, Edison was not allowed to enter into contracts with its own customers.  Protest period ends November 24^th, Responses due on November 25^th.  Item E-5 on December 16^th.
•	November 5^th:  Edison.  Agenda Item E-2b was approved with modifications in Resolution E-
C.	SDG&E
Recent Activity
•	December 3^rd:  SDG&E.  Agenda Items H-1 and H-1a were withdrawn.  Original and Alternate.  For an order under Section 701 of the Public Utilities Code granting SDG&E permission to use Financial Energy Commodity Derivative Transactions.
	
XII.	Small and Multi Jurisdictional Utilities 
D.97-12-093 in A.97-05-011, et. al.  “Order Addressing the Application of AB 1890 to Smaller and Multi-Jurisdictional Utilities” clarified and specified the applicability of AB 1890 to the small and multi jurisdictional utilities (SMJUs) which sell electricity to California customers.  These utilities include Southern California Water Company’s Bear Valley Electric, Kirkwood Gas & Electric, PacifiCorp, and Sierra Pacific Power Company.  In D.97-12-093, the Commission required each of these companies to unbundle their rates into components that reflect the underlying cost for generation, transmission, distribution and public purpose programs.  Additionally, the Commission concluded that companies seeking to recover any uneconomic cost of generations, i.e., PacifiCorp and SPPC, must reflect the resulting transition charges on its bills to all customers, track its collection of transition costs in a balancing account, undergo a market valuation process, surrender control of its jurisdictional transmission facilities to the Independent System Operator (ISO), freeze its rates at June 10, 1996 levels and provide a 10% rate reduction for residential and small commercial customers.  The Commission also ordered PacifiCorp, SPPC, and Bear Valley to provide their customers with direct access to competitive energy services and to accommodate third-party meters and metering services in a manner consistent with D.97-05-039, and required Kirkwood to file a general rate case application by December 31, 1998.

On February 4, 1998 Kirkwood changed its name to Mountain Utilities.

Recent Activity
•	January - March 1998:  The SMJUs made Advice Letter compliance filings pursuant to D.97-12-093 which are still under review.  Kirkwood is expected to file its first GRC application in late April or May.

XIII.	CEQA Issues Related to Divestiture of Fossil Generation
These issues relate to the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to the fossil-fueled generation plants being divested by the utilities as part of electric restructuring.  Environmental assessments of the sale of the plants under CEQA were accomplished in 1997 for some plants.  Further assessments are planned for 1998.

Recent Activity 
•	D.97-12-106:  Approved the sale of 10 Edison plants to various buyers.  A.96-11-046 requested Commission approval for the sale of 12 Edison plants.  After D.97-12-106 was adopted, Edison reached agreements to sell the remaining two plants that were not sold with the other plants: Long Beach and Ormond Beach.  Approval of the sales was conditioned upon Edison complying with the mitigation measures contained in the Commission’s mitigated negative declaration for Edison (approved in D.97-10-059).
•	D.97-12-107:  Approved the sale of three PG&E plants to a single buyer.  Approval of the sale was conditioned upon PG&E complying with the mitigation measures contained in the Commission’s mitigated negative declaration for PG&E (approved in D.97-10-058).
•	Mitigation Monitoring for the above Decisions:  Edison has filed documentation with the Energy Division for its compliance with the various mitigation measures.  As of March 23, 1998, Edison has complied with all the mitigation measures with the exception of those related to the Ormond Beach plant.  PG&E has not yet filed any compliance documentation for its mitigation measures.
•	A.97-12-039:  This is SDG&E’s filing for the voluntary divestiture of two power plants, 19 gas combustion turbines, a marine fuel oil terminal, its 20% interest in the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), and its portfolio of purchase power contracts.  The Energy Division began its CEQA assessment of SDG&E’s divestiture proposal in March 1998.
•	A.98-01-008:  (PG&E Phase II) PG&E has filed an application for the divestiture of a second batch of plants.  These plants include the Hunters Point, Potrero, Contra Costa, Pittsburg power plants (fossil), and the Geysers geothermal plant.  The Energy Division filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on February 13, 1998.  Various comments on the NOP have been received from public agencies.  Public information meetings occurred on March 10, 11, and 12 in San Francisco (Hunters Point, Potrero), Calistoga (the Geysers), and Pittsburg (Pittsburg and Contra Costa).  An additional public meeting in the town of Cobb (the Geysers plant) occurred on March 26, 1998.  Publication of the Draft EIR by the Energy Division is expected in June 1998.

Other Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs) were approved at the October 22^nd Commission meeting (D.97-10-058 and D.97-059).
•	October 22^nd:  D.97-10-058 and D.97-10-059 were issued in which the Commission adopted the Final Mitigated Negative Declarations (MND) for the respective PG&E and Edison divestiture applications.
•	See http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/environ.html, or http://www.pgedivest.com/ or http://www.scedivest.com/ for more information.

XIV.	Reliability 
The project includes analysis of outage data, utility maintenance (including tree trimming), and work on interstate issues.  Remaining work for AB 1890 includes ongoing participation in the ISO’s reliability study,  adoption of standards for electric emergencies, and pursuing an interstate compact for reliability.

A.	Inspection, Reporting, & Repair Standards for Reliability

The Commission has ordered utilities to patrol their systems every 1-2 years, to perform detailed inspections every 3-5 years, to set dates for necessary repairs, and to inspect the integrity of power poles every 10-20 years.

Recent Activity
After reviewing compliance filings from last July, Utilities Safety Branch staff sent letters to the utilities that were deficient in their G.O. 165 compliance plans.  The letters requested those utilities to submit revised plans by April 1, 1998, that would comply with G.O. 165 requirements.

Upcoming Events
Revised plans due April 1.  The Commission is currently considering whether to apply the standards to municipal utilities.  A proposed decision on this matter is included on the Commission’s March 12, l998 meeting agenda.

Past activity and Information of interest:
•	August 1, 1997: Public and municipal utilities commented as to whether the rules should apply to them.  
•	July 1, 1997:  The five respondent utilities filed Inspection, Reporting, & Repair Standard Implementation Plans.
•	Background:  D.97-03-070 in I.95-02-015 adopted inspection, reporting, and repair standards for distribution systems, which are designed to promote electric utility distribution system safety and high-quality service.  Electric distribution systems include the transformers, poles, overhead and underground lines found on most streets and roads in the state which bring power from the state's electric transmission system to individual homes and businesses.  See also the Commission’s March 31^st Press Release on D. 97-03-070 at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news/970331_elec_inspect.txt

B.	Emergency Standards for Reliability  
Required by AB 1890

Recent Activity
•	On March 12, 1998, the Commission issued D.98-03-036 proposing rules for comment regarding emergency response activities and reporting.  The order set forth some guidelines for the Commission’s consideration of final rules.  Commissioner Knight and Commissioner Conlon each filed concurring opinions seeking comments on additional issues, i.e., whether final rules should distinguish between natural disasters and other emergencies, and whether the Commission should require more aggressive undergrounding efforts by the utilities in order to promote safety and system reliability.  The decision solicited comments by April 1, 1998.  Several parties have sought an extension of time to May 1, 1998, by way of a letter to the Executive Director dated March 19.

Other Past Activity and information of Interest
•	December 15^th:  Comments were filed on or about November 17^th, addressing the Joint Parties proposal as well as that of TURN.  The parties commenting included the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA), State Office of Emergency Services (OES), TURN, Joint Parties, California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA), and International Brotherhood of Electric Workers (IBEW).
•	October 1^st:  Proposed Emergency Standards filed by the Joint Parties, which include PG&E, San Diego Gas & Electric Co., Southern California Edison, Sierra Pacific Power Corporation, Pacific Corp., Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, California Utilities Emergency Association, and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245.  TURN filed its own proposed emergency standards.  D.97-03-070 in I.95-02-015 required parties to propose emergency standards by August 1^st, which was later changed to October 1^st.

C.	Performance Standards
Utilities must report annually on the duration and frequency of outages, the largest outages, and circuits with more than 12 outages per year.

All the utilities have filed their reports for calendar year 1997.  These reports are available on the Commission’s web page at this site:  http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/index.htm then go into “Library”, then into “Electric Reliability”.

Past Activity and Information of Interest
•	All of the utilities (PG&E, Edison, SDG&E, PacifiCorp, and Sierra) have completed their 1996 reports but have not put this information on their web sites yet, as requested.
•	May 7, 1997:  Commission staff responded to these filings by identifying omissions and requested completion of the reports by the end of May.
•	March 1, 1997:  Utilities filed their first reliability reports, as required by D.96-09-045.

Upcoming:
•	PG&E, Sierra Pacific, SDG&E, and Edison shall file in a performance-based ratemaking application proposed performance standards for maintaining, repairing, and replacing distribution system facilities no later than July 1, 1998.  (Ordering Paragraph 2 from D.96-11-021 in I.95-02-015).

D.	Interstate Issues
AB 1890 established as state policy that California enter an interstate compact that will enforce reliability standards.

Recent Activity
At its December, 1997 Board and membership meeting, WSCC approved a program to enforce reliability standards, but also voted to participate in discussions to design legislation establishing a self-managed reliability program, based on current, measurable standards.  Staff participated in design of the program.

Meanwhile, the Committee on Regional Power Cooperation (CREPC), an informal group of western regulators, supported the WSCC program as an interim step toward federal legislation.  Pursuant to that meeting, staff is preparing options for federal legislation, as a contribution to a report by the Western State Energy Board.  CREPC is also planning a seminar/workshop on how current deterministic standards can be given an economic basis using probability data.

Upcoming Events
The western Governors meet on June 29-20 in Alberta.

XV.	Customer Education

The Commission’s Three-Part Education Campaign
The Commission is taking a three-pronged approach to educate California consumers with a comprehensive public education plan, which began in September 1997 and will continue through June 1999.  The three-part program is being funded by PG&E, Edison, SDG&E, and Southern California Water Company with a total amount of $89.3 million.  The plan consists of the following three components:

A.	“Plug In, California!”

	This first prong of the program will include a $73.5 million intensive consumer education program -- which will be known as “Plug In, California!” -- will include television and radio advertisements, utility bill inserts, a live-operator information call center, and a variety of community outreach efforts.  This program also includes $3.6 million which will be distributed to community-based organizations (CBOs) to conduct grassroots education about choices that will be available to consumers after January 1, 1998.
English/Consumers | 800-253-0500 | Hmong | 800-462-3749
English/Businesses | 800-789-0550 | Lao		NEW # > | 800-442-2489
Spanish | 800-365-0550 | Cambodian | 800-465-6543
Vietnamese | 800-474-5335 | Japanese | 800-210-7933
Tagalog | 800-683-8448 | Chinese/Mandarin | 800-940-3883
Korean | 800-930-9559 | Chinese/Cantonese | 800-957-8558
Thai | 800-462-1244 | TDD | 800-933-3119

Recent Activity
•	Direct Mailing  As of November 30^th, the nine million residential customers of PG&E, SCE and SDG&E received a direct mailer of educational material.  The material included a letter from Commissioner Knight, explaining that change is coming to California’s electric industry, as well as a booklet entitled “Straight Answers About the Coming Changes to the Electric Utility Industry.”  The booklet includes topics such as: Shopping for Electricity, Rates and Billing Changes, Safety and Reliability, Consumer Protection, Group Buying Power, and Protecting the Environment.  Similar mailings geared to small business and agriculture customers will be mailed out the first week of December.
•	Supplemental Direct Mailing  Commission Decision 97-12-131 ordered California’s investor-owned utilities to develop an additional direct mailing to notify consumers of the delay of Direct Access, and that requests for new ESPs will continue to be processed. Residential and small business/agriculture customers of PG&E, SCE and SDG&E will begin receiving the additional direct mailing starting February 13^th as part of the Customer Education Program (CEP).
•	Spring 1998 Direct Mailing  The final Direct Mail of the IOUs’ component of the Customer Education program is scheduled for mail drop in mid-April. Residential customers will receive an interactive “slide guide” to help consumers understand the distinctions between UDCs, ESPs and aggregators.  Small commercial customers will receive a worksheet which may be used to compare rates and services of competing offers.  Both residential and small commercial customers will also receive a magnet, which will list important questions consumers should ask providers when shopping for electricity, and the number of the Electric Education Call Center.
•	CEP Promotional Activities  Billboards and bus posters are appearing statewide, informing consumers that change is coming to the electric utility industry, and providing the toll-free number to the Electric Education Call Center.  Grocery receipts from participating stores and tickets purchased at TicketMaster feature a Knowledge Is Power message, providing the Call Center phone number and web site:  www.knowledgeispower.org.  Purchases from Blockbuster Video will be accompanied by a “Fun Pack” containing packed candy, popcorn, and a Plug In, California! magnet and brochure.
•	Knowledge is Power website   The Knowledge is Power website may be accessed at: http://www.knowledgeispower.org/.  The website is  
•	another resource for consumers to learn more about how the coming changes to the electric industry will affect their energy choices. Consumers may select from a menu of five topics: small business, agriculture, residential, the press and help.  The small business, agriculture and residential topics provide detailed information about industry changes and consumer choice.  The press topic provides the news releases and fact sheets distributed by the Plug In, California! News bureau.  The help topic provides answers to consumers’ frequently asked questions and invites consumers to e-mail questions for an e-mail response.  Links to the CPUC and the CEC website are also provided.
•	Community Outreach   Nine regional coordinators are working in local communities to educate consumers on a one-to-one basis. Activities include making presentations to community-based organizations, attending community events, and conducting interviews with local media outlets, community newspapers, and local organization newsletters.  Additionally, 85 CBOs are statewide are providing consumer education on a one-on-one basis by distributing printed information, organizing community workshops, participating in local meetings and events, and providing pre-written articles for local publications.  Special emphasis is being placed on educating hard-to-reach audiences, which include Asian, Hispanic, African-American, Senior, Disabled, Low-Income, Rural/Agricultural, and Small Business consumers.
	
B.	The Commission’s Outreach Plan
The second prong in the consumer education effort is the Commission’s own Outreach Plan, which will build upon the Commission’s unique resources and expertise to assist and educate consumers about the changes taking place in the electric industry.  $2 million has been authorized for the Outreach Plan.

Recent Activity
•	CPUC Speakers Bureau  March 1998 speakers included:
•	 Donna Silvestre -  Senior Centers in El Monte, Santa Clarita, Brea, La Puente, Whittier, and Baldwin Park. Donna also made presentations to the Sunrise Rotary Club in Desert Hot Springs, the Willowbrook Community Center, the Boyle Heights Homeowners Association, the Lancaster Chamber of Commerce, the Redondo Beach City Council, and an Electric Restructuring workshop sponsored by Assemblymember Carl Washington;
•	Doug Long -  the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco;
•	Michelle Cooke - the Western Coalition of Arid States in Tucson, Arizona;
•	Kevin Coughlan - Syntex Retirees, Palo Alto;
•	Arocles Aguilar - the Piedmont League of Women Voters (late February)

C.	The Electric Education Trust
	The third prong is the Electric Education Trust (EET).  The EET’s educational efforts will focus on working with community-based organizations, and will focus on customer groups and communities where participation in and understanding of Direct Access is low.  The Commission authorized a total of $13 million to the EET; $10 million is to be allocated to the CBO.

D. 	Consumer Protection 

	The Commission issued its decision on Consumer Protection at the March 26 meeting. Pursuant to Senate Bill 477, the commission adopted rules to protect consumers from unfair or abusive marketing practices by electric service providers.

The decision provides market participants with specific, meaningful CPUC registration criteria, such as providing proof of technical, operation and financial viability, executing service agreements with one or more utility distribution companies and a scheduling coordinator, and posting a deposit or bond with the Commission.  Additionally, the Commission instituted a 30-day waiting period to conduct a background check prior to issuing an ESP’s registration number.

Each ESP must also provide the Commission and consumers with its Notice of Price, Terms and Conditions, using the uniform format suggested by the Commission, so that consumers may compare competing service offerings.  Utilities and ESPs must adopt a standard bill format to allow consumers to recalculate the bill to verify its accuracy.

	The CPUC’s Consumer Services Division (CSD) will track and investigate consumer complaints, and make this information available on the Commission’s web site.  The CSD will also maintain a Don’t Call Me List.  Consumers wishing to avoid telephone solicitations by electric service providers can ask to be placed on the Don’t Call Me List  by mailing a written request to
CSD.
	
The Office of Ratepayer Advocates was directed to file a report with its recommendations for preparing information guides to assist consumers in evaluating electric service options.

Page  of 41