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

Date:	March 17, 1999 

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 March 4, including upcoming events and filings. Details from prior reports are available on the web site.,

		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. Ratesetting	
A. Revenue Adjustment Proceeding (RAP) (A.98-07-003, et. al.)	
B. Annual Transition Cost Proceedings (ATCP - A.98-09-003, et. al.)	
C. Performance-Based Ratemaking (PBR)	
II. Transition Costs	
A.  CTC:  A. 96-08-001 et. al.	
B. Qualifying Facilities (QF) Issues	
For the most up-to-date information, check the Energy Division QF Web Site at: www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/QF_issues/qf_main_page.htm	
III. Divestiture Proceedings	
A. SDG&E Sec. 851 “Divestiture” Application 97-12-039	
B. PG&E, Sec, 851 "Divestiture" Application 98-01-008	
IV. Direct Access	
V. FERC‑Related Issues	
A. ISO Files Ancillary Services Redesign Plan	
B.  Potential Settlement Reached in PG&E Transmission Owner Tariff Rate Case	
C. FERC Considers Market-Based Rate Applications Filed by New Owners and Operators of Divested Utility Plants	
D.  PX Files Tariff Amendments	
E. Recent FERC Decisions	
VI.  Public Purpose Programs	
A. California Board for Energy Efficiency Programs (CBEE)	
B. Governing Board For Low-Income Programs (LIGB)	
VII . CEQA Issues Related to Divestiture of Fossil Generation	
VIII. Reliability	
IX. Consumer Education/Protection	
A. The Commission’s Outreach Plan	
B.  The Electric Education Trust	
C. Consumer Protection	

I.	Ratesetting
A.	Revenue Adjustment Proceeding (RAP) (A.98-07-003, et. al.)

On July 1, PG&E, SDG&E and SCE filed applications in their first annual RAP proceedings.  The purpose of the RAP is to consolidate the revenue requirement adjustment associated with each utility's various proceedings and ratemaking mechanisms, verify the "headroom" to be transferred to the transition cost balancing account, streamline and eliminate unnecessary balancing accounts, and consider general rate design and revenue allocation issues.  Additional issues including the accuracy of the PX credit calculation will also be considered in the 1998 RAP proceedings.   A proposed decision is expected in March 1999.
B.	Annual Transition Cost Proceedings (ATCP - A.98-09-003, et. al.)

On September 1, PG&E, SCE and SDG&E filed their first applications in their annual transition cost proceedings.  The purpose of the ATCP is to 1) review entries to the must-run and non-must-run memorandum accounts to ensure that excess revenues are properly credited to the TCBA, 2) adjust accelerated depreciation and account for the results of divestiture proceedings in the TCBA; 3) adjust the TCBA for generation capital additions and QF contract buyouts, and 4) review the reasonableness of costs and revenues from the ISO and PX, employee related transition costs, purchased power, and QF contract administration. 

The current schedule is as follows:

	April 20		ORA Testimony
	May 7			Workshop Report on Rate Reduction Bond Issues
	May 11		Intervenor Testimony
	June 21		Hearings Begin
	November 15	PD
	December 16	Final Decision

C.	Performance-Based Ratemaking (PBR)

On January 26, 1999, the Assigned Commissioner in the PG&E PBR proceedings, A.98-11-023, issued a Scoping Memo, finding that the issue of lost margin associated with bypass of the electric distribution system was not within the scope of the proceeding.  The Scoping Memo requires PG&E to file an amended application by February 26, 1999, and sets forth a schedule for the proceeding.  PG&E filed its amended application on February 26, 1999.

A Commission decision a new SDG&E PBR mechanism is expected by the spring of 1999, in A.98.01-014.

Southern California Edison was expected to file its midterm review of its Distribution PBR on March 1, 1999.

C. Post-Transition Period Ratemaking Applications (A.99-01-016, et. al.).

On January 15, 1999, PG&E, SCE and SDG&E filed the applications which propose methods of identifying the end of the transition period and establishing ratemaking mechanisms for the subsequent period.  Assigned ALJs Malcolm and Minkin held a prehearing conference on February 18 and Commissioner Duque issued a scoping memo on March 11.  The proceeding will address how to end the rate freeze for various customer groups, and ratemaking matters such as balancing account treatment for power cost recovery.  The scope of the proceeding will also include broad rate design matters which are integral to ending the rate freeze and the development of post-transition ratemaking.  The Commission will consider the mechanics of ending the rate freeze in Phase 1 and Post-Transition Rate Regulation in Phase 2.  The schedules are as follows:

Phase 1

March 30, 1999      ORA Testimony
April 18                  Intervenor Testimony
April 29                  Rebuttal Testimony
May 10                  Hearings Begin
June 1                   Opening Briefs
July 5                    ALJs' Proposed Decision
August 5                Final Decison

Phase 2

July 2  	                ORA Testimony
July 30                  Intervenor Testimony
August 11              Rebuttal Testimony
August 23              Hearings Begin
Sept 25                  Opening Briefs
December 14          ALJs' PD
January 14, 2000     Final Decision

D. SDG&E Application to End the Rate Freeze (A.99-02-029)

On February 19 SDG&E filed A.99-02-029 proposing to end the rate freeze for its customers effective July 1, 1999.  By a Ruling dated March 1, assigned ALJs Malcolm and Minkin consolidated SDG&E's application with the post-transition period ratemaking applications.  At the March 12 th prehearing conference, parties were encouraged to meet to resolve the issues on an interim basis. Parties will report on the status of  settlement negotiations at the second prehearing conference scheduled for March 25th.
II.	Transition Costs

Recent Activity
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, et al.  On 12/17/98 the commission issued D.98-12-067 relating to the applicability of CTC charges to new customer load pursuant to PU Code Section 369.  PG&E, SCE and SDG&E filed advice letters in compliance with D.98-12-067 on 12/23/98.  Parties filed protests to these advice letters on 1/4/99.
Upcoming Events

A.98-05-004, et. al.:  The schedule set forth in the scoping memo is:  ORA testimony August 26; Intervenor testimony Sept 9; Hearings Oct 21 to Nov 3; PD March 1999; Decision April ’99. This schedule only  applies to Edison while PG&E and SDG&E are on a different schedule because they proposed settlements.
SDG&E and PG&E filed settlement proposals reached with various parties to the consolidated proceedings on November 12 and 13, 1998, respectively. These proposed settlement agreements are subject to hearings beginning January 4, 1999 as required by ALJ’s ruling dated December 21, 1998

B.	Qualifying Facilities (QF) Issues
	For the most up-to-date information, check the Energy Division QF Web Site at: www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/QF_issues/qf_main_page.htm
III.	Divestiture Proceedings  
A.	SDG&E Sec. 851 “Divestiture” Application 97-12-039

SDG&E filed its divestiture application on December 19, 1997 to divest all of its fossil plants, its 20% interest in SONGS nuclear power plant as well as all of its long term power purchase contracts.
B.	PG&E, Sec, 851 "Divestiture" Application 98-01-008 

Recent Activity 

•	December 9th:  PG&E made a compliance filing with the CPUC to request a final order finding that the sales are in the public interest. In this filing, PG&E certifies that it has followed the auction process authorized by the Commission and has provided information to the Commission on the identity of the winning bidders, their bid prices and other terms.

Edison offered all of its 12 oil/gas fired power plants for sale through an open auction process approved by the CPUC.  10 of these plants were sold in November of 1997.  The sale was approved by the CPUC on  December 16, 1997 (D. 97-12-106). The two remaining units - Long Beach and Ormond Beach power plants were sold earlier this year. The total capacity of all 12 of these plants was 9562 MW.  The first 10 plants sold for a total of $ 1.115 billion which was 2.65 times the net book value of those plants. Long Beach (530 MW) plant was sold to NRG Energy and Destec Energy for $29.9 million. Ormond Beach was purchased by Houston industries for $40 million.  The   net book value for this plant was $125 million. 
IV.	Direct Access

Activity Since Last Update

•	The structure of the Rule 22 (Direct Access Tariff) Review Group is described in greater detail in this Update.  See below.

Ongoing Direct Access Implementation Activity

Direct Access Implementation Activity Reports were filed by PG&E, Edison, and SDG&E.  These reports are filed on the 15th of every month.  Check the following URL for electronic copies:  
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/divisions/energy/Direct_Access/direct_main_page.htm

Load Profiling (D.97-10-086)

Status of Proceeding

The Commission’s Load Profiling Decision ordered the Energy Division to hold a number of workshops and issue reports with recommended policy changes or refinements. 

Documents related to the load profiling workshops may be obtained at:
http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/lp/

Tariffs and Service Agreements for Direct Access (D.97-10-087)

Status of Proceeding

Most discussion related to the Direct Access tariffs and service agreements takes place in the monthly meetings of the “Rule 22 Tariff Review Group”, held at PG&E on the first Thursday of every month.

Participants at the monthly meetings have decided to form a number of “sub-groups” to resolve specific issues between meetings.  These groups operate under the umbrella of a group called the “Operating Coordinating Committee” (OCC).  The sub-groups are listed below
1.	DASR Consistency/ Account Maintenance
2.	Meter Specific
3.	Billing Business Rules
4.	Meter Usage
5.	Operations Manual
6.	Revenue Assurance

Monthly meeting notes and other documentation may be obtained at the website http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/tariff/

Meter and Data Communication Standards (D.97-12-048)

Status of Proceeding

The Permanent Standards Working Group (PSWG) was established by the Meter and Data Communication Standards (D.97-12-048).  Parties met together as the “Permanent Standards Working Group” (PSWG) and submitted their report in July.  On December 17, 1998, the Commission issued D.98-12-080, which addressed the recommendations made in the PSWG report.

Ongoing Activity

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.  A list of certified MSPs may be obtained from the Commission’s website  http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/electric_restructuring/msp_registration/meter_providers.htm

Retail Settlements and Information Flow (D.97-12-090)

Status of Proceeding

The Retail Settlements and Information Flow (RSIF) decision established three working groups to address certain issues regarding the information flows that will be required for the new electric market structure to function.  Final reports have been issued by the “Universal Node Identifier” Working Group and the “Distribution Loss Factor” Working Group.

The Interim Report of the Data Quality and Integrity Working Group and other DQIWG materials are available at the following website: http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/dqi/
The final report is undergoing final edits, and is expected in February, 1999.
V.	FERC‑Related Issues

A.	ISO Files Ancillary Services Redesign Plan

On March 1, 1999, the ISO filed Tariff Amendment No. 14, its Ancillary Services Redesign Plan.  The primary elements of Ancillary Services redesign are: (1) implementation of a “rational buyer” strategy to minimize the cost or procuring Ancillary Services; (2) elimination of incentives to ignore ISO dispatch orders for real time energy; (3) automation of dispatch orders for real time energy; (4) separate pricing for Regulation Up and Regulation Down; (5) development of a Participating Load Agreement to implement demand side bidding; and (6) implementation of InterSC trades of Ancillary Services.  Two other Ancillary Services redesign elements were filed as part of Amendment No.1 3 and accepted by FERC: (7) billing Ancillary Services by metered demand rather than scheduled demand; and (8) withholding payment for uninstructed deviations from Ancillary Services capacity.  In addition, Amendment 14 contains other tariff changes not related to Ancillary Services redesign, including: (9) new requirements for units providing regulation; (10) a provision for payments for Ancillary Services dispatched under certain RMR contracts; and (11) a clarification of the Market Surveillance Committee’s role.
B.	 Potential Settlement Reached in PG&E Transmission Owner Tariff Rate Case

On March 3, 1999, FERC suspended the hearing schedule in PG&E’s transmission owner tariff rate case, as the parties have reached an agreement in principle.  The CPUC has participated actively in the case.  The parties have until March 31 to file a settlement.
C.	FERC Considers Market-Based Rate Applications Filed by New Owners and Operators of Divested Utility Plants

Several owners of divested units have recently requested market-based rates for energy and capacity for units divested by utilities.  Applicants include: Duke Energy South Bay, Docket No. ER99-1175; Southern Energy California ER99-1841; Southern Energy Potrero ER99-1833; Southern Energy Delta ER99-1842.  In addition, the new owners of most of SDG&E’s divested units recently received market-based rate authority from FERC, Cabrillo Power I, et al, 86 FERC ¶ 61,180 (1999); Docket Nos. ER99-1115 and ER99-1116.
D.	 PX Files Tariff Amendments

The PX has filed several recent tariff amendments.  On January 8, 1999, the PX tendered for filing Amendment No. 8, to its Operating Agreement and Tariff (PX Tariff) and the accompanying PX Settlement and Billing Protocol (PSABP).  Amendment No. 8 proposes discrete changes to implement a December 11, 1998, filing by the California Independent System Operator (ISO) relating to the treatment of "TO Debits" for derated Hour-Ahead transmission capacity.  Docket No. ER99-1229-000

On January 13, 1999, the PX provided notice of a temporary, experimental deviation from the Hour-Ahead timeline contained in the PX’s FERC-authorized tariff in order to test the efficiency benefits of a "Day-Of market" timeline for a three-month period commencing January 17, 1999. Docket No. ER99-1262-000.

On February 19, 1999, the PX, tendered for filing Amendment No. 9 to the PX Tariff, which establishes a PX "Bookout" option under which offsetting transactions at common delivery points located outside of the California Independent System Operator (ISO) grid will be matched and reported as net schedules of imports into or exports from the ISO grid. Docket No. ER99-1883-000.

E.	Recent FERC Decisions

1.		FERC Denies Duke Application for Rehearing Regarding Acquisition Adjustment

In an Order dated March 3, 1999, FERC denied Duke’s Request for Rehearing request for rehearing of FERC’s prior order (Duke Energy Moss Landing LLC, et al., 83 FERC ¶ 61,318 (1998)) which summarily dismissed Duke’s proposed acquisition adjustment and found the proposed rates to be rate changes rather than initial rates.  Duke had proposed to increase its cost-based rates by an amount which reflected the amount over book value that it paid PG&E for three plants.  FERC once again rejected the proposed acquisition adjustment.  Duke Energy Moss Landing LLC, et al., 86 FERC ¶ 61,227 (1999); Docket No. ER98-2668-003 et al.

2.		FERC Addresses Alturas Interconnection Issues

In an Order dated February 26, 1999, FERC broadly addressed issues related to the Alturas Interconnection.   In the order, FERC accepted for filing, nominally suspended, and set for hearing the Operating and Scheduling Agreement (Scheduling Agreement) among Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville), PacifiCorp, and Sierra Pacific Power Company (Sierra Pacific) (collectively, the Alturas Participants) that was submitted in Docket No. ER99-945-000.  In addition, on its own motion, FERC set for investigation pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) the Alturas Intertie Project Interconnection and Operation and Maintenance Agreement (Interconnection Agreement) (Docket No. EL99-38-000), which it had previously accepted for filing in Docket No. ER99-28-000.   FERC consolidates Docket Nos. ER99-28-000, ER99-945- 000, and EL99-38-000, and directed that the hearing in the consolidated proceedings be held in abeyance pending settlement judge procedures.  FERC also addressed requests for rehearing and clarification filed in Docket No. ER99-28-001.  Sierra Pacific Power Company, 86 FERC ¶ 61,198 (1999); Docket Nos. ER99-28-000 et al.

3.	FERC Accepts PX Amendment No. 7

In an Order dated March 1, 1999, FERC accepted PX Amendment No. 7, which provides for the addition of a fourth member to the PX’s Market Monitoring Committee.  California Power Exchange Corp., 86 FERC ¶ 61,211 (1999); Docket No. ER99-1079-000.

4.	FERC Sets Duke Affiliate Abuse Issues for Hearing

In an Order dated February 25, 1999, FERC issued an order pertaining to potential affiliate abuse arising from sales by Duke Energy Moss Landing and Duke Energy Oakland—which are both RMR units—to Duke marketing affiliates.  FERC agreed that the marketing contracts raised the possibility of affiliate abuse and set for further proceedings the issue whether there is a need for special affiliate abuse rules given the interplay between Duke’s market-based sales margins and the rates under the RMR agreement.   FERC established trial-type evidentiary hearing procedures with respect to prior affiliate sales, and set a paper hearing to consider whether additional transaction or reporting rules are needed to prevent affiliate abuses.  Duke Energy Moss Landing, 86 FERC ¶ 61,187; Docket Nos. ER99-1127-000 et al.

5.	FERC Accepts PX Amendment 6 for Filing and Sets Hearing and Settlement Procedures

In an Order dated February 11, 1999, FERC accepted PX Amendment No. 6 for filing, and set hearing and settlement procedures.  Amendment No. 6 includes numerous amendments to the PX Tariff, its Settlement and Billing Protocol (PSABP), its PX Communications Protocol (PCP), and its Scheduling and Control Protocol (PSCP).  The PX stated that the proposed changes will better accommodate the flow- through and billing of charges from the California Independent System Operator Corporation (ISO), will allow the issuance of settlement statements via secure electronic interface with the PX's Internet website, and will implement additional computer software enhancements.  In addition, the PX proposed several additional changes to clarify and clean-up the PX Tariff and Protocols.   Various intervenors objected to numerous provisions as drafted, including the PX's proposed revisions to the settlements calendar; the allocation of certain ancillary services costs; and the proposal to charge PX Sellers PX Administrative Charges.  In addition, the intervenors stated that many of the proposed provisions require further clarification or revisions.  Thus FERC set the case for hearing and encouraged the parties to settle prior to hearing.  California Power Exchange Corp., 86 FERC ¶ 61,145 (1999); Docket No. ER99-933-000

6.	FERC Accepts ISO Amendment No. 13 as Modified

In an Order dated February 9, 1999, FERC accepted ISO Amendment No. 13 as modified.  On December 11, 1998, the ISO filed Tariff Amendment No. 13, containing numerous amendments to the ISO Tariff.  The most significant changes include:  (1) a proposal to withhold the Ancillary Service payments to generators that commit to provide Ancillary Services and then fail to honor that commitment by generating in other markets (referred to herein as "uninstructed deviations"; (2) a proposal to bill Ancillary Services on the basis of metered load rather than on scheduled deliveries; (3) a proposal to eliminate an inconsistency between the congestion charges assessed when a Scheduling Coordinator schedules transmission across a constrained path and the related billing credit that Scheduling Coordinator receives if its transaction is actually curtailed due to an unexpected outage; (4) a proposal to allow generators in the ISO Control Area to submit negative Supplemental Energy bids during Overgeneration conditions; and (5) a proposal to amend the Tariff to clarify that settlement of Replacement Reserve charges on a zonal or system-wide basis will be based on the ISO's procurement of Replacement Reserves in the Day-Ahead market.

FERC approved the filing in its entirety, except FERC approved allocation of replacement reserve costs retroactively back to start-up.  The ISO has been allocating Ancillary Services cost zonally when it procures Ancillary Services zonally, but had been concerned that language in the ISO tariff prohibited this practice.  This modification was proposed by PG&E and SMUD, and affirms that the Ancillary Services billing for the past year is acceptable and need not be recalculated.  It thus keeps the costs of Ancillary Services procured for the southern zone when the ISO was procuring zonally in the southern zone, and avoids reallocating the costs on a system-wide basis.

One of the items in Amendment 13 was to institute billing of Ancillary Services based on metered demand rather than scheduled demand.  This change was made to eliminate an incentive to underschedule load, which under the prior procedure enabled buyers to avoid paying for some Ancillary Services necessary to support their load.  The FERC order notes that the ISO expects the software changes necessary to implement this change to be operational in early March.  The ISO will post a notice of the implementation seven days in advance of the implementation date.  California Independent System Operator Corp., 85 FERC 61,122 (1998); Docket No. ER99-896-000.

7.	FERC Denies Oversight Board’s Rehearing Request Regarding Jurisdictional Issues

In an order dated February 4, 1999, FERC denied the Oversight Board's request for rehearing of FERC's November 24, 1998 order ("November Order").  The November order reaffirmed FERC's prior conclusion that a permanent role for the Oversight Board in the appointments, governance, or operations of the ISO and PX, or appellate review of ISO Board decisions, as that role has been reflected in the ISO Bylaws, conflicts with FERC’s jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act and undermines the independence of the ISO and PX Governing Boards.  In addition, FERC directed the ISO to seat Eric Woychik as a Governing Board member immediately.

In the February 4 order FERC stated that “although [it] is sensitive to the stake which the Oversight Board and state public officials have in the success of the ISO and the PX, especially given their unique origin in state legislation . . . Our reasons for denying rehearing stem from a need for this Commission to protect its clear jurisdiction consistent with the broad public interest, including protection of the citizens of California and surrounding states.”  FERC reiterated that under Order 888, states may continue to exercise historical regulatory authority over utility activities, but concluded once again that “the ISO and PX Bylaws are flawed because they provide a role for an agency of the State of  California that goes beyond traditional state areas of oversight, that infringes on our jurisdictional mandate under the FPA, and that undermines the independence of the ISO and PX Governing Boards with respect to transmission in interstate commerce or wholesale sales in interstate commerce.”  California Power Exchange Corp., 86 FERC ¶ 61,114 (1999);  Docket Nos. EC96-19-046 et al.

8.	FERC Permits Extension of BEEP Price Cap but Rejects Specific ISO Proposal

In an Order dated January 27, 1999, FERC rejected the specifics of the ISO’s proposal to extend the real time energy (“BEEP”) price cap, but granted the ISO discretion to impose a purchase price cap on real time energy purchases at the level the ISO deemed appropriate.  FERC also ordered the ISO to explain its future plans regarding the BEEP cap in its March 1 Ancillary Services redesign filing.   The ISO had proposed to raise the BEEP cap to $2,500/MW on October 1, 1999 regardless of market developments in the interim.  California Independent System Operator Corporation, 86 FERC ¶ 61,059 (1999); Docket N0. ER99-826-000.

VI.  Public Purpose Programs
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.ligb.org

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.
VII . 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.  The Energy Division released a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) on PG&E’s second divestiture application (A.98-01-008) for public comment in August 1998.  The comment period closed on September 21, 1998.  The Division responded to all comments received on the document in the Final EIR which was released on November 16, 1998.   The Commission voted to adopt the Final EIR at its business meeting on November 19, 1998.

The Division released a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for public comment in October 1998 which analyzed SDG&E’s divestiture application (A.97-12-039).  The comment period closed on November 12, 1998.  A Final Mitigated Negative Declaration was released on November 23, 1998 and was adopted at the Commission business meeting on December 3, 1998. 

Recent Activity 
See http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/environ.html, or http://www.pgedivest.com/ or http://www.scedivest.com/ or http://www.sdgedivest.com for more information.
VIII.	Reliability 

The project includes analysis of outage data, utility maintenance (including tree trimming), and work on interstate issues.  Remaining work for AB 1890 includes adoption of standards for electric emergencies, and pursuing an interstate compact for reliability.
 	
Inspections/Maintenance
•	Completed draft of oversight plan for GO 165 (Inspection Cycles for Electric Distribution Facilities); out for comment to CSD Utility Safety Branch.
•	Summarizing whether each major electric utility has satisfied the reporting requirements in GO 165.
Outage Reports
•	Confirmed that detailed outage data supports reports the utilities submitted;
•	Evaluated utility internal planning for maintenance budgetting that is based on outage data.
Interstate Compact
•	Western Interconnection Coordination Forum is working on a proposal for western autonomy, for completion early in 1999.  This effort together with a western reliability bill being drafted by western regulators (CREPC) is aimed at influencing legislation proposed by the North American Electricity Reliability Council (NERC) to be applicable nationwide. 
Emergency Notification and Response 
•	Standards- ALJ Malcolm held a second PHC pursuant to D.98-07-097 in the electric emergency resoponse standards rulemaking on January 7.  Parties asked for further discussions; the utilities agreed to provide a facilitator.  ALJ Malcolm gave them until March 4 to settle.  
•	Notification- Staff is coordinating with OES, CEC, and utilities to develop and implement a statewide beeper system for use in energy emergencies.  Energy Division staff established an emergency notification phone number, voicemailbox, and pagers. Staff is discussing with utilities and Safety staff how to combine it now with Safety’s existing notification system.
Undergrounding
•	Staff is working with a Department of Health Services (DHS) on a request to develop cost and relaibility information about EMF hazards and underground versus overhead power lines.
IX.	Consumer Education/Protection

The utilities’ customer education program mandated by AB1890 and approved by the Commission in D.97-08-064 concluded on May 31, 1998. A Near-Term Education Plan  implemented by the Commission’s Consumer Services Division began on September 15, 1998. The Electric Education Call Center continues to serve residential and small business customers in 11 languages, with further language support available when necessary, providing customer service operators to answer questions and forward printed materials. Consumers may also access the consumer education website at www.knowledgeispower.org.

English/Consumers	800-253-0500
English/Businesses		800-789-0550
Spanish			800-365-0550
Chinese/Mandarin		800-940-3883
Chinese/Cantonese		800-957-8558
Vietnamese			800-474-5335	
Hmong			800-462-3749
Lao				800-442-2489	
Cambodian			800-465-6543
Japanese			800-210-7933
Tagalog			800-683-8448	
Korean			800-930-9559	
Thai				800-462-1244	
TDD				800-933-3119

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. Help topics 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.

A.	The Commission’s Outreach Plan
The Commission’s own Outreach Plan builds upon the Commission’s unique resources and expertise to assist and educate consumers about the changes taking place in the electric industry.  

Throughout 1999, the Commission is participating in Town Hall meetings and briefings in legislative districts statewide. These activities are designed to assist legislators in providing their constituencies with information about electric industry restructuring. 
B.	 The Electric Education Trust
D.97-08-064 directed the EET to work with community-based organizations to focus its educational efforts on customer groups and communities where understanding of the changes to the electric industry is low.  The Commission authorized a total of $13 million to the EET.

C.	Consumer Protection 
The Commission issued its decision on Consumer Protection at the March 26, 1998 meeting. Pursuant to Senate Bill 477, the Commission adopted rules to protect consumers from unfair or abusive marketing practices by electric service providers.

A decision regarding the permanent standards for financial viability and technical and operational capabilities is expected shortly.