BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF … · 2017. 2. 14. · BEFORE THE PUBLIC...

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Order Instituting Rulemaking to Implement Portions of AB117 concerning Community Choice Aggregation.

))))

R.03-10-003 (Filed October 2, 2003)

PREHEARING CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY (U 338-E), PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 39-E), AND

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902-E)

Stacy Van Goor E. Gregory Barnes Attorneys for SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY 8330 Century Park Court CP32D San Diego, CA 92123 Telephone: (858) 654-1534 Facsimile: (619) 699-5027 Email: [email protected] [email protected]

Charles Middlekauff Attorney for PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 77 Beale Street, B30A San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 973-6971 Fax: (415) 973-5220 E-mail: [email protected]

Janet S. Combs Andrea L. Tozer Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-1524 Facsimile: (626) 302-6693 Email: [email protected]

Dated: February 13, 2017

1


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


))))

R.03-10-003 (Filed October 2, 2003)

PREHEARING CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

COMPANY (U 338-E), PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 39-E), AND SAN

DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902-E)

I. INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling Re Setting Prehearing Conference and

Requesting Prehearing Conference Statements (Ruling) issued on January 30, 2017 in this

proceeding, Southern California Edison Company (SCE), Pacific Gas and Electric Company

(PG&E), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) (collectively, the Joint Utilities)

respectfully submit this Prehearing Conference Statement to respond to the eight questions posed

in the Ruling.

The Joint Utilities appreciate that the Commission is re-initiating its efforts to implement

the bond and re-entry fee requirements of Public Utilities (P.U.) Code Section 394.25(e) for

Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs). Given the current level of interest in CCA program

formation across California, it is critical that the Commission secure the protections for bundled

service and CCA customers that the Legislature intended in enacting the consumer protections in

P.U. Code Section 394.25(e). It is also important for cities and counties assessing the feasibility

of CCA programs to have certainty as to their obligations in this regard.

As the Ruling indicates, in and around 2008 – 2010 the Commission gathered an

extensive record of comments, workshop reports, settlement reports, settlements, testimony and

legal briefs on the requirements of and methods for implementing P.U. Code Section 394.25(e),

both in this proceeding and in the Direct Access (DA) Order Instituting Rulemaking (R.07-05-

025). In 2011 and 2013, the Commission issued two decisions that determined the scope of the

2

protections for DA customers and the methods for calculating the bond and reentry fees for

Electric Service Providers (ESPs). At that time, the Commission declined to address the bond

and reentry fees for CCAs as well.1

While decisions and mechanisms for determining ESP bonds and reentry fees are in

place, the Commission should not proceed under the assumption that those mechanisms should

apply to CCAs with little or no changes. The Joint Utilities find compelling reasons for

gathering a fresh record on the protections and requirements of P.U. Code Section 394.25(e) for

CCAs, including that:

The Commission already saw fit to address the DA and CCA bond issues separately; therefore, the mechanisms adopted for ESPs expressly exclude CCAs;

The records on DA and CCA bonds and reentry fees for involuntary returns are six or more years old, and many parties who are likely to have a stake in these issues today were not active participants in the earlier proceedings.2 It is likely to be burdensome to expect those parties to completely familiarize themselves with these extensive earlier records; and

The ESP bond and reentry fee mechanisms do not satisfy the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 350 (2015), enacted after the Commission’s decisions in the DA OIR, that bundled service customers shall not experience any cost increases as a result of load departing the IOUs’ procurement services for other providers.3 The earlier records and Commission decisions could not have considered the scope of SB 350’s protections for customers, because this new law was not part of the legal landscape at that time. The Commission must ensure that the bonds and reentry fees for CCAs meet the requirements of P.U. Code Section 394.25(e) as well as the incremental protections in SB 350.

Accordingly, the Joint Utilities recommend that this proceeding include the submission of

direct and rebuttal testimony from parties, hearings if needed (i.e., if material factual issues are in

1 See Decision (D.)11-12-018, mimeo p. 54, stating “Although § 394.25(e) imposes the obligation to post a bond or to demonstrate insurance sufficient to cover re-entry fees on both Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) and ESPs, the scope of this decision only addresses the applicability of the re-entry fee and financial security requirements to ESPs. We make no prejudgment here concerning whether the provisions should be interepreted [sic] similarly or differently for CCAs or whether the bond amounts would be different.” Rather, the Commission adopted an “interim” bond for CCAs based on the financial viability security deposit requirement applicable to ESPs pursuant to PU Code 394(b)(9) - between $25,000 and $100,000, depending on how many customer accounts are served. See Resolution E-4133 (12/20/2007).

2 As the Ruling notes (at p. 2), five additional CCAs have begun operation since 2011, and others are currently considering CCA programs.

3 See P.U. Code Sections 365.2 and 366.3.

3

dispute), legal briefs, and settlement discussions as appropriate, to inform the Commission’s

implementation of bond and reentry fees for CCAs as required by P.U. Code Section 394.25(e).

The Joint Utilities make additional recommendations on the scope and schedule for this

proceeding in addressing the Ruling’s questions, below.

II. RESPONSES TO RULING’S QUESTIONS

A. Question 1

1. What, if any, consideration should now be given to any of the information filed in

response to the Amended Scoping Memo in 2011?

Response:

No formal consideration of these earlier materials is warranted. To the extent the

information and arguments submitted in response to the Amended Scoping Memo in 2011

remain valid, they should be re-introduced through a fresh round of testimony and briefs on the

factual and legal issues related to implementing bond and reentry fees for CCAs as required by

P.U. Code Section 394.25(e). These materials are about 6 years old, and many of the parties

with a stake in the matter today did not participate in these earlier submissions. Moreover, some

of these earlier submissions are now moot. For example, the 2011 Amended Scoping Memo

sought legal briefs on the question of whether the legal obligations arising under P.U. Code

Section 394.25(e) apply differently to CCAs and ESPs.4 The Commission’s subsequent decision

(D.11-12-018) to exclude CCAs from the bond and reentry fee mechanisms adopted for ESPs

essentially mooted this question. Additionally, some of the supplemental information submitted

in response to the 2011 Amended Scoping Memo pertained to the June 24, 2009 Settlement that

is now moot.5 For these reasons, as well as those bulleted in the Introduction above, it makes

little sense to rely on these dated materials to resolve the matter at hand. Rather, the

Commission should build a fresh record on which to decide the matter, through testimony,

hearings if needed, and briefs.

B. Question 2

2. Should a bond methodology be the same for all CCAs? Why or why not?

4 See 2011 Amended Scoping Memo, p. 3. 5 See Ruling, p. 2, discussing the ill-fated June 24, 2009 Settlement.

4

Response:

Yes. The implementation of P.U. Code Section 394.25(e) requires two calculation

methods: one for determining the financial security (in the form of surety bond or other financial

security instruments) required of each CCA (i.e., a forecast of reentry fees); and one for

determining the reentry fees upon an involuntary return of customers by a CCA. Both the bond

and the reentry fee calculation methods should apply equally to all CCAs; however, the results

should differ based on the number of customers and the size and shape of the load served by each

CCA. Any other differences between CCAs, such as the extent to which their resource portfolios

are hedged against market risks, should not be accounted for in setting the bonds and reentry

fees. Because CCAs have historically argued that the Commission has little or no jurisdiction to

oversee their portfolios, the Joint Utilities assume it is unrealistic for the Commission to assess,

as part of determining CCA financial security and reentry fees, how exposed to market, credit or

liquidity risks each CCA is, such that in adverse market conditions a CCA may be forced to

cease procurement services and involuntarily return its customers to the IOU.

Ceasing operations is not just limited to adverse or stress market prices; it may also arise

as a result of several CCAs having concentration risk to a single or limited number of suppliers

defaulting on contractual obligations. Therefore, when each CCA obtains a financial security in

the form of a surety bond or letter of credit or other financial security instrument, it can provide

this kind of information to its insurer or creditor so that these risk factors can be reflected into the

price of the CCA’s financial security instrument. Providers of financial security instruments will

reflect risk factors in assessing the price of a financial security instrument upon reviewing the

financial strength, stability of operations and controls and any supplier related issues.

Creditworthy CCAs can expect to pay pennies on each dollar amount of a bond.

C. Question 3

3. Should a bond methodology be fundamentally a multiplication of an IOU's

reentry fee by an estimate of the number of a CCA's customers, or some other arithmetic

measure? What issues would need to be resolved to develop such a methodology?

Response:

Reentry fees must be determined for each involuntary return, and will generally depend

on the number of customers, the size and shape of the involuntarily returned load, and the costs

to the IOU to serve that load. A bond methodology needs to regularly forecast those reentry fees

5

to determine each CCA’s bond amount. Thus, there is no set “IOU reentry fee.” Rather, the

reentry fees represent the IOU’s incremental costs to serve the involuntarily returned load, and

those reentry fees must be recovered from the CCA, and if not fully recovered from the CCA,

then recovered from the CCA’s involuntarily returned customers, per P.U. Code Section

394.25(e). To the extent this question refers solely to the reentry fee in the IOUs’ CCA rate

schedules for voluntary returns – for example, SCE’s current amount is $1.30 per service

account6 – this fee is intended to approximate the incremental administrative costs the IOU

incurs when a CCA customer voluntarily returns to IOU procurement service. It does not cover

any incremental procurement costs – such as energy, Resource Adequacy, Renewable Portfolio

Standards (RPS) – the IOU incurs to serve this returning load. Switching rules exist to mitigate

the incremental procurement costs associated with voluntarily returning load.7 For involuntarily

returning load, the bond and reentry fees need to cover incremental administrative costs and

incremental procurement costs to ensure that bundled service customers do not incur cost

increases as a result of the CCA’s cessation of service and return of all or a substantial portion of

its customers to IOU procurement service. Thus, the existing reentry fee in the IOUs’ CCA

tariffs can only serve as a reasonable proxy of the incremental administrative costs per service

account. Incremental procurement costs need to be determined separately, using forecasts and

reliable market indices, as discussed below.

D. Question 4

4. If some other type of methodology should be considered, what would it be? What

issues would need to be resolved to develop such a methodology? Numerical examples should

be provided.

6 See e.g., SCE’s Schedule CCA-SF, Section E.2. 7 Switching rules, such as advance notice and minimum stay periods, are intended to mitigate the

incremental costs of the return of a CCA customer to IOU procurement service at the customer’s election (a voluntary return); not the CCA’s cessation of service and return of its customers to IOU procurement service (an involuntary return). An involuntary return is one that is not at the election of the customer, and results from a voluntary service termination (the CCA simply elects to go out of business) or an involuntary service termination (the CCA is forced to terminate service).

6

Response:

A bond calculation should generally consider:

The duration of incremental costs in an involuntary return. For CCAs, that period should be a minimum of one year, because the IOUs’ CCA tariffs require a CCA to provide an advance notice of at least one year prior to the CCA’s cessation of service.8 In some circumstances, the IOU can expect to incur incremental costs for several years, depending on how hedged its portfolio is against the risks of a stressed market. Thus, a longer duration should be considered.

A forecast of the IOU’s system average generation rate for bundled service prior to the involuntary return, under stressed conditions. This establishes a baseline against which to measure incremental costs.

A forecast of the IOU’s procurement costs in cents per kWh to serve the involuntarily returned load’s Generation service requirements, under stressed conditions. This forecast includes the costs of energy, Resource Adequacy, RPS, and any other resources that the IOU is required to procure to serve the involuntarily returned load’s Generation service requirements. It needs to account for market volatility and stressed market conditions as the risk of an involuntarily return is most prevalent in a stressed market.

Incremental procurement costs to serve the involuntarily returned load. This would equal the second forecast above minus the first forecast, multiplied by the CCA load. A positive difference should require financial security. A negative difference should be zeroed out.

Incremental administrative costs to serve the involuntarily returned load. For ease, a proxy of the IOU’s incremental administrative costs to serve each returned service account can be used 9, as discussed in response to Question 3 above. This amount should be secured with an appropriate financial security instrument.

Regular updates of the CCA bond amounts. This accounts for changes in market conditions, and changes in the CCA’s program (load, number of customers, etc.)

A reentry fee calculation should generally consider:

The duration of incremental costs in an involuntary return. Same as above.

A forecast of the IOU’s system average generation rate for bundled service prior to the involuntary return. Forecasts will also be needed to determine the reentry

8 See e.g., SCE’s Rule 23, Section S.1. 9 See e.g., SCE’s Schedule CCA-SF, Section E.2.

7

fee costs, because an insurer or creditor can be expected to have the right to terminate the financial security instrument within 90 days for bonds or sooner for other instruments of an event of default, such as the CCA’s cessation of service and involuntary return of customers. Accordingly, the IOU will need to be able to demand reentry fees within that 90-day window. This forecast establishes the baseline against which to measure incremental costs.

A forecast of the IOU’s procurement costs in cents per kWh to serve the involuntarily returned load’s generation service requirements. This forecast includes the costs of energy, Resource Adequacy, RPS, and any other resources that the IOU is required to procure to serve the involuntarily returned load’s generation service requirements. It needs to account for expected market conditions over the duration period.

Incremental procurement costs to serve the involuntarily returned load. This would equal the second forecast above minus the first forecast, multiplied by the CCA load. A positive difference needs to be included in the reentry fees. A negative difference should be zeroed out.

Incremental administrative costs to serve the involuntarily returned load. For ease, a proxy of the IOU’s incremental administrative costs to serve each returned service account can be used, and should be included in the reentry fees.

A mechanism for recovering any residual reentry fees not recovered from the CCA. If the IOU is unable to fully recover reentry fees from the CCA (including from the CCA’s bond or letter of credit, etc.), any “residual” reentry fees should be recovered from that CCA’s involuntarily returned customers over some reasonable period of time, not to exceed the applicable minimum stay period.

E. Question 5

5. Should the bond methodology include any adjustment for risk and/or historical

experience of a CCA? Why or why not?

Response:

For reasons largely covered in response to Question 2 above, the bond and reentry fee

calculation methods should consider market risk, but not risks posed by a particular CCA

program. Those creditworthiness and risks of a particular CCA program should be assessed by

the CCA’s insurer or creditor and will appropriately factor into the price of the bond or letter of

credit the CCA obtains. As stated above, the CCA financial security amounts should be updated

regularly to account for changes in market conditions, and changes in the CCA’s program size

and load shape.

8

F. Question 6

6. How, if at all, should the potential for expansion of a CCA’s service to additional

areas after its initial service begins be accounted for in developing a CCA bond methodology?

Response:

The potential for expansion is less relevant than an actual expansion of service. Because

the amount of bond or reentry fees of each CCA will differ based on the number of customers

and the size and shape of the load served by the CCA, if a CCA program expands into new areas,

a new bond amount should be calculated.

G. Question 7

7. Provide a proposed schedule for resolving this issue in this proceeding. Any

proposal that includes either a workshop or an evidentiary hearing must provide specific

justification for the proposed activity.

Response:

Ruling and Scoping Memo March 2, 2017 Concurrent Direct Testimony April 27, 2017 Concurrent Rebuttal Testimony May 18, 2017 Motion for Evidentiary Hearings May 25, 2017 Evidentiary Hearings (if needed) June 12-13, 2017 Opening Briefs June 29, 2017 Reply Briefs July 17, 2017 Proposed Decision September 2017 Final Decision October 2017

H. Question 8

Identify any other issues related solely to the setting of a bond for CCAs that a party

believes should be discussed at the PHC.

Response:

None at this time.

9

Respectfully submitted, JANET S. COMBS ANDREA L. TOZER

/s/ Janet S. Combs By: Janet S. Combs

Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-1524 Facsimile: (626) 302-6693 E-mail: [email protected]

On behalf of Southern California Edison Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and San Diego Gas & Electric Company

February 13, 2017


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


))))

R.03-10-003 (Filed October 2, 2003)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that, pursuant to the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, I have this day served a true copy of PREHEARING CONFERENCE STATEMENT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E), PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 39-E), AND SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (U 902-E) on all parties identified on the attached service list(s) for R.03-10-003. Service was effected by one or more means indicated below:

Transmitting the copies via e-mail to all parties who have provided an e-mail address.

Placing the copies in sealed envelopes and causing such envelopes to be delivered by hand or by overnight courier to the offices of the Assigned ALJ(s) or other addressee(s).

ALJ Anne E. Simon CPUC 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102

Placing copies in properly addressed sealed envelopes and depositing such copies in the United States mail with first-class postage prepaid to all parties for those listed on the attached non-email list.

Executed February 13, 2017, at Rosemead, California.

/s/ Sandra Sedano Sandra Sedano Legal Administrative Assistant SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770

PROCEEDING: R0310003 - CPUC - OIR TO IMPLEM FILER: CPUC LIST NAME: LIST LAST CHANGED: FEBRUARY 2, 2017

DOWNLOAD THE COMMA-DELIMITED FILE ABOUT COMMA-DELIMITED FILES

Back to Service Lists Index

BARBARA R. BARKOVICH COLIN M. LONG CONSULTANT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION BARKOVICH & YAP, INC. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: CALIFORNIA CLEAR ENERGY RESOURCES FOR: CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO AUTHORITY (CAL-CLERA)

ELIZABETH KELLY JODY S. LONDON MARIN CLEAN ENERGY JODY LONDON CONSULTING EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: MCE CLEAN ENERGY FOR: LOCAL GOVENMENT SUSTAINABLE ENERGY COALITION DBA LOCAL GOVERNMENT COALITION

KEVIN SMITH ROGER BERLINER BRAUN & BLAISING, P.C. PRESIDENT EMAIL ONLY BERLINER LAW PLLC EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY FOR: CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES EMAIL ONLY, DC 00000 ASSOCIATION FOR: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SCOTT BLAISING G. PATRICK STONER BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN, P.C. LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000 FOR: INLAND VALLEY DEV/CITY OF FOR: LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION VICTORVILLE

CPUC Home

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSIONService Lists

Parties

Page 1 of 13CPUC - Service Lists - R0310003

2/13/2017https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/servicelists/R0310003_58447.htm

RICHARD ESTEVES ELENA MELLO SESCO, INC. SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY 77 YACHT CLUB DRIVE, SUITE 1000 6100 NEIL ROAD LAKE HOPATCONG, NJ 07849-1313 RENO, NV 89520 FOR: SESCO, INC. FOR: SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY

KIM F. HASSAN KRISTY MORRIS, PH.D ATTORNEY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYST SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 555 WEST FIFTH STREET, GT-14E7 1315 VALLEY DRIVE LOS ANGELES, CA 90013 HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254-3885 FOR: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH

MIKE BURKE DANIEL W. DOUGLASS ENERGY CHOICE, INC. ATTORNEY 8714 LINDANTE DRIVE DOUGLASS & LIDDELL WHITTIER, CA 90603 4766 PARK GRANADA, SUITE 209 FOR: ENERGY CHOICE, INC. CALABASAS, CA 91302 FOR: ALLIANCE ENERGY RETAIL MARKETS/ WESTERN POWER TRADING FORUM/ MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY

MATTHEW GORMAN ANDREA L. TOZER CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ATTORNEY CITY OF POMONA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 500 S. GAREY AVE. BOX 660 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE. / PO BOX 800 POMONA, CA 91769 ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 FOR: CITY OF POMONA FOR: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

RONALD MOORE MATTHEW GORMAN SR ANALYST, REGULATORY AFFAIRS ALVAREZ-GLASMAN & COLVIN BEAR VALLEY ELECTRIC 100 N. BARRANCA AVE., SUITE 1050 630 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD WEST COVINA, CA 91791 SAN DIMAS, CA 91773 FOR: CITIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FOR: GOLDEN STATE WATER/BEAR VALLEY ELECTRIC

GLORIA BRITTON TIM HULTS REGULATORY AFFAIRS MGR. CITY MANAGER ANZA ELECTRIC CO-OPERATIVE, INC (909) CITY OF SAN JACINTO PO BOX 39109 / 58470 HIGHWAY 371 595 S. SAN JACINTO AVE ANZA, CA 92539-1909 SAN JACINTO, CA 92583 FOR: ANZA ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC FOR: CITY OF SAN JACINTO

DAVID ORTH FRASER D. SMITH SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY POWER AUTHORITY CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ADMIN OFF @KINGS RIVER CONSERV DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM 4886 EAST JENSEN AVENUE 525 GOLDEN GATE AVE., 7TH FLOOR FRESNO, CA 93725 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3220 FOR: KINGS RIVER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, FOR: SFPUC SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY POWER AUTHORITY

JIM HENDRY ROBERT FINKELSTEIN



SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM. GENERAL COUNSEL 525 GOLDEN GATE AVE., 7TH FLOOR THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3220 785 MARKET ST., STE. 1400 FOR: SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103 COMM. FOR: THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK

SHERYL CARTER CHARLES R. MIDDLEKAUFF CO-DIR, ENERGY ATTORNEY NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 111 SUTTER STREET, 20TH FLOOR 77 BEALE STREET, B30A-2467 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 FOR: NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL FOR: PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY

PETER W. HANSCHEN STEVEN MOSS ATTORNEY AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY POWER MORRISON & FOERSTER, LLP 2325 THIRD ST., STE. 344 425 MARKET STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 FOR: GOLDEN STATE COOPERATIVE/SF CO-OP FOR: CONSTELLATION NEWENERGY, INC.

MICHAEL DAY DAVID L. HUARD GOODIN MACBRIDE SQUERI & DAY LLP ATTORNEY 505 SANSOME STREET, STE. 900 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FL. FOR: COMMERCE ENERGY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-3736 FOR: CITY OF CHULA VISTA; COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

JEAN MERRIGAN WILLIAM H. BOOTH WOMEN'S ENERGY MATTERS ATTORNEY AT LAW PO BOX 2615 LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM H. BOOTH MARTINEZ, CA 94553 67 CARR DRIVE FOR: WOMEN'S ENERGY MATTERS MORAGA, CA 94596 FOR: CALIFORNIA LARGE ENERGY CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION

GERALD LAHR SCOTT WENTWORTH, P.E. ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS ENERGY ENGINEER 101 8TH STREET, PO BOX 2050 CITY OF OAKLAND OAKLAND, CA 94607 7101 EDGEWATER DRIVE FOR: ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS OAKLAND, CA 94621 FOR: CITY OF OAKLAND

CYNTHIA WOOTEN NEAL DE SNOO NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC. ENERGY PROGRAM OPFFICER 1126 DELAWARE STREET CITY OF BERKELEY PLANNING DEPARTMENT BERKELEY, CA 94702 2180 MILVIA STREET BERKELEY, CA 94704 FOR: CITY OF BERKELEY

CLYDE MURLEY BARBARA HALE CONSULTANT TO NRDC PRESIDENT 1031 ORDWAY STREET CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION ALBANY, CA 94706 1125 TAMALPAIS AVE. FOR: NRDC SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901



FOR: CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION (CALCCA)

JAMES M. TOBIN C. SUSIE BERLIN TOBIN LAW GROUP LAW OFFICES OF C. SUSIE BERLIN PO BOX 33 1346 THE ALAMEDA, SUITE 7, NO. 141 NOVATO, CA 94948-0033 SAN JOSE, CA 95126 FOR: PAC-WEST TELECOMM, INC. FOR: CITY OF MORENO VALLEY

JIM STONE KELLY M. FOLEY CITY OF MANTECA DEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL COUNSEL 1001 WEST CENTER STREET SONOMA CLEAN POWER AUTHORITY MANTECA, CA 95337 50 SANTA ROSA AVE., 5TH FL. FOR: THE CITY OF MANTECA SANTA ROSA, CA 95404 FOR: SONOMA CLEAN POWER

PAUL FENN MICHAEL KYES LOCAL POWER 7423 SHAUN CT. PO BOX 261 SEBASTOPOL, CA 95472 COMPTCHE, CA 95427-0261 FOR: LOCAL POWER

MATTHEW MARSHALL PATRICK MEALOY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DIRECTOR REDWOOD COAST ENERGY AUTHORITY NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC. 633 3RD STREET 35 IRON POINT CIRCLE, STE. 225 EUREKA, CA 95501 FOLSOM, CA 95630 FOR: REDWOOD COAST ENERGY AUTHORITY (RCEA)

DOROTHY ROTHROCK SCOTT BLAISING VP - GOVERNMENT RELATIONS ATTORNEY AT LAW CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS & TECHNO. ASSN. BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN & SMITH, P.C. 1115 11TH STREET 915 L STREET, STE. 1480 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 FOR: CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS & FOR: SILICON VALLEY CLEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION AUTHORITY (SVCEA)

EDWARD J. TIEDEMANN ANDREW B. BROWN ATTORNEY AT LAW ATTORNEY AT LAW KRONICK, MOSKOVITZ, TIEDEMANN & GIRARD ELLISON SCHNEIDER & HARRIS, LLP 400 CAPITOL MALL, 27TH FLOOR 2600 CAPITAL AVENUE, SUITE 400 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4416 SACRAMENTO, CA 95816-5905 FOR: KINGS RIVER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR: DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES

LYNN HAUG DAVID R. HAMMER ATTORNEY AT LAW COUTY COUNSEL ELLISON, SCHNEIDER & HARRIS, LLP COUNTY OF TRINITY 2600 CAPITOL AVENUE, SUITE 400 PO BOX 1428 SACRAMENTO, CA 95816-5905 WEAVERVILLE, CA 96093-1426 FOR: EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY FOR: CITY OF TRINITY DISTRICT (EBMUD)

CORBY GARDNER



PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC CO-OP 73233 STATE ROUTE 70 PORTOLA, CA 96122-7069 FOR: PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC CO-OP

ANNE FALCON BRUCE MCLAUGHLIN EES CONSULTING, INC. BRAUN & BLAISING, P.C. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, WA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

CURTIS KEBLER DAWN WEISZ SEMPRA GENERATION EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR EMAIL ONLY MARIN CLEAN ENERGY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

DIANA S. GENASCI DIANE I. FELLMAN CASE MGR. DIRECTOR, REGULATORY & GOV'T AFFAIRS PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY NRG WEST & SOLAR EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

DONALD C. LIDDELL GREGORY S.G. KLATT DOUGLASS & LIDDELL DOUGLASS & LIDDELL EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

JAMIE TUCKEY JENNIFER CREGAR COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR CITY OF SANTA BARBARA MARIN CLEAN ENERGY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

JEREMY LAUNDERGAN JEREMY WAEN DIRECTOR, UTILITY SERVICES CONSULTING SR. REGULATORY ANALYST ENERNEX MARIN CLEAN ENERGY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

JOHANNA FORS JOHN KEENER PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FROM PACIFICA AND PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY BOARD

JOHN W. LESLIE, ESQ. JONATHAN LOWELL ATTORNEY CITY ATTORNEY DENTONS US LLP CITY OF PLEASANTON EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

Information Only



JUSTIN C. WYNNE KAREN SHEA ATTORNEY AT LAW PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN, P.C. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

LARA ETTENSON MADELINE SILVA NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

MARC D JOSEPH MCE REGULATORY ATTORNEY MARIN CLEAN ENERGY ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO, PC EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

MIGNON MARKS NEAL REARDON ACTING EXEC. DIR. REGULATORY AFFAIRS MANAGER CALIFORNIA SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSN. SONOMA CLEAN POWER EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: CALIFORNIA SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSN

NINA SUETAKE SHALINI SWAROOP STAFF ATTORNEY REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK MARIN CLEAN ENERGY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

SHALINI SWAROOP SUJATA PAGEDAR REGULATORY COUNSEL ENERGY MARIN CLEAN ENERGY PACIFIC GAS AND ELETRIC COMPANY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

TAM HUNT TOM HABASHI HUNT CONSULTING SILICON VALLEY CLEAN ENERGY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION (CALCCA)

MRW & ASSOCIATES, LLC KATHRYN GILLICK EMAIL ONLY SAN FRANCISCO PUC EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000

KURT J. KAMMERER RICHARD SMITH K.J. KAMMERER & ASSOCIATES SAN FRANCISCO PUC EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY



EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000

JAMES MCMAHON STEVE HASTIE 29 DANBURY ROAD NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC. NASHUA, NH 03064 1717 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103

KELLY CRANDALL DAVID SAUL EQ RESEARCH, LLC PACIFIC SOLAR & POWER CORPORATION 1580 LINCOLN STEET, SUITE 880 2850 W. HORIZON RIDGE PKWY, SUITE 200 DENVER, CO 80203 HENDERSON, NV 89052 FOR: SOLEL, INC.

JIM DOOLITTLE CITY ADMINISTRATOR ORADO MANAGEMENT GROUP CITY OF VERNON 3517 TOPAZ PARK RD 4305 SANTA FE AVENUE GARDNERVILLE, NV 89410-7063 VERNON, CA 90058

CITY ADMINISTRATOR STEVEN R. ORR CITY OF VERNON RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON 4305 SANTA FE AVENUE 355 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE, 40TH FLOOR VERNON, CA 90058 LOS ANGELES, CA 90071-3101

HARVEY EDER KATHERINE HERNANDEZ PUBLIC SOLAR POWER COALITION SR. ANALYST 1223 WILSHIRE BLVD. CITYOF PICO RIVERA SANTA MONICA, CA 90403-5406 6615 PASSONS BLVD. PICO RIVERA, CA 90660 FOR: CITY OF PICO RIVERA

CASE ADMINISTRATION FADIA KHOURY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SR. ATTORNEY 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE., RM 370 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE., G.O.1, RM. 346N ROSEMEAD, CA 91770

CASE ADMINISTRATION DON WOOD SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY PACIFIC ENERGY POLICY CENTER 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE, RM 370 4539 LEE AVENUE ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 LA MESA, CA 91941

MELANIE MCCUTCHAN REBECCA PEARL RESEARCH ASSOCIATE POLICY ADVOCATE, CLEAN BAY CAMPAIGN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COALITION ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COALITION 2727 HOOVER AVE., STE. 202 2727 HOOVER AVE., STE. 202 NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950 NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950

KARI KLOBERDANZ-YU KELLY FOLEY SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY PILOT POWER GROUP 8330 CENTURY PARK COURT, CP32D 8910 UNIVERSITY CENTER LANE, SUITE 520 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122



JAMIE K. YORK PAUL SZYMANSKI SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY SEMPRA ENERGY 8330 CENTURY PARK COURT, CP32D 8330 CENTURYPARK CT., CP32D SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123

WENDY KEILANI CENTRAL FILES REGULATORY CASE MGR. SDG&E AND SOCALGAS SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY 8330 CENTURY PARK COURT, CP31-E 8330 CENTURY PARK COURT, CP32D SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1550 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123

JUNE M. SKILLMAN JASON DE LA TOVA CONSULTANT WINDWARD ENERGY COMPANY 2010 GREENLEAF STREET 14609 FLINSTONE DRIVE SANTA ANA, CA 92706 LAKE HUGHES, CA 93532

HEATHER SWAN JASON CAUDLE LANCASTER POWER AUTHORITY LANCASTER CHOICE ENERGY CITY OF LANCASTER 44933 FERN AVE. 44933 FERN AVE. LANCASTER, CA 93534 LANCASTER, CA 93534 FOR: CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION (CALCCA)

DAVID A. SILBERMAN JAN PEPPER GENERAL COUNSEL PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY SAN MATEO COUNTY COUNSEL OFFICE 455 COUNTY CENTER, 4TH FL. 400 COUNTY CENTER, 6TH FL. REDWOOD CITY, CA 94063 REDWOOD CITY, CA 94063 FOR: CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION (CALCCA)

NIRIT ERIKSSON GLORIA D. SMITH SAN MATEO COUNTY COUNSEL OFFICE ADAMS, BROADWELL, JOSEPH & CARDOZO 400 COUNTY CENTER, 6TH FL. 601 GATEWAY BLVD., SUITE 1000 REDWOOD CITY, CA 94063 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 FOR: COALITION OF CALIFORNIA UTILITY EMPLOYEES

BRIAN STEVENS THERESA MUELLER CLEANPOWERSF-POWER ENTERPRISE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 525 GOLDEN GATE AVE., 7TH FL. CITY HALL, ROOM 234 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102

MEG MEAL JEANNE M. SOLE S.F. PUC - POWER ENTERPRISE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY 525 GOLDEN GATE AVE. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3220 1 DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE, RM. 234 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-4682

NORMAN J. FURUTA CASE ADMINISTRATION ATTORNEY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY FEDERAL EXECUTIVE AGENCIES 77 BEALE STREET 1455 MARKET ST., SUITE 1744 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103-1399



LAUREN HUDSON RANDY LITTENEKER SENIOR CASE MANAGER PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 77 BEALE STREET, RM 3173 / PO BOX 7442 77 BEALE STREET, MC B9A SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

SAMUEL GOLDING JANINE L. SCANCARELLI PRESIDENT ATTORNEY AT LAW COMMUNITY CHOICE PARTNERS, INC. CROWELL & MORING LLP 58 MIRABEL AVENUE 275 BATTERY STREET, 23RD FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94110 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111

MARC THEOBALD MARVIN FELDMAN EMCOR ENERGY SERVICES, INC. ECONOMIST 505 SANSOME ST., 16/F RESOURCE DECISIONS SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 934 DIAMOND STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94114

JIM BURKE CALIFORNIA ENERGY MARKETS BURKE TECH SERVICES 425 DIVISADERO ST., STE 303 PO BOX 15055 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94117 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115-0055 FOR: BURKE TECH SERVICES

CHRISTOPHER J. WARNER REGULATORY FILE ROOM ATTORNEY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PO BOX 7442 77 BEALE STREET B30A / PO BOX 7442 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94120 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94120

ED CHANG PETER DRAGOVICH FLYNN RESOURCE CONSULTANTS INC. ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER 5440 EDGEVIEW DRIVE CITY OF CONCORD DISCOVERY BAY, CA 94514 1950 PARKSIDE DRIVE, MS 01/A CONCORD, CA 94519

MICHAEL ROCHMAN MICHAEL NELSON MANAGING DIR. 1119 GLEN CT SCHOOL PROJECT UTILITY RATE REDUCTION WALNUT CREEK, CA 94595-2318 1850 GATEWAY BLVD., STE. 235 CONCORD, CA 94520

RAMONA GONZALEZ SAJI THOMAS PIERCE EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 375 ELEVENTH STREET, M/S NO. 205 375 11TH STREET OAKLAND, CA 94607 OAKLAND, CA 94607-4240

DAVID ROOM CAROL MISSELDINE 5807 FREMONT ST MAYOR'S OFFICE OAKLAND, CA 94608 CITY OF OAKLAND 1 FRANK OGAWA PLAZA, 3/F OAKLAND, CA 94612



TIM LINDL JEAN WOO COUNSEL FOUNDER, CFO KEYES & FOX LLP CUSTOM POWER SOLAR 436 14TH STREET, STE. 1305 1442A WALNUT STREET, NO. 368 OAKLAND, CA 94612 BERKELEY, CA 94709

DAWN WEISZ MICHAEL CALLAHAN-DUDLEY MARIN CLEAN ENERGY REGULATORY COUNSEL 1125 TAMALPAIS AVE. MARIN CLEAN ENERGY SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 1125 TAMALPAIS AVENUE FOR: CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 ASSOCIATION (CALCCA)

DANA ARMANINO MICHAEL DIETRICK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARIN CLIMATE SHIFT-LEAP CAMPAIGN COUNTY OF MARIN THE WATERPLANET ALLLIANCE 3501 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, ROOM 308 573 SEAVER DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94903 MILL VALLEY, CA 94941

RITA NORTON THOMAS S KIMBALL RITA NORTON AND ASSOCIATES, LLC MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT 18700 BLYTHSWOOD DRIVE, 1231 11TH STREET LOS GATOS, CA 95030 MODESTO, CA 95352-4060

CHRIS L. KIRIAKOU MISTY MERSICH CORNERSTONE CONSULTING, INC. CLIMATE PROTECTION PROGRAM ANALYST 1565 E. TUOLUMNE RD. SONOMA CNTY. REGIONAL CLIMATE PROTECTIONTURLOCK, CA 95382 490 MENDOCINO AVE., STE. 206 SANTA ROSA, CA 95401

JAN MCFARLAND MICHAEL R. WOODS SONIC ATTORNEY AT LAW 1650 EAST NAPA STREET MICHAEL R. WOODS P.C. SONOMA, CA 95476 846 BROADWAY SONOMA, CA 95476

REGULATORY AFFAIRS HENRY NANJO REDWOOD COAST ENERGY AUTHORITY ASSISTANT CHIEF COUNSEL, LEGAL SERVICES 633 3RD STREET DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES EUREKA, CA 95501 707 3RD STREET, SUITE 7-330 WEST SACRAMENTO, CA 95605

RICHARD MCCANN NAVIGANT CONSULTING, INC. M.CUBED 35 IRON POINT CIRCLE, STE. 225 2655 PORTAGE BAY ROAD, SUITE 3 FOLSOM, CA 95630 DAVIS, CA 95616

STEVEN A GREENBERG CAMILLE STOUGH, ESQ. REALENERGY BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN & SMITH PC 4100 ORCHARD CANYON LANE 915 L STREET, STE. 1480 VACAVILLE, CA 95688 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814



DAN L. CARROLL KEVIN WOODRUFF ATTORNEY AT LAW WOODRUFF EXPERT SERVICES, INC. DOWNEY BRAND, LLP 1127 - 11TH STREET, SUITE 514 621 CAPITOL MALL, 18TH FLOOR SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814

MICHAEL BOCCADORO TY TOSDAL WEST COAST ADVISORS OF COUNSEL 925 L STREET, SUITE 800 BRAUN BALISING MCLAUGHLIN & SMITH, P.C. SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 915 L. STREET, SUITE 1270 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814

LAURA TAYLOR KAREN LINDH BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN & SMITH, P.C. CALIFORNIA ONSITE GENERATION 915 L STREET, STE. 1480 7909 WALERGA ROAD, NO. 112, PMB 119 SACRAMENTO, CA 95822 ANTELOPE, CA 95843

ANN L. TROWBRIDGE CATHIE ALLEN DAY CARTER & MURPHY LLP REGULATORY AFFAIRS MGR. 3620 AMERICAN RIVER DRIVE, SUITE 205 PACIFICORP SACRAMENTO, CA 95864 825 NE MULTNOMAH ST., STE 2000 PORTLAND, OR 97232

COLIN CAMERON SR ANALYST EES CONSULTING 570 KIRKLAND WAY, STE. 100 KIRKLAND, WA 98033

CARLOS VELASQUEZ MICHAEL COLVIN CPUC CPUC - EXEC EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

MITCHELL SHAPSON SANDY GOLDBERG STAFF ATTORNEY SR. COUNSEL CPUC - LEGAL DIV. GOVERNOR'S OFF. OF PLANING & RESEARCH EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

SCOTT MURTISHAW TERI ROHRER ENERGY ADVISOR MANAGER CPUC - EXEC DIV COGENERATION CONTRACT SERVICES EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

WILLIAM MAGUIRE JAMES MCMAHON REGULATORY ANALYST 29 DANBURY ROAD CPUC-DRA NASHUA, NH 03064

State Service



EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

ANNE E. SIMON CHERYL COX CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES OFFICE OF RATEPAYER ADVOCATES ROOM 5104 ROOM 4101 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

CHRISTOPHER CLAY DAVID PECK CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION LEGAL DIVISION PRESIDENT PICKER ROOM 4300 ROOM 4108 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

DIANA L. LEE JULIE A. FITCH CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION LEGAL DIVISION DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES ROOM 4107 ROOM 5019 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

KE HAO OUYANG LOUIS M. IRWIN CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION UTILITY & PAYPHONE ENFORCEMENT BRANCH ELECTRICITY PRICING AND CUSTOMER PROGRAMAREA 2-E ROOM 4209 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

PAUL DOUGLAS STEPHEN C. ROSCOW CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND PERMITTING B DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES AREA 4-A ROOM 5109 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

SUZANNE CASAZZA TRUMAN L. BURNS CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MARKET STRUCTURE, COSTS AND NATURAL GAS ENERGY COST OF SERVICE & NATURAL GAS BRAAREA ROOM 4205 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

WILLIAM MAGUIRE MARGARET L. TOBIAS CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION TOBIAS LAW OFFICE DEMAND RESPONSE, CUSTOMER GENERATION, AN 460 PENNSYLVANIA AVE AREA 4-A SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

CRAIG MCDONALD HASSAN MOHAMMED NAVIGANT CONSULTING CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION



35 IRON POINT CIRCLE, STE. 225 1516 9TH STREET, MS43 FOLSOM, CA 95630 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814

JOHN PACHECO LISA DECARLO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES STAFF COUNSEL 2033 HOWE AVE., STE. 220 CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 1516 9TH STREET MS-14 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814

MICHAEL WOFFORD JACQUELINE GEORGE CA DEPT OF WATER RESOURCES, CERS DIV CALIF. ENERGY RESOURCES SCHEDULING 2030 HOWE AVENUE CALIF. DEPT OF WATER RESOURCES SACRAMENTO, CA 95825 2033 HOWE AVE., STE. 220 SACRAMENTO, CA 95825-0181

TOP OF PAGE BACK TO INDEX OF SERVICE LISTS



List of Non-Email Recipients DAVID R. HAMMER COUNTY COUNSEL COUNTY OF TRINITY CITY OF TRINITY PO BOX 1428 WEAVERVILLE, CA 96093-1426

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF … · 2017. 2. 14. · BEFORE THE PUBLIC...

Documents

Transcript of BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF … · 2017. 2. 14. · BEFORE THE PUBLIC...