BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF ... · 5 III. GROUNDS FOR PROHIBITING...

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Application of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) for Authority to, Among Other Things, Increase Its Authorized Revenues for Electric Service in 2015, And to Reflect That Increase in Rates.

)))))

A. 13-11-003 (Filed November 12, 2013)

MOTION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR A

PROTECTIVE ORDER

KRIS G. VYAS JANE LEE COLE GLORIA M. ING ROBERT F. LEMOINE

Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-1999 Facsimile: (626) 302-3990 E-mail:[email protected]

Dated: November 14, 2013

1


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


)))))

A. 13-11-003

MOTION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR A

PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pursuant to Rule 11.1 of the California Public Utilities Commission’s (“CPUC” or

“Commission”) Rules of Practice and Procedure and the authorities set forth herein, Southern

California Edison Company (“SCE”) respectfully moves that the Commission grant this motion

adopting a Protective Order to govern the use of protected material produced by SCE in its 2015

General Rate Case (“GRC”) proceeding.

I.

OVERVIEW

As part of SCE’s 2015 GRC Notice of Intent (“NOI”) process, SCE has already produced

to the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (“ORA”) its confidential Results of Operation (“RO”)

Model, which is proprietary, as well as the corresponding User Reference Guide for the Model.

SCE has also produced other protected documents to ORA, including SCE’s confidential

testimony and workpapers and approximately 150 confidential data request responses or

attachments.

2

This proposed Protective Order is not intended to govern access by the ORA to SCE’s

confidential or proprietary materials, as that access is governed by Public Utilities Code Section

583 and General Order 66(c). Rather, the Protective Order would permit other third parties

access to confidential and proprietary material, such as the RO model, the confidential testimony

and confidential workpapers that SCE has prepared in connection with its 2015 GRC application,

and the data request responses that SCE already provided to ORA. In addition, SCE expects that

there will be additional discovery between SCE and third parties throughout the course of this

proceeding, which may involve the production of confidential information. Adoption of this

Protective Order would facilitate discovery because the Order would also govern third party

access to confidential information provided in response to future discovery requests as well. As

with the confidential and proprietary documents identified to date, SCE will endeavor to

minimize the number of such documents requiring confidential treatment.

As indicated above, SCE has already produced protected documents and its RO model to

ORA in connection with SCE’s NOI. Because SCE expects that other parties will soon engage

in discovery, SCE requests that the assigned ALJ, the Law and Motion ALJ, or the CPUC

expeditiously grant this motion. SCE submits this motion for a protective order without

prejudice to future motions for other discovery-related relief.

Pursuant to Resolution ALJ-164, SCE has attached: (1) a draft proposed Protective

Order,1 (2) a draft Non-Disclosure Certificate, and (3) a draft Administrative Law Judge Ruling

1 In Decision No. 08-04-023, the Commission adopted a Model Protective Order for market-sensitive information addressed in Decision No. 06-06-066 and Decision No. 07-05-022. The Commission indicated that with respect to other proceedings, parties may find the model useful but were not obligated to use it: “Parties to other proceedings, and in industries other than the electric sector, may find the Model useful as well, although we will not obligate them to use it.” Decision No. 08-04-023, mimeo p. 2. As discussed further in this motion, a limited number of SCE’s testimony and workpapers contain market-sensitive information and are protected under the CPUC-approved matrix from Decision No. 06-06-066. However, rather than use two protective orders in this proceeding (i.e., the Commission’s Model Protective Order from Decision No. 08-04-023 for the limited number of market-sensitive information and a Protective Order modeled after the one SCE used in its prior GRC proceeding for the vast majority of other confidential information), SCE is requesting the CPUC approve one protective order. This is the same approach SCE used in its 2009 General Rate Case proceeding where the ALJ approved a single protective order for all of SCE’s confidential information in the proceeding.

3

Approving the Protective Order. SCE’s proposed Protective Order is substantially similar to the

one approved by the Administrative Law Judge in SCE’s 2009 General Rate Case proceeding2

and should be adopted for this GRC as well.

II.

BACKGROUND

On July 15, 2013, SCE tendered to ORA its NOI to file a 2015 test year General Rate

Case (“GRC”). The Commission’s Executive Director accepted SCE’s NOI for filing by letter

dated on or about September 10, 2013.

As part of the NOI process, SCE provided to ORA its testimony and workpapers. A

limited number of the bound volumes of testimony and workpapers included confidential

material, which SCE provided to ORA under Public Utilities Code Section 583 and General

Order 66(c). Concurrent with the NOI, SCE also served on the ORA its responses to ORA’s

master data request, some of which were provided under Section 583 and General Order 66(c).

Subsequent to SCE’s tendering of its NOI, SCE has and continues to respond to data requests

propounded by ORA, some of which were also provided to ORA under Section 583 and General

Order 66(c). SCE’s 2015 GRC application, being filed concurrent with this motion, is supported

by testimony and workpapers, of which a limited number of volumes contain confidential

information.

In general, the documents that would be subject to the proposed Protective Order include

the following categories:

2 See January 22, 2008 email from ALJ DeAngelus to service list for Application No. 07-11-011, which granted SCE’s request for a protective order in SCE’s 2009 General Rate Case proceeding. In SCE’s 2012 General Rate Case application, SCE did not request the Commission to approve a Protective Order and instead entered into individual negotiated nondisclosure agreements with parties. Subsequently, the Commission adopted a protective order in Southern California Gas Company (“SoCalGas”) and San Diego Gas and Electric Company’s (“SDG&E”) 2012 General Rate Case proceeding. See March 21, 2011 Assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge’s Scoping Memo and ruling in SDG&E and SoCalGas’ A. 10-12-005 and A. 10-12-006.

4

Documents that contain proprietary and confidential business information, some of

which belong to third parties.

Documents protected under existing confidentiality agreements.

Documents containing sensitive pricing terms or confidential bid information.

Documents that contain security or critical energy infrastructure information.

Documents that contain market-sensitive information and that are protected under

Decision No. 06-06-066.

A more specific description of the confidential testimony and workpapers that would be subject

to this protective order and the grounds for protecting them are contained in Sections III and IV

of this motion.

In addition, SCE has a proprietary RO model which was used by SCE to calculate its

proposed revenue requirement, which is comprised of operations and maintenance expense,

depreciation, return, and taxes on the 2015 rate base included in SCE’s GRC applications. In

addition, the RO model is designed to be used to calculate scenarios applying various changes to

the requested costs. SCE developed the RO model at significant time and expense and considers

the model, including any and all changes, updates, or enhancements, to be confidential and

proprietary. SCE has provided ORA and the Commission’s Energy Branch access to its model

pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 583 and General Order 66(c).

Pursuant to Rule 10.4(d) of the Commission’s rules of practice and procedure, if a party

requests access to SCE’s computer model, SCE has the option of making the requested runs on

its own computer or making the model available to the party. If SCE elects to make the RO

model available to a third party, then the model must be protected. Because SCE’s RO model is

proprietary, SCE requests that access to its model be covered under the terms of the Protective

Order.

5

III.

GROUNDS FOR PROHIBITING DISCLOSURE

The California Constitution, Article 12, Section 2 and Public Utilities Code Section 1701

mandate that the Commission comply with due process of law.3 Public Utilities Code Section

1794 requires the Commission to follow the Code of Civil Procedure in discovery matters.4

Section 2017.020 provides that a party may bring a motion for a protective order to limit

discovery when the intrusiveness, burden or expense of discovery clearly outweighs the

likelihood that the information sought will lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.5 Rule

11.1 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure permits parties to make a motion to

request the Commission or Administrative Law Judge to take a specific action related to an open

proceeding before the Commission.

The Commission has issued protective orders on a number of prior occasions.6 Protective

orders facilitate discovery, especially in proceedings where substantial discovery is expected and

where it is important to impose an orderly process on the discovery of confidential and

proprietary documents to facilitate the Commission’s and parties’ full and timely review of an

application.7 With respect to general rate case applications for energy utilities, the Commission

granted SCE’s request and adopted a protective order in SCE’s 2009 General Rate Case

application A. 07-11-011, which is substantially similar to the protective order SCE seeks

3 See People v. Western Airlines, Inc. (1954) 42 Cal. 2d 621, 632 (referencing Section 1701). 4 See Re Alternative Regulatory Frameworks for Local Exchange Carriers (1994) D. 94-08-028, 55 Cal. PUC 2d

672, 677. 5 Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2017.020. 6 See, e.g., Decision 00-11-041 (November 21, 2000), mimeo p. 10, footnote 9 (citing D. 99-08-008, 1999 Cal.

PUC Lexis 499, at *4; D. 98-06-021, 1998 Cal. PUC Lexis 474, at *20; D. 98-02-112, 1998 Cal. PUC Lexis 235, at *3); Decision 00-05-046, mimeo p. 7.

7 See, e.g., July 3, 2002 Administrative Law Judge Ruling Adopting Protective Order in Southern California Edison Company’s GRC proceeding (A. 02-05-004/I.02-06-002), May 1 2002 Administrative Law Judge’s Ruling re Revised Protective Order in the generation procurement rulemaking (R. 01-10-024), and Administrative Law Judge’s January 31, 1997 Order Adopting Nondisclosure and Protective Agreement in the Pacific Enterprises/Enova merger case (A. 96-10-038): “This order is made in the interest of facilitating prompt discovery, protecting and preserving the rights of parties, and avoiding unnecessary law and motion practice.”

6

approval of in this application.8 More recently, the Commission issued a protective order in

Southern California Gas Company and San Diego Gas and Electric Company’s 2012 general rate

case application in response to the utilities’ motion for protective order, which was filed on or

about the time that the two utilities filed their application.9

IV.

DESCRIPTION OF PROTECTED WORKPAPERS AND TESTIMONY

As indicated in Section I above, SCE’s proposed Protective Order would govern third

party access to the RO model, subject to the CPUC’s Rule 10.4(d). Further, there are

approximately 150 confidential data request responses and attachments already provided by SCE

to ORA that are confidential. SCE’s proposed Protective Order would govern access to these

confidential data request responses and attachments, as well as other confidential information

that SCE may subsequently produce in discovery.

Finally, the proposed Protective Order would govern access to a limited number of

confidential testimony and workpapers that SCE has prepared in support of its 2015 GRC

application. A summary of these confidential testimony and workpapers is provided below.

A. Testimony to be Protected

Of the 53 volumes of bound testimony SCE has prepared in support of its application,

four contain confidential information. A summary of SCE’s confidential testimony is provided

below.

8 January 22, 2008 email from ALJ DeAngelus to service list for Application No. 07-11-011. 9 See March 2, 2011 Assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge’s Scoping Memo and Ruling in

SDG&E and SoCalGas’ A.10-12-005 and A.10-12-006.

7

1. Mountainview: Terms from the Contractual Service Agreement (SCE-2,

Volume 9C)

When SCE purchased the Mountainview Generating Station, SCE assumed responsibility

for existing contracts, including the Contractual Services Agreement (“CSA”) with General

Electric. The CSA covers maintenance (including parts, services, and repairs) for the four

combustion turbine generators and two steam turbine generators.

In support of its forecast of expenses for Mountainview, SCE has discussed terms from

the CSA in Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 9C. Specifically, this exhibit contains six pages that reveal

confidential terms from the CSA. The CSA explicitly states that information contained in the

CSA is proprietary. In addition, Sections 15.1 - 15.3 of the CSA require parties to the agreement

to use reasonable efforts to obtain confidential treatment of CSA information and to seek a

protective order limiting the dissemination and use of information from the CSA. Pursuant to the

terms of the CSA, Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 9C should be protected under the Protective Order.

2. Property and Liability Insurance (SCE-08, Vol. 1, Pt. 2C)

Exhibit SCE-08, Vol. 1, Pt. 2C, contains one line item in Table I-1 and one paragraph on

SCE’s Supplemental Wildfire Insurance, which reveals the limit, deductible, and expiration of

the insurance. Access to this information should be governed under the proposed Protective

Order because release of the information would harm ratepayers. SCE’s Wildfire Insurance is

renewed annually and ratepayers would be harmed if the insurance companies that negotiate with

SCE on SCE’s Wildfire Insurance were aware of the amount SCE paid for the supplemental

insurance, along with the other terms of the supplemental policy. Knowledge of this information

could impact the amount that these insurance companies may seek in negotiations and would

give them an unfair advantage during the negotiations. Because public release of this

information could harm SCE’s ratepayers, the confidential information in SCE-08, Vol. 1, Part

2C should be protected under the terms of the proposed Protective Order.

8

3. IHS Global Insight Forecasts (SCE-10, Vol. 1C)

Three tables in Exhibit SCE-10, Vol. 1C (Tables VII-21, VII-25, and VII-27) relating to

SCE’s cost escalations rely upon confidential forecasts from IHS Global Insight. Pursuant to

Section 5.3 of SCE’s subscription agreement with IHS Global Insight, SCE must protect the IHS

information. Pursuant to Section 5.4 of the agreement, SCE is permitted to provide the

information to a regulatory agency (such as the CPUC) so long as SCE takes reasonable steps to

seek confidential treatment of the information. SCE has thus provided the confidential testimony

to the Commission under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c). If

the Commission adopts SCE’s proposed Protective Order, third parties would have access to the

confidential testimony under the terms of the Protective Order.

4. Hedging Strategy, Power Procurement Information, Tolling Unit

Expenditures (SCE-10, Vol. 2C)

In Section V.B.c.1(i) of Exhibit SCE-10, Vol. 2C, SCE discloses confidential information

associated with SCE’s gas options, which are part of SCE’s current hedging strategy. Natural

gas hedging transactions are protected under Matrix Category I.A.4 (“Long-term fuel (gas)

buying and hedging plans”) that was adopted in Decision No. 06-06-066 in R. 06-05-040.

In Section V.B.c.2., SCE reveals confidential information associated with its lead lag

study. This information is confidential because you can use the redacted information in this

section to back into the end result power procurement information, which is confidential

pursuant to Matrix Category Section VII.B. (“Contracts and power purchase agreements between

utilities and non-affiliated third parties”) of the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-

066 in R. 05-06-040.

In Section V.B.c.2., SCE also discloses confidential information relating to its tolling unit

expenditures. This information is confidential because the redacted information in this section

can be used to back into the end result power procurement information, which is confidential

pursuant to Matrix Category Section VII.B. (“Contracts and power purchase agreements between

9

utilities and non-affiliated third parties”) of the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-

066 in R. 05-06-040. In addition, in this section SCE reveals information about forecasted power

procurements under QF, non-QF, and tolling contracts, which is confidential pursuant to Matrix

Categories IV.B. (“Resource planning information- Electric: Forecast of Qualifying Facility

Generation”) and II.B.4. (“Cost Forecast Data – Electric: Generation Cost Forecasts: Non-QF

Bilateral Contracts”) of the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066 in R. 05-06-

040.

Therefore, Exhibit SCE-10, Volume 2C is available to the Commission and its staff under

Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code. This volume of testimony is available to other third

parties who are not market participants under the terms of the proposed Protective Order.

B. Workpapers To Be Protected

SCE seeks to protect a limited number of confidential workpapers that were submitted

under Public Utilities Code Section 583 and General Order 66(c) to ORA as part of its July 15,

2013 NOI and SCE’s 2015 GRC Application. Of the 94 bound volumes of workpapers

supporting SCE’s application, 11 contained confidential information. The workpapers SCE

seeks to protect are discussed below:

1. AB 32 California Air Resource Board Administrative Fees (SCE-2, Volume

4C)

In Decision No. 12-10-044, the Commission granted SCE’s request to recover the

California Air Resource Board’s (“CARB”) administrative fees that were assessed on state

utilities as a result of Assembly Bill 32. In Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 4, SCE provides testimony

and its forecast of the CARB fees. In its workpapers (SCE-2, Volume 4C), SCE has provided a

confidential workpaper to support SCE’s forecast of the CARB administrative fees. The

workpaper includes SCE's forecast of IOU generation and is confidential pursuant to Section

IV.A of the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066 in R. 05-06-040. The

10

confidential information is available to the CPUC under section 583 of the Public Utilities Code

and General Order 66(c). If the Protective Order is approved, the information would also be

available to non-market participants under the proposed Protective Order. Pursuant to Decision

No. 06-06-066, market participants shall not have access to this information.

2. Economic Analyses – Benefit-to-Cost Ratio for Capital Projects and Data

Request Response DRA-16-Morse Associated with Four Corners (SCE-2,

Volume 6, Part 2C)

In Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 6, Part 2, SCE provides testimony on its forecast capital

expenditures that are required to support Four Corners. In support of SCE’s testimony, SCE has

included in its workpapers the economic analyses of the benefit-to-cost ratio for the proposed

capital projects. To develop the benefit-to-cost ratios, SCE used a forecast of gas prices, as well

as energy and capacity, which are included as part of the analyses. These forecasts also appear

in SCE’s response to data request DRA-16-Morse, which SCE also includes as a workpaper

(Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 6, Part 2C).

Some of the capital projects are based on economic analyses that rely on a gas price

forecast or an energy and capacity forecast for years 2013, 2014, or 2015. The forecasts for

these years are confidential pursuant to the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066

in R. 05-06-040. The confidential information is available to the CPUC under section 583 of the

Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c). If the Protective Order is approved, it would also

be available to non-market participants under the proposed Protective Order. Pursuant to

Decision No. 06-06-066, market participants shall not have access to this information.

3. Economic Analyses – Benefit-to-Cost Ratio for Capital Projects Associated

with SCE’s Hydro Facilities (SCE-2, Volume 7, Part 2C)

In Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 7, Part 2, SCE provides testimony on its capital forecasts to

support: (1) miscellaneous electrical capital equipment at the Hydro plants that need to be

11

refurbished or replaced, and (2) capital equipment associated with the turbines and generators of

SCE’s hydro plants. In support of SCE’s testimony on the capital projects that exceed $1.0

million, SCE has included in its workpapers (SCE-2, Volume 7, Part 2) economic analyses of the

benefit-to-cost ratio for the capital projects. To develop the benefit-to-cost ratios, SCE used a

forecast of gas prices, as well as energy and capacity, which are included as part of the analyses.

Some of SCE’s economic analyses rely on a gas price forecast or an energy and capacity

forecast for years 2013-2015 that are confidential pursuant to the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of

Decision No. 06-06-066 in R. 05-06-040. These confidential economic analyses are found in the

workpaper volume SCE-2, Volume 2, Part 2C. The confidential information is available to the

CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c) and to non-market

participants under the proposed Protective Order, but market participants shall not have access to

this information.

4. Mountainview - General Electric Contract Forecast; Contractual Service

Agreement; Capital Economic Analyses (SCE-2, Volume 8C)

As discussed above in Section IV.A.1, SCE’s Contractual Services Agreement (“CSA”)

with General Electric provides that the information contained in the CSA is proprietary.

Sections 15.1 - 15.3 of the CSA require parties to the agreement (such as SCE) to use reasonable

efforts to obtain confidential treatment of CSA information and to seek a protective order

limiting the dissemination and use of information from the CSA.

In support of its forecast of expenses for Mountainview, SCE has included the CSA in its

workpapers, along with other documents that discloses terms from the CSA. SCE is requesting

that the CSA and its terms be protected under the proposed Protective Order. If the Protective

Order is approved, the workpapers would be available to third parties (except competitors of GE)

under the proposed Protective Order. Competitors of GE should not have access to the

confidential and proprietary information.

12

Finally, the confidential workpapers supporting Mountainview (SCE-2, Volume 8C) also

contain economic analyses of the benefit-to-cost ratio for those capital projects that rely on a gas

price forecast or energy and capacity forecast for years 2013-2015, which are confidential

pursuant to the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066 in R. 05-06-040. The

confidential information is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code

and General Order 66(c). It would be available to non-market participants under the Protective

Order, if approved. Market participants will not have access to this information.

5. Economic Analyses – Benefit-to-Cost Ratio for Capital Projects Associated

with Peaker Plants (SCE-2, Volume 9C)

In Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 9, SCE provides testimony on the ongoing capital

expenditures forecasted for its peaker plants such as spare transformers, spare service air

compressors, and spare gas compressors. In support of SCE’s testimony on these capital

projects, SCE’s confidential workpapers (SCE-2, Volume 9C) include economic analyses of the

benefit-to-cost ratio for the spare service air compressor and the spare gas compressor. SCE’s

analyses rely on a gas price forecast or an energy and capacity forecast for years 2013-2015,

which are confidential pursuant to the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066 in R.

05-06-040. The confidential information is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the

Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c). It would be available to non-market participants

under the Protective Order, if approved. Market participants will not have access to this

information.

6. SCE’s Solar Photovoltaic Program Lease Information (SCE-2, Volume 10C)

In Exhibit SCE-2, Volume 10, SCE provides testimony on its forecast for the company’s

Solar Photovoltaic Program (“SPVP”), which includes aggregate information on the lease

payments associated with the program. In SCE’s confidential workpapers (SCE-2, Volume

10C), SCE has included its data request responses to DRA-SCE-02, Questions 6 and 7 and DRA

13

Verbal 018, Question A.01, which disclose payment and terms under the individual lease

agreements. Pursuant to Section 17.9 of SCE’s lease with Prologis, the terms of the individual

leases are confidential and therefore, SCE seeks to protect this information under the Protective

Order. The confidential information is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public

Utilities Code and General Order 66(c).

7. Gartner Research Study on SCE’s Information Technology Capital

Expenditures, Direct System Support Pricing Matrix, and Forecast

Expenditures for High Volume Printers and Bill Inserters Refresh (SCE-5,

Volume 1C)

In Chapter 3 of Exhibit SCE-5, Volume 1, SCE presents its testimony on its proposed

capital expenditures associated with hardware replacement. In support of its forecast, SCE has

provided in its workpapers (SCE-5, Volume 1C) a research document by Gartner titled “Extend

the Life of Your Server, but Beware Some of the Pitfalls.” On the research document, Gartner

expressly provides that its document cannot be reproduced or distributed in any form without

prior written permission. Under Public Utilities Code Section 582, the Commission has access to

SCE’s books, reports, accounts, papers, and records in its possession. Therefore, the workpaper

is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c).

SCE has received permission from Gartner to provide the confidential research document to third

parties so long as the document is protected under a protective order.

The workpapers relating to the direct system support pricing matrix and the expenditures

for high volume printers and bill inserters refresh contain confidential vendor information from

Edge Solution, Ricoh, and Pitney Bowes Systems. SCE obtained this information through a

competitive procurement process, and SCE’s customers would be harmed if competitive pricing

information was made public. If other vendors were aware of the financial terms of SCE’s

agreement with these vendors, a competing vendor may increase its bid in a future procurement.

Further, ratepayers may be harmed if vendors declined to do business with SCE if they knew

14

their pricing terms would be made public. Therefore, SCE’s confidential workpaper is available

to the CPUC and its staff under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66

(c). Third parties may have access to the confidential workpaper under the terms of the

Protective Order.

8. Gartner Research Study; Vendor Information – Information Technology

Capitalized Software Expenditures, SONGS Critical Digital Asset

Remediation (SCE-5, Volume 2, Part 1C)

In support of SCE’s testimony on capitalized software expenditure, SCE’s workpaper

(SCE-5, Volume 2, Part 1C) includes two research documents by Gartner titled, “Hype Cycle for

Business Intelligence 2012” and “Justifying Business Application Software Maintenance Fees.”

On the research documents, Gartner expressly provides that its documents cannot be reproduced

or distributed in any form without prior written permission. Under Public Utilities Code section

582, the Commission has access to SCE’s reports, books, accounts, papers, and records in its

possession. Therefore, the workpaper is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public

Utilities Code and General Order 66(c). SCE has received permission from Gartner to provide

the confidential research documents to third parties so long as the documents are protected under

a protective order.

In addition, in support of its various information technology capitalized software

expenditures described in Exhibit SCE-5, Volume 2, Part 1, SCE has included documents in its

workpaper that contain competitive pricing terms, some of which are vendor quotes and some of

which are prices from selected vendors as a result of a competitive bidding process. Release of

this information would harm SCE’s ability to obtain competitive prices in the future. For

example, vendors may take this information into consideration (to the detriment of SCE and its

ratepayers) when submitting a future bid. In addition, release of the vendor’s confidential

information could disadvantage SCE in future dealings with its vendors because they may

choose to not deal with SCE if they know that their confidential information would be made

15

public. Moreover, release of this information in competitive markets in which they operate could

disadvantage SCE’s vendors. It could harm the vendors in future bids with other customers if

the vendors’ pricing information with SCE was made public. The confidential workpapers found

in SCE-5, Volume 2, Part 1C are available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities

Code and General Order 66(c). If the Protective Order is approved, the workpapers would be

available to third parties under the terms of the Protective Order.

Finally, in the confidential workpapers supporting Exhibit SCE-5, Vol. 2, Part 1, SCE has

included a description of its SONGS Critical Digital Asset Remediation. The remediation

project is part of the SONGS Cyber Security Plan and reveals SCE’s general summary of the

areas SCE intends to analyze to address cyber security threats. Similar to critical energy

infrastructure information, this type of security information should not be made public because it

would reveal areas of potential cyber security vulnerability. SCE has made this information

available to the CPUC under Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c), but it should not be

made available to parties in this proceeding except through the terms and conditions of the

Protective Order.

9. SCE Security Enhancement analysis (SCE-7, Volume 4C)

In support of Exhibit SCE-7, Volume 4 relating to the Corporate Security department of

the Safety, Security, and Compliance Operating Unit (SS&C), SCE included an analysis on

security enhancement in its confidential workpapers (SCE-7, Volume 4C). SCE’s analysis

describes the feasibility of different security enhancements at SCE’s facilities in Rosemead,

Alhambra, Pomona, Rancho Cucamonga, Irwindale, Riverside, Alhambra, and Long Beach and

the design challenges these facilities face to control access. Because public release of this

analysis may impact the safety of SCE employees and visitors in these facilities, this information

is available to the CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c).

The analysis should not be made available to the public unless protected under SCE’s proposed

Protective Order.

16

10. IHS Global Insight Forecasts (SCE-10, Vol. 1, Chapter VIIC)

SCE’s cost escalations (for non-labor, labor, and capital) in Exhibit SCE-10, Vol. 1,

Chapter VII, rely upon confidential forecasts from IHS Global Insight. Pursuant to Section 5.3

of SCE’s subscription agreement with IHS Global Insight, SCE must protect the IHS

information. Pursuant to Section 5.4 of the agreement, SCE is permitted to provide the

information to a regulatory agency (such as the CPUC) so long as SCE takes reasonable steps to

seek confidential treatment of the information. SCE has thus provided the confidential

workpapers in SCE-10, Vol. 1, Chapter VIIC to the Commission under Section 583 of the Public

Utilities Code and General Order 66(c). If the Commission adopts SCE’s proposed Protective

Order, third parties would have access to the confidential workpapers under the terms of the

Protective Order.

11. Working Cash Lead-Lag Study/Expense Lags, Purchase Power Section,

Mountainview CSA Information (SCE-10, Vol. 2, Chapter 5C)

SCE’s workpapers include its Working Cash Study in the public workpapers supporting

SCE-10, Vol. 2. However, portions of the study contain power purchase forecasts that are

confidential pursuant to Section II.B of the IOU Matrix (Appendix 1) of Decision No. 06-06-066

in R. 05-06-040. The protected information in the confidential workpapers is available to the

CPUC under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Codes and General Order 66(c). If the Protective

Order is approved, the workpaper would be available to nonmarket participants pursuant to

Decision No. 06-06-066. Market participants shall not have access to this information.

In addition, the confidential workpapers supporting Exhibit SCE-10, Volume 2, Chapter

5, also contain a workpaper that identifies the HGPI component for overhauls for Mountainview.

As indicated earlier in Section IV.A.1 of this Motion, SCE’s Contractual Services Agreement

(“CSA”) with General Electric provides that the information contained in the CSA is proprietary.

Sections 15.1 - 15.3 of the CSA require parties to the agreement (such as SCE) to use reasonable

17

efforts to obtain confidential treatment of CSA information and to seek a protective order

limiting the dissemination and use of information from the CSA.

V.

CONCLUSION

Wherefore, for the above reasons, SCE respectfully requests that the Commission grant

SCE’s motion and adopt the proposed Protective Order attached to this motion.

Respectfully submitted, KRIS G. VYAS JANE LEE COLE GLORIA M. ING ROBERT F. LEMOINE

/s/ Gloria M. Ing By: Gloria M. Ing

Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-1999 Facsimile: (626) 302-3990 E-mail:[email protected]

November 14, 2013

Appendix A

Proposed Protective Order

Appendix A-1


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


)))))

A. 13-11-003 (Filed November 12, 2013)

PROTECTIVE ORDER

(Issued _______________, 2013)

1. This Protective Order shall be available to and govern the use of all Protected Materials

produced by Southern California Edison Company (SCE) in this proceeding. This Protective Order shall

also govern access to SCE’s Results of Operations model, which was used to develop SCE’s revenue

requirement in this proceeding. Notwithstanding any order terminating this proceeding, this Protective

Order shall remain in effect until specifically modified or terminated by a Presiding Administrative Law

Judge (Presiding Judge), the Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge, or the California Public Utilities

Commission (CPUC).

2. SCE may designate as protected those materials which customarily are treated by SCE as

sensitive or proprietary, which are not available to the public, and which, if disclosed freely, would subject

SCE or its customers to risk of competitive disadvantage or other business injury. This information can

include, but is not limited to, testimony, workpapers, data request responses, and SCE’s Results of

Operations Model.

3. Definitions – for purposes of this Agreement:

(a) The term “Nondisclosure Certificate” shall mean the certificate annexed hereto by

which Intervenor has been granted access to Protected Materials, which certifies

Intervenor’s understanding that such access to Protected Materials is provided pursuant

Appendix A-2

to the terms and restrictions of this Protective Order, and that such Intervenor’s

Reviewing Representative has read the Protective Order and agrees to be bound by it.

(b) The term “Reviewing Representative” shall mean a person who has signed a

Nondisclosure Certificate and who is:

(1) An attorney representing Intervenor who has made an appearance or intends to

make an appearance in SCE’s 2015 GRC Application proceeding;

(2) An attorney, paralegal, and other employee associated for purposes of this case

with an attorney described in (1); or

(3) an expert or an employee of an expert retained by Intervenor for the purpose of

advising, preparing for or testifying in this proceeding.

(4) Employees or other representatives of Intervenor appearing in this proceeding

with responsibility for this docket.

(c) The term “Protected Material” refers to those materials described in Section 2 above.

Notwithstanding Section 3(b)(1-4) above, SCE has the right to refuse to provide a Reviewing

Representative access to Protected Material if grounds exist such that the Reviewing Representative could

use Protective Material for commercial or improper usage. If Intervenor disagrees with SCE’s refusal to

provide Protected Material, Intervenor may seek resolution under the procedures set forth in Section 10(a).

4. Protected Materials shall be made available under the terms of this Protective Order only to

Intervenor and only through its Reviewing Representatives.

5. (a) Protected Materials shall remain available to Intervenor until the later of the date that

an order terminating SCE’s 2015 GRC Application becomes no longer subject to judicial review, or the date

that any other CPUC proceeding relating to the Protected Material is concluded and no longer subject to

judicial review.

(b) Within 15 calendar days of such date set forth in Section 5(a), Intervenor shall return

to SCE the Protected Materials, including notes of Protected Material, copies of filings, official transcripts

and exhibits in this proceeding that contain Protected Materials, or, upon agreement by SCE, shall destroy

the materials in a manner determined by SCE. Within such time period, Intervenor shall also submit to SCE

Appendix A-3

an affidavit stating that, to the best of its knowledge, all Protected Materials and documents containing

Protected Materials have been return or have been destroyed.

6. All Protected Materials shall be maintained by Intervenor in a secure place. Access to

Protected Materials shall be limited to those Reviewing Representatives specifically authorized pursuant to

this Protective Order.

7. (a) Protected Materials shall be treated as confidential by Intervenor and by the

Reviewing Representative in accordance with the Nondisclosure Certificate executed pursuant to Section 8.

Protected Materials shall not be used except as necessary for the conduct of SCE’s 2015 GRC Application,

nor shall they be disclosed in any manner to any person except a Reviewing Representative who is engaged

in the conduct of this proceeding and who needs to know the information in order to carry out that person's

responsibilities in this proceeding.

(b) Reviewing Representatives may make notes of Protected Materials which shall be

treated as notes of Protected Materials if they disclose the contents of Protected Materials. Reviewing

Representatives may not make copies of Protected Materials unless agreed to by SCE. Any such copies

become Protected Materials.

8. A Reviewing Representative shall not be permitted to inspect, participate in discussions

regarding, or otherwise be permitted access to Protected Materials pursuant to this Protective Order unless

Reviewing Representative has first executed a Nondisclosure Certificate. A copy of each Nondisclosure

Certificate shall be provided to counsel for Intervenor and to SCE prior to disclosure of any Protected

Material to that Reviewing Representative.

9. Any Reviewing Representative may disclose Protected Materials to (a) any other Reviewing

Representative as long as the disclosing Reviewing Representative and receiving Reviewing Representative

both have executed a Nondisclosure Certificate, or (b) a member of the CPUC’s Office of Ratepayer

Advocates (ORA) who is engaged in the conduct of this proceeding. ORA is subject to the rules and

regulations that govern the treatment of Protected information such as Public Utilities Code Section 583 and

General Order 66(c). In the event that any Reviewing Representative to whom Protected Materials are

disclosed ceases to the engaged in these proceedings, or is employed or retained for a position whose

Appendix A-4

occupant is not qualified to be a Reviewing Representative under Section 3(b), access to Protected Materials

by the person shall be terminated. Even if no longer engaged in this proceeding, every person who has

executed a Nondisclosure Certificate shall continue to be bound by the provisions of this Protective Order

and the certificate.

10. (a) Subject to Section 15, the CPUC, Presiding Administrative Law Judge of the CPUC,

or Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge of the CPUC, as appropriate, shall resolve any disputes

arising under this Protective Order. Prior to presenting any dispute under this Protective Order to the

Commission, Presiding Administrative Law Judge, or Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge under

Resolution ALJ-164 or the CPUC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, the parties to the dispute shall meet

and confer and use their best effects to resolve the dispute.

(b) If Intervenor contests the designation of materials as protected, Intervenor shall notify

SCE by specifying in writing the materials whose designation is contested. This Protective Order shall

continue to apply to such materials after the notification is made. Intervenor may seek resolution of the

dispute under the procedures set forth in Section 10(a). If the CPUC, Presiding Administrative Law Judge,

or Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge of the CPUC finds that the materials at issue are not entitled

to protection, the procedures of Section 15 shall apply.

11. All copies of all documents reflecting Protected Materials that are filed or submitted with the

Commission, including the portion of the hearing testimony, exhibits, transcripts, briefs and other

documents which refer to Protected Materials, shall bear the prominent markings indicating that the contents

include Protected Materials subject to this Protective Order.

12. If Intervenor desires to include, utilize or refer to any Protected Materials, Intervenor shall

first notify Counsel for SCE. If Intervenor desires to include, utilize, or refer to any protected Materials at

the evidentiary hearing, Intervenor shall notify the Presiding Judge of such desire, identifying with

particularity each of the Protected Materials. Thereafter, use of such Protected Material will be governed by

procedures determined by the Commission or the Presiding Judge.

13. Nothing in this Protective Order shall be construed as precluding SCE from objecting to the

use of Protected Materials on any legal grounds.

Appendix A-5

14. Nothing in this Protective Order shall preclude Intervenor from requesting the CPUC, or

Presiding Judge or the Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge of the CPUC, or any other body having

appropriate authority, to find that this Protective Order should not apply to all or any materials previously

designated as Protected Materials pursuant to this Protective Order.

15. If the CPUC, Presiding Judge, or the Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge of the

CPUC finds at any time in the course of SCE’s 2015 GRC proceeding that all or part of the Protected

Materials need not be protected, those materials shall, nevertheless, be subject to the protection afforded by

this Protective Order for seven (7) business days from the data of the decision unless, within such period, a

party files a rehearing request or an interlocutory appeal on that finding with the Commission, in which case

the materials shall remain protected until seven (7) business days after the final order resolving the question

of confidentiality. SCE and Intervenor do not waive their rights to seek additional administrative or judicial

remedies after the Commission's or the Presiding Judge's or the Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge

decision respecting Protected Materials or Reviewing Representatives, or the Commission's denial of an

appeal or rehearing thereof.

16. SCE does not waive the right to pursue any other legal or equitable remedies that may be

available in the event of actual or anticipated disclosure of Protected Materials.

17. Contents of Protected Materials or any other form of information that copies or discloses

Protected Materials shall not be disclosed to anyone other than in accordance with this Protective Order and

shall be used only in connection with SCE’s 2015 GRC proceeding.

18. This Protective Order may be executed in counterparts, all of which together shall constitute

a single instrument, and it shall not be necessary that any counterpart be signed by all the Parties. The

signatories hereto represent that they have been duly authorized to enter into this Protective Order on behalf

of the Party for whom they sign.

Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge

Appendix B

Non-Disclosure Certificate

Appendix B


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


)))))

A. 13-11-003 (Filed November 12, 2013)

NON-DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE

(To be executed by a Reviewing Representative for access to Protected Materials)

I hereby certify my understanding that access to Protected Materials is provided to me pursuant to

the terms and restrictions of the Protective Order in this proceeding, that I have been given a copy of and

have read the Protective Order, and that I agree to be bound by it. I understand that the contents of the

Protected Materials, any notes or other memoranda, or any other form of information that copies or

discloses Protected Materials shall not be disclosed to anyone other than in accordance with that Protective

Order. I acknowledge that a violation of this certificate constitutes a violation of an order of the California

Public Utilities Commission.

By:___________________________________________ Print Name: ___________________________________

Title:__________________________________________

Representing:___________________________________

Date:__________________________________________

Appendix C

Proposed Ruling Issuing Protective Order

Appendix C-1


STATE OF CALIFORNIA


)))))

A. 13-11-003 (Filed November 12, 2013)

RULING ISSUING PROTECTIVE ORDER

On November 14, 2013, Southern California Edison Company (SCE”) filed a motion

requesting that the assigned Administrative Law Judge or the Law and Motion Administrative

Law Judge issue a protective order in this proceeding. SCE indicates that it provided

confidential testimony, workpapers, and responses to data request questions to the Office of

Ratepayer Advocates under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c)

relating to its general rate case filing. The protective order would govern the terms and

conditions by which third parties may have access to these confidential documents while

maintaining and protecting the confidential nature of these documents. SCE indicates that the

protective order would apply to any subsequent materials that may be produced with respect to

SCE’s 2015 general rate case application proceeding.

In addition, SCE has provided access to the Office of Ratepayer Advocates to its Results

of Operations model under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code and General Order 66(c).

The Protective Order would provide for access to SCE’s Results of Operations model to parties

in the proceeding pursuant to Rule 10.4, which provides that if a party requests access to SCE’s

Appendix C-2

Results of Operations model, SCE may, at its election, make the requested runs on its own

computer.

SCE’s request is reasonable. Therefore, I order that the attached protective order is

available to and binding on all parties to this proceeding.

Law and Motion Administrative Law Judge

Date:________________________________________

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 MOTION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER on all parties identified on the attached service list(s) A.10-11-015. Service was effected by one or more means indicated below:

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

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

Chief ALJ Karen Clopton CPUC 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102

[X] 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.

[ ] Directing Prographics to place the copies in properly addressed sealed envelopes and to deposit such envelopes in the United States mail with first-class postage prepaid to all parties.

Executed this Thursday, November 14, 2013 at Rosemead, CA.

/s/ Alejandra Arzola Alejandra Arzola Project Analyst SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY

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

PROCEEDING: A1011015 - EDISON - FOR AUTHORI FILER: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY LIST NAME: LIST LAST CHANGED: NOVEMBER 13, 2013

DOWNLOAD THE COMMA-DELIMITED FILE ABOUT COMMA-DELIMITED FILES

Back to Service Lists Index

DANIEL W. DOUGLASS JOHN W. LESLIE, ESQ. DOUGLASS & LIDDELL MCKENNA LONG & ALDRIDGE LLP EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FOR: WESTERN POWER TRADING FORUM FOR: EXXON MOBIL CORPORATON STEPHANIE CHEN RICK D. CHAMBERLAIN ATTORNEY AT LAW ATTORNEY THE GREENLINING INSTITUTE BEHRENS, WHEELER & CHAMBERLAIN EMAIL ONLY 6 N.E. 63RD STREET, SUITE 400 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105 FOR: THE GREENLINING INSTITUTE FOR: WAL-MART STORES, INC. AND SAM'S WEST, INC. NORMAN A. PEDERSEN FRANK A. MCNULTY ATTORNEY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY HANNA AND MORTON LLP 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE. / PO BOX 800 444 SOUTH FLOWER ST. SUITE 1500 ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 LOS ANGELES, CA 90071-2916 FOR: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GENERATION COALITION CARL WOOD JAMES F. WALSH AFL-CIO, NATL REGULATORY AFFAIRS DIR. ATTORNEY UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY 2021 S. NEVADA ST 101 ASH STREET, HQ12B / PO BOX 1831 OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3017

CPUC Home

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Service Lists

Parties

Page 1 of 8CPUC - Service Lists - A1011015

11/14/2013http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/service_lists/A1011015_79627.htm

FOR: UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA FOR: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY JOHN A. PACHECO ROCHELLE BECKER ATTORNEY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY ALLIANCE FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY 101 ASH STREET, HQ12B PO BOX 1328 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3017 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93406 FOR: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC FOR: ALLIANCE FOR NUCLEAR RESPONSIBILITY KATHLEEN M. BELLOMO ROBERT GNAIZDA ATTORNEY AT LAW OF COUNSEL KATHLEEN MALONEY BELLOMO 15 SOUTHGATE AVE., STE. 200 PO BOX 217 DALY CITY, CA 94015 LEE VINING, CA 93541 FOR: NATIONAL ASIAN AMERICAN FOR: EASTERN SIERRA RATEPAYER COALITION/LATINO BUSINESS CHAMBER OF ASSOCIATION GREATER LOS AGELES/BLACK ECONOMIC COUNCIL RACHAEL E. KOSS LAURA J. TUDISCO ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD, SUITE 1000 LEGAL DIVISION SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 ROOM 5032 FOR: COALITION OF CALIFORNIA UTILITY 505 VAN NESS AVENUE EMPLOYEES (CUE) SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 FOR: ORA ROBERT FINKELSTEIN TOM LONG GENERAL COUNSEL THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK 785 MARKET ST., STE. 1400 785 MARKET ST., STE. 1400 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94103 FOR: THE UTILITY REFORM NETWORK FOR: TURN NORA SHERIFF STEVEN W. FRANK ALCANTAR & KAHL ATTORNEY 33 NEW MONTGOMERY ST., STE. 1850 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 77 BEALE STREET, B30A FOR: ENERGY PRODUCERS & USERS COALITION SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 FOR: PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EDWARD G. POOLE BRIAN T. CRAGG ATTORNEY GOODIN, MACBRIDE, SQUERI, DAY & LAMPREY ANDERSON & POOLE 505 SANSOME STREET, SUITE 900 601 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 1300 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108-2818 FOR: INDEPENDENT ENERGY PRODUCERS FOR: WESTERN MANUFACTURED HOUSING ASSOCIATION COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION DAVID L. HUARD SUMA PEESAPATI ATTORNEY AT LAW EARTHJUSTICE MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP 50 CALIFORNIA ST., STE. 500 ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 FOR: SIERRA CLUB FOR: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES



HOWARD V. GOLUB DAVID J. BYERS, ESQ. NIXON PEABODY, LLP ATTORNEY AT LAW 1 EMBARCADERO CENTER, 18TH FLOOR BYERS / RICHARDSON LAWYERS SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-3600 259 W. 3RD AVENUE FOR: CITY OF LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA SAN MATEO, CA 94402-1551 FOR: CALIFORNIA CITY-COUNTY STREET LIGHT ASSOCIAION "CAL-SLA" MELISSA W. KASNITZ JAMES WEIL CENTER FOR ACCESSIBLE TECHNOLOGY DIRECTOR 3075 ADELINE STREET, SUITE 220 AGLET CONSUMER ALLIANCE BERKELEY, CA 94703 PO BOX 866 FOR: DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES NOVATO, CA 94948 FOR: AGLET CONSUMER ALLIANCE KAREN NORENE MILLS ANN TROWBRIDGE ASSOC. COUNSEL ATTORNEY AT LAW CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION DAY CARTER MURPHY LLC 2300 RIVER PLAZA DRIVE 3620 AMERICAN RIVER DRIVE, SUITE 205 SACRAMENTO, CA 95833 SACRAMENTO, CA 95864 FOR: CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION FOR: AGRICULTURAL ENERGY CONSUMER ASSOC.

ERIC SELMON BARBARA R. BARKOVICH JEMZAR CORP. BARKOVICH & YAP, INC. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, IS 000 000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 ISRAEL CHUCK MANZUK CLAY FABER SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY SEMPRA UTILITIES EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 FRED LYN GREGG ORRILL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DIRECTOR, EQUITY RESEARCH EMAIL ONLY BARCLAYS CAPITAL EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, NY 00000 GREGORY SHIMANSKY JOANIE YUEN SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY CASE COORDINATOR EMAIL ONLY PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 LAUREN DUKE LYNN M. HAUG DEUTSCHE BANK SECURITIES INC. ELLISON, SCHNEIDER & HARRIS, L.L.P. EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, NY 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000

Information Only



MINCI HAN NAAZ KHUMAWALA PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, TX 00000 PAUL PATTERSON SCOTT BLAISING GLENROCK ASSOCIATES LLC ATTORNEY EMAIL ONLY BRAUN BLAISING MCLAUGHLIN, P.C. EMAIL ONLY, NY 00000 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 SHELLY SHARP STEFANIE WARREN PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY LUCE FORWARD HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 TOM ADAMS MRW & ASSOCIATES, LLC EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 ALISON LECHOWICZ SCOTT SENCHAK BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES DECADE CAPITAL EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000 EMAIL ONLY, NY 00000-0000 STEVEN KELLY JONATHAN ARNOLD POLICY DIR. DEUTSCHE BANK INDEPENDENT ENERGY PRODUCERS ASSN 60 WALL STREET EMAIL ONLY NEW YORK, NY 10005 EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000-0000 ELLEN NGAI KEVIN FALLON RBC CAPITAL MARKETS SIR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT 111 WORTH ST., APT. 18K 620 EIGHTH AVENUE, 22ND FLR. NEW YORK, NY 10013 NEW YORK, NY 10018 EDWARD HEYN MICHAEL GOLDENBERG POINTSTATE CAPITAL LUMINUS MANAGEMENT 40 WEST 57TH STREET, 25TH FL. 1700 BROADWAY, 38TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10019 NEW YORK, NY 10019 SUNNY KWAK JAMES J. HECKLER MACQUARIE CAPITAL (USA) LEVIN CAPITAL STRATEGIES 125 WEST 55TH STREET 595 MADISON AVENUE NEW YORK, NY 10019 NEW YORK, NY 10022 KIT KONOLIGE MARC C. JOHNSON BGC FINANCIAL L.P. LAW 199 WATER STREET, 23RD FL. EXXON MOBIL GAS & POWER MRKTNG CO. NEW YORK, NY 10038 800 BELL STREET, NO. 3497-N HOUSTON, TX 77002



JOHNNY J. PONG CHAIRMAN / PRESIDENT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY LAT. BUS. CHAMBER OF GREATER L.A. 555 W. 5TH ST. GT14E7, SUITE 1400 634 S. SPRING STREET, STE 600 LOS ANGELES, CA 90013-1034 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 FOR: SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC HOWARD CHOY HENRY / DOROTHY COLLINS DIR. - OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY 3345 VIRGINIA STREET COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES LYNWOOD, CA 90262-0482 1100 NORTH EASTERN AVENUE, ROOM 300 LOS ANGELES, CA 90063 GREGORY KLATT JOANNE GENIS DOUGLASS & LIDDELL CITIZENS FOR ALTERNATE ROUTING OF ELECT 411 E. HUNTINGTON DR., STE. 107-356 3766 GARDEN COURT ARCADIA, CA 91006 CHINO HILLS, CA 91709 CASE ADMINISTRATION FELICIA WILLIAMS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY EDISON INTERNATIONAL 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE./ PO BOX 800 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE. ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 KRIS G. VYAS RUSSELL WORDEN ATTORNEY DIRECTOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE./PO BOX 800 2244 WALNUT GROVE AVE./PO BOX 800 ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 DANIEL DOMINGUEZ KEITH MELVILLE UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA LOC 246 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY 6125 LAS TUNAS DRIVE 101 ASH STREET, HQ-12B OCEANSIDE, CA 92057 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 LAURA EARL DONALD C. LIDDELL SR. COUNSEL - REGULATORY COUNSEL SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY DOUGLASS & LIDDELL 101 ASH STREET 2928 2ND AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 ONELL SOTO MARCIE A. MILNER SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE VP - REG AFFAIRS PO BOX 120191 SHELL ENERGY NORTH AMERICA (US), L.P. SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-0191 4445 EASTGATE MALL, STE. 100 SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 PETE GIRARD CENTRAL FILES SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 8330 CENTURY PARK CT., STE. 32E 8330 CENTURY PARK CT, CP31-E SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1530 JOAN RENEHAN EILEEN ANTHONY 913 CROWN AVENUE 410 DOGWOOD DRIVE



SANTA BARBARA, CA 93111 BUELLTON, CA 93427 FAITH BAUTISTA SUE MARA PRESIDENT & CEO PRINCIPAL NATIONAL ASIAN AMERICAN COALITION RTO ADVISORS, LLC 15 SOUTHGATE AVE., STE. 200 164 SPRINGDALE WAY DALY CITY, CA 94015 REDWOOD CITY, CA 94062 MARC D. JOSEPH JANET LIU ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO CASE COORDINATOR 601 GATEWAY BLVD., STE. 1000 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037 77 BEALE STREET, MC B9A SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 AARON LEWIS JACK STODDARD 1472 FILBERT ST., APT. 408 MANATT PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94109-1629 ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FL. SANFRANCISCO, CA 94111 PHYLLIS A. MARSHALL RANDY KEEN ATTORNEY MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FLOOR ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FL SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 FOR: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; THE FOR: THE CALIFORNIA BLACK CHAMBER OF CALIFORNIA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE COMMERCE TARA KAUSHIK CALIFORNIA ENERGY MARKETS ATTORNEY 425 DIVISADERO ST STE 303 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94117-2242 ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER, 30TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 FOR: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; THE CALIFORNIA BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. CASE COORDINATION S. JULIO FRIEDMANN PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY PO BOX 770000; MC B9A PO BOX 808 L-184 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94177 LIVERMORE, CA 94551 TRACY PORTER LEN CANTY PREMIERE SOLUTIONS, LLC CHAIRMAN 4695 CHABOT DRIVE, STE. 200 BLACK ECONOMIC COUNCIL PLEASANTON, CA 94588 484 LAKE PARK AVE., SUITE 338 OAKLAND, CA 94610 DAVID MARCUS REED SCHMIDT PO BOX 1287 BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES BERKELEY, CA 94701 1889 ALCATRAZ AVENUE BERKELEY, CA 94703-2714 GARRICK JONES RICHARD MCCANN JBS ENERGY INC. ASPEN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP



311 D STREET 2655 PORTAGE BAY AVE E, SUITE 3 WEST SACRAMENTO, CA 95605 DAVIS, CA 95616 KEVIN WOODRUFF RONALD LIEBERT WOODRUFF EXPERT SERVICES ATTORNEY AT LAW 1100 K STREET, SUITE 204 ELLISON SCHNEIDER & HARRIS LLP SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 2600 CAPITOL AVENUE, STE. 400 SACRAMENTO, CA 95816 DONALD W. SCHOENBECK RCS, INC. 900 WASHINGTON STREET, SUITE 780 VANCOUVER, WA 98660

ROLAND ESQUIVIAS BISHU CHATTERJEE CPUC CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION EMAIL ONLY GAS SAFETY AND RELIABILITY BRANCH EMAIL ONLY, CA 00000 AREA 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 CHRISTOPHER R VILLARREAL CLAYTON K. TANG CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION POLICY & PLANNING DIVISION ENERGY COST OF SERVICE & NATURAL GAS BRA ROOM 5119 ROOM 4205 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 DONALD J. LAFRENZ DONNA-FAY BOWER CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MARKET STRUCTURE, COSTS AND NATURAL GAS ENERGY COST OF SERVICE & NATURAL GAS BRA AREA 4-A ROOM 4205 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 ERIC GREENE FELIX ROBLES CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MARKET STRUCTURE, COSTS AND NATURAL GAS BROADBAND, POLICY & ANALYSIS BRANCH AREA 4-A AREA 2-E 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 MELANIE DARLING RAHMON MOMOH CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES UTILITY & PAYPHONE ENFORCEMENT BRANCH ROOM 5041 AREA 2-E 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 ROBERT M. POCTA SHERI INOUYE BOLES

State Service



CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ENERGY COST OF SERVICE & NATURAL GAS BRA EXECUTIVE DIVISION ROOM 4205 AREA 2-B 505 VAN NESS AVENUE 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214 TRACI BONE CALIF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION LEGAL DIVISION ROOM 5027 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3214

TOP OF PAGE BACK TO INDEX OF SERVICE LISTS



HENRY / DOROTHY COLLINS 3345 VIRGINIA STREETLYNWOOD CA 90262-0482

JOAN RENEHAN 913 CROWN AVENUESANTA BARBARA CA 93111

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

� � �

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF ... · 5 III. GROUNDS FOR PROHIBITING...

Documents

Transcript of BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF ... · 5 III. GROUNDS FOR PROHIBITING...