Commission Held Voting on Draft Resolution E-5143's Expansion of RPS Citation Program

Draft Resolution E-5143 proposes the following updates:

• E-5143 will impose penalties for failure to submit both the annual Draft and Final RPS Procurement Plan (“RPS Plan”) at the time required with the required elements.
• E-5143 eliminates the 10-day fixed deadline for a retail seller to respond to Commission staff requests for information or documentation, leaving the deadline to Commission staff's discretion.
• E-5143 eliminates Resolution E-4720’s Finding 12 labeling requirement for requests for information which indicates that the request is related to the RPS program and subject to a fine schedule.

‍

The following parties made comments on the Draft Resolution:

       Joint IOUs:  

• Argues that Commission Decision 21-01-005 did not authorize expansion of the RPS Citation Program to include deficient draft RPS Plans as described in the Draft Resolution. Joint IOUs request that the Commission reject this expansion of the program.  
• The Commission should provide for a 10-business day cure period for inadvertent errors or omissions in draft or final RPS Plans before a citation is issued.

        Joint CCA Parties:

• Suggests the Commission clarify what constitutes a required missing element of a draft or final RPS Plan.
• Suggests the use of an informal process for curing a missing element in a draft or final RPS Plan prior to a scheduled penalty being issued.
• Suggests the Commission set a reasonable minimum timeframe for responding to a request for information that takes into consideration the scale and complexity of the information requested and seeks input from the retail seller on the feasibility of the proposed deadline, but nothing less than 5 business days. Additionally, the Draft Resolution should allow for a retail seller to request additional time to respond to an information request, which the granting should be at the discretion of Energy Division staff.
• Suggests the inclusion of Resolution E-4720's Finding 12 labeling requirement for requests for information that indicates the request is subject to a fine schedule.

        CalChoice:

• The Draft Resolution should be modified to include more clarity about when a required element is missing from a draft or final RPS Plan subjecting the retail seller to penalties, provide an informal cure process prior to formal citation, include a minimum timeframe for responding to a request for additional information, and require data requests to include a specified label.  
• The Commission should consider the size and financial ability of retail sellers in developing these penalties (i.e., scaled penalties).
• Proposes that small retail sellers with annual load equal to or less than 700 GWh should be fined no more than $500, plus $500 per day the submission is late, with no escalation penalty amounts        based on the number of days.  

        Public Advocates Office:

• The Commission should clearly articulate what actions and deficiencies would constitute a violation in the expanded RPS Citation Program.  
• The Commission should clarify whether respondents to RPS citation have a right to evidentiary hearings or simply a right to request evidentiary hearings.