12. EnerNOC MW Number MW It is reasonable to authorize SDG&E’s Testimony Not Provided Number additional capacity calculation Not procurement for SCE, for as of its Provided much as 500 MW, because SCE has adequate capacity, resource according to its studies, need between the Track I appears to authorization and the be planned Mesa Loop-In reasonable. transmission project unless (at III-31, the likelihood of realizing II-12.) the transmission project is low. (at II-2-3; II-7-9). SDG&E’s analysis of Before authorizing SCE to need is procure additional consistent resources beyond its Track I with authorization, the CAISO’s, Commission must resolve which the calculation difference shows an between SCE’s and CAISO’s analysis. (at II-2, need II-7-6-8) between 620 and 147 The Commission should MW, after not authorize additional adjusting capacity procurement until for Track 1 the CAISO has completed authorized its 2013-14 Transmission Planning Process. (at II-3, (at II-9-11) Further, the Commission SDG&E’s should reject the CAISO’s proposal is and utilities’ objections to only updating assumptions and partially any efforts to impose consistent inappropriate conditions on with the demand response reducing loading or meeting local need. Any order. (at Track 4 need determination II-11-12). must be consider all As in the updated assumptions (i.e., case of CAISO’s TPP results, Track SCE, the 1 solicitations/pilots results, and further should development of DR also use programs) through at least updated the first quarter of next year before any Track 4 in
12. EnerNOC Testimony MW Number Not Provided MW Number Not Provided It is reasonable to authorize additional capacity procurement for SCE, for as much as 500 MW, because SCE has adequate capacity, according to its studies, between the Track I authorization and the planned Mesa Loop-In transmission project unless the likelihood of realizing the transmission project is low. (at II-2-3; II-7-9). Before authorizing SCE to procure additional resources beyond its Track I authorization, the Commission must resolve the calculation difference between SCE’s and CAISO’s analysis. (at II-2, II-7-6-8) The Commission should not authorize additional capacity procurement until the CAISO has completed its 2013-14 Transmission Planning Process. (at II-3, II-9-11) Further, the Commission should reject the CAISO’s and utilities’ objections to updating assumptions and any efforts to impose inappropriate conditions on demand response reducing or meeting local need. Any Track 4 need determination must be consider all updated assumptions (i.e., CAISO’s TPP results, Track 1 solicitations/pilots results, and further development of DR programs) through at least the first quarter of next year before any Track 4 SDG&E’s calculation of its resource need appears to be reasonable. (at III-31, II-12.) SDG&E’s analysis of need is consistent with CAISO’s, which shows an need between 620 and 147 MW, after adjusting for Track 1 authorized (at SDG&E’s proposal is only partially consistent with the loading order. (at II-11-12). As in the case of SCE, the should also use updated in