Issues Before the Commission The following issues are within the scope of this proceeding: Should the CPUC adopt the definition of Pipeline Infrastructure set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the implementation plan set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the cost recovery framework set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the pilot selection criteria framework set forth in Appendix B of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the data gathering parameters set forth in Attachment B to Appendix B of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? and Does the proposed implementation framework support the safe provision of natural gas services? If not, how should it be modified? We discuss each of these issues below focusing on the changes that we are making to the initially proposed framework set forth in the rulemaking. In addition, we note that the rulemaking anticipated that we would either establish a second phase in this proceeding or open a future rulemaking at the time the CEC 2017 IEPR renewable gas recommendations are available. The CEC issued its draft 2017 Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) on October 16, 2017 and expects to adopt the Final 2017 IEPR in February 2018. In light of the expected timing of CEC adoption of final recommendations, we will pursue a future rulemaking to consider, in consultation with the CEC and ARB, policies to support the development and use of renewable gas that reduce short-lived climate pollutants in California, as directed by H&S § 39730.8(d).
Issues Before the Commission The following issues are within the scope of this proceeding: Should the CPUC adopt the definition of Pipeline Infrastructure set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the implementation plan set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the cost recovery framework set forth in Appendix A of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the pilot selection criteria framework set forth in Appendix B of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? Should the CPUC adopt the data gathering parameters set forth in Attachment B to Appendix B of the Rulemaking? If not, how should it be modified? and Does the proposed implementation framework support the safe provision of natural gas services? If not, how should it be modified? We discuss each of these issues below focusing on the changes that we are making to the initially proposed framework set forth in the rulemaking. In addition, we note that the rulemaking anticipated that we would either establish a second phase in this proceeding or open a future rulemaking at the time the CEC 2017 IEPR renewable gas recommendations are available. The CEC issued its draft 2017 Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR) on October 16, 2017 and expects to adopt the Final 2017 IEPR in February 2018. In light of the expected timing of CEC adoption of final recommendations, we will pursue a future rulemaking to consider, in consultation with the CEC and ARB, policies to support the development and use of renewable gas that reduce short-lived climate pollutants in California, as directed by H&S § 39730.8(d).
201352373.docx