Search

Comments on issue paper and straw proposal

Transmission planning process phase 3 - revise competitive solicitation project proposal fee

Print
Comment period
Jun 08, 01:30 pm - Jun 22, 05:00 pm
Submitting organizations
View by:

Six Cities
Submitted 06/22/2023, 01:59 pm

Submitted on behalf of
Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA

Contact

Margaret McNaul (mmcnaul@thompsoncoburn.com)

1. Please provide a summary of your organization’s comments on the Transmission planning process phase 3 - revise competitive solicitation project proposal fee stakeholder call.

As discussed below, the Six Cities support the CAISO’s proposals in this initiative.   

2. Does your organization support or oppose increasing the initial deposit for each competitive solicitation project sponsor application from $75,000 to $100,000? Please provide details of why your organization supports or opposes.

 The Six Cities do not oppose increasing the deposit as proposed by the CAISO.

3. Does your organization support or oppose removing the ‘not to exceed’ cap of $150,000? Going forward, each project sponsor would be responsible for its pro rata share of the actual costs the ISO incurs in qualifying and selecting an approved project sponsor. Please provide details of why your organization supports or opposes.

The Six Cities support removal of the $150,000 cap on the cost to evaluate and select approved project sponsors for projects that are subject to the competitive solicitation process.  The Six Cities agree that applicants in the competitive solicitation process should pay the full cost of the CAISO’s evaluation allocated among applicants on a pro rata basis. 

Back to top