Regulatory Activity

Filings Archive

Earlier CLECA filings across CPUC, CAISO, CEC, CARB, and west-wide proceedings. The most recent filings are on the Filings page; the complete record is available through each agency's docket system.

CPUC
R.25-09-004
2026

Opening Comments on the Demand Response Staff Proposal

CLECA’s comments on the demand response rulemaking staff proposal carry forward its defense of reliability-oriented industrial demand response and workable program design for Base Interruptible Program participants.

CAISO
D-DEMI
2026

Comments on the D-DEMI Straw Proposal & Issue Paper

In CAISO’s Demand and Distributed Energy Market Integration initiative, CLECA supported the Track 1 export-zeroing reform while strongly objecting to Track 2’s exclusion of RDRR minimum-on-time and startup-cost reform — the market design fixes industrial demand response needs to be dispatched accurately.

CARB
Cap-and-Invest
2026

Comments on the Initial Statement of Reasons

CLECA’s ISOR comments opposed a Cap Adjustment Factor trajectory that would drop industrial allocation coverage to roughly 28% by 2035, urged suspension of CAF reductions until a border carbon adjustment exists, and pressed for a technology-neutral, workable Manufacturing Decarbonization Incentive.

CPUC
A.25-05-009
2026

Testimony in PG&E General Rate Case

CLECA witnesses submitted testimony challenging PG&E’s proposed 2027 General Rate Case, addressing A&G costs, capital expenditure justification, headcount efficiency benchmarks, and rate allocation impacts on industrial customers.

West-Wide
Pathways Step 2
2024

Comments on West-Wide Regional Organization

CLECA submitted detailed comments on the Pathways Initiative Step 2 proposal, supporting a designated C&I sector on the Stakeholder and Nominating Committees and advocating for an independent market monitor.

CPUC
A.23-05-010
2024

Testimony in SCE General Rate Case

CLECA filed joint ratepayer testimony in Southern California Edison’s Test Year 2025 General Rate Case, addressing rate design, dynamic pricing implementation, and affordability metrics for large industrial customers.

CAISO
D-DEMI
2025

Comments on the D-DEMI Discussion Paper

CLECA identified its priority problem statements in CAISO’s demand and distributed energy market integration effort — RDRR startup costs, minimum on-time reform, bid-interval alignment, and partial outage reflection — and proposed a phased near-term/mid-term/long-term sequencing for 2026 through 2030.

CARB
Cap-and-Invest
2025

Comments on the October 2025 Workshop

CLECA’s workshop comments supported the stronger industrial allocation concept, urged CARB to suspend Cap Adjustment Factor reductions until a border carbon adjustment is implemented, and laid out design principles for the then-new Manufacturing Decarbonization Incentive.

CAISO
D-DEMI
2025

Comments on Working Group Session 10

CLECA proposed including RDRR startup costs in dispatch through a near-term two-tier tariff approach and adopting the 255-minute minimum on-time aligned with CAISO’s short-term unit commitment — improving the accuracy of economic dispatch for reliability demand response.

CPUC
R.23-12-008
2024

Reply Comments in Transportation Electrification OIR

CLECA opposed further ratepayer-funded transportation electrification spending on top of roughly $2.8 billion already authorized, arguing behind-the-meter charging infrastructure should not be ratepayer-funded given federal incentives, and that EV rate design belongs in utility-specific marginal-cost-based applications.

CPUC
R.21-10-002
2023

Reply Comments on Resource Adequacy Reform

CLECA opposed setting the Transmission Loss Factor adder for demand response to zero, showing that a zero TLF would inaccurately undercount demand response supply during tight system conditions — a position supported by nearly all stakeholders.

CEC
23-ERDD-04
2023

Comments on INDIGO Program Design

CLECA urged the CEC to expand INDIGO funding eligibility to efficiency projects in heat-intensive industries where full electrification is not yet feasible, and to fund projects rather than assessments.

CPUC / CEC / CAISO
DR Vision
2022

Comments on California Demand Response Vision

CLECA proposed additions to the joint CPUC–CEC–CAISO Demand Response Vision, including explicit reference to reliability emergency conditions as a valid DR deployment trigger, consistent with longstanding BIP program design.

CPUC
R.18-07-006
2022

Comments in the Affordability Rulemaking

CLECA praised Itemized Lists of Revenue Requirements as transparency progress addressing “death by a thousand cuts” from fragmented rate approvals, and asked for aggregated customer-class impacts and benchmark comparisons of nonresidential rates against neighboring western states.

CEC
21-DR-01
2022

Comments on Supply-Side Demand Response Counting

CLECA advocated its LIP+LOLE qualifying capacity methodology for supply-side demand response, arguing the CPUC — not the CAISO — determines qualifying capacity for resources, and that demand response should be RAAIM-exempt like wind and solar.

CPUC
A.21-06-001
2022

Comments on PG&E 2022 ERRA Forecast Proposed Decision

CLECA opposed 12-month amortization of the ERRA undercollection, seeking 24 months to limit rate shock — holding the system average bundled increase to roughly 10% instead of cumulative increases above 20%.

CEC
21-IEPR-06
2021

Comments on Industrial Decarbonization Funding

CLECA told the CEC that cost is a significant barrier to industrial decarbonization, seeking 50–75% match funding, stable review guidelines, and a two-track review model for industrial projects.

CPUC
R.20-11-003
2021

Reply Testimony on Summer Reliability Procurement

CLECA testimony argued emergency procurement should not proceed “at any cost,” that the August 2020 heatwave was a 1-in-30-year event against a 1-in-10 reliability standard, and that RDRR and BIP should be dispatched as load-modifying reliability resources consistent with their tariffs.

CPUC
R.20-05-002
2020

Joint Comments on EITE Climate Credits

With the Direct Access Customer Coalition, CLECA urged the Commission to maintain Cap-and-Trade climate credits to Emissions-Intensive, Trade-Exposed manufacturers without change — because keeping energy-intensive manufacturing in California prevents higher-emission out-of-state production.