Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sdge Ica Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SDG&E says ICA data issues resolved; protests challenge redaction and remediation reporting
Summary
San Diego Gas & Electric told the CPUC workshop it has implemented portal and methodology refinements, continues monthly QA/QC, and believes it has no outstanding ICA accuracy issues — a stance that drew two protests calling for less redaction and a clearer remediation baseline.
San Diego Gas & Electric told the CPUC’s quarterly Integrated Capacity Analysis workshop that its ICA process and portal have been updated and that the utility has resolved the material data‑quality problems it previously reported.
SDG&E principal distribution policy advisor Mary Sweeney said the utility (1) removed the portal registration requirement in March 2025, (2) adjusted published ICA results to reflect distribution projects that are complete or will be issued for construction within one year, (3) implemented limited generation profile (LGP) templates (available July 9, 2025) to let applicants include profiles in Rule 21 filings, and (4) deployed a bulk data download feature in August 2025. Sweeney said SDG&E conducts monthly QA/QC that investigates every line segment showing zero load hosting capacity and that engineers arrange field verification when needed.
SDG&E said it filed a tier 3 remediation advice letter on Aug. 26. In that filing the company told the commission it had no systemic outstanding ICA issues and therefore no remediation plan was appropriate; SDG&E said the earlier data‑quality problems had been resolved through ongoing data validation. SDG&E said it will continue monthly updates and the QA/QC process and will respond to stakeholder questions through the ICA portal contact address.
Two protests were filed against SDG&E’s advice letter — one from the Office of the Public Advocate and one from the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC). The protests raised three main points: (1) SDG&E’s data redaction practices (consistent with prior CPUC rulemaking redaction rules) should be reconsidered or reduced, (2) the company’s view that no remediation plan is needed leaves insufficient baseline data for future reporting, and (3) a rule for tracking alignment and root‑cause analysis was proposed by protesters. SDG&E replied on Sept. 22, saying its redaction practices follow CPUC orders and that remediation plans are by definition meant to fix known deficiencies — SDG&E said it had no known systemic deficiencies to fix.
Why it matters: SDG&E’s claim that known ICA issues are resolved contrasts with protests asserting gaps in redaction, baseline reporting and root‑cause transparency. The dispute affects whether the commission will require additional reporting or methodology changes for SDG&E and whether the remediation‑plan requirement should be applied even when a utility reports no outstanding items.
Speakers: Mary Sweeney presented SDG&E’s slides and answered questions. Stakeholders who raised concerns in the transcript include IREC, the Office of the Public Advocate and individual commenters recorded as Brian Lydic and others.
