MEG/hkr 1/11/2006

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Order Instituting Rulemaking to Examine the Commission's Future Energy Efficiency Policies, Administration, and Programs.

Rulemaking 01-08-028 (Filed August 23, 2001)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING ADOPTING PROTOCOLS
FOR PROCESS AND REVIEW OF POST-2005 EVALUATION, MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION (EM&V) ACTIVITIES

1. Introduction and Summary

The Commission has directed that EM&V protocols be developed under an expedited review process, so that they can be put in place as quickly as possible as we move to the new administrative and policy framework for energy efficiency in 2006 and beyond. The EM&V protocols are to include the following information:¹

a) A protocol table for classifying each proposed program, based on characteristics such as program size, market segment, whether it involves new construction or retrofit applications, the performance basis and other considerations, in order to establish the type of studies that will be conducted under the EM&V plan;

b) A cross-walk table between the type of study or studies required for each program classification and the specific outputs that will be generated for the calculation of the performance basis-either on a prospective basis for future programs or for true-up purposes for prior year programs;

c) A protocol that describes the frequency for each type of study, by program classification. The combination of this protocol and b) above should provide a schedule for how frequently specific performance parameters (e.g., first-year energy savings, program participation, expected useful measure lives, net-to-gross ratios, etc.) will be updated;

d) Quality control protocols that provide directions on how to gather and analyze information for major study parameters, including acceptable data collection methods, acceptable confidence levels, approaches for dealing with uncertainty, among others;

e) A schematic and accompanying description that illustrates the "integrated EM&V cycle," that is, how the required studies will inform the program planning and resource planning process. This document should indicate when studies will be completed, how they will be submitted/made available for public review and describe how the resulting updated information will feed into the next energy efficiency program planning cycle and/or resource planning cycles;

f) A schedule and process for updating the Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER) on a regular basis, using the results of ex post measurement studies, as part of e) above; and

g) A dispute resolution process to address the results of EM&V studies with respect to goal assessment or performance incentive mechanisms.

To date, Energy Division and California Energy Commission staff assigned to this proceeding (Joint Staff) and/or Energy Division's consultants (the TecMarket Works Team) have prepared draft protocols that cover many of the components listed above. For this purpose, Joint Staff has organized the protocols under two major categories: (1) Evaluator or "How To" Protocols and (2) Process and Review Protocols. (See Attachment 1.)

As discussed further below, Joint Staff and the TecMarket Works Team have developed an EM&V protocol framework whereby the information under a), b), and c) above will be developed through a risk analysis, priority assessment and study scoping process rather than laid out in tabular form in a protocol document. Joint Staff and its consultants are undertaking these steps through a public process that is outlined in the Process and Review Protocols adopted today. Once these steps are completed, Joint Staff will be able to proceed with writing and issuing the requests for proposals (RFPs) and managing the resulting EM&V contracts for the 2006-2008 program cycle.

By this ruling, I adopt the following:

a) The Performance Basis Protocol, which identifies when Joint Staff and its consultants plan to verify various components (e.g., measure installations, program costs, unit energy savings) used to calculate the performance basis for each portfolio administrator for the 2006-2008 planning cycle. (Attachment 2.)

b) The Public Process Protocol for the risk analysis, priority assessment and study scoping that Joint Staff will be undertaking in the coming weeks for impact evaluation studies. (Attachment 3).

c) The Study Review Protocol, that describes the process Joint Staff will use to develop and review comments after a contractor has been selected to conduct a specific set of evaluations for impact and market effects studies. This protocol also identifies the Annual Earnings Assessment Proceeding as the forum for dispute resolution. (Attachment 4.)

The EM&V protocols still to be reviewed in a later workshop are indicated in italics in Attachment 1. We will move ahead with finalizing all of the EM&V protocols and resulting study plans as early in 2006 as possible.

¹ See the Commission's discussion of the required protocols and expedited review process in Decision (D.) 05-04-051, pp. 67-73. See also D.05-04-051 at p. 111 and Administrative Law Judge's Ruling on EM&V Protocol Issues, September 2, 2005, pp. 15-20.