ALJ/JHE/sid Date of Issuance 8/24/2009
Decision 09-08-027 August 20, 2009
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of Southern California Edison Company (U338E) for Approval of Demand Response Programs, Goals and Budgets for 2009-2011. |
Application 08-06-001 (Filed June 2, 2008) |
And Related Matters. |
Application 08-06-002 Application 08-06-003 |
DECISION ADOPTING DEMAND RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
AND BUDGETS FOR 2009 THROUGH 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
DECISION ADOPTING DEMAND RESPONSE ACTIVITIES
AND BUDGETS FOR 2009 THROUGH 2011 2
1. Summary 2
2. Procedural Background 2
3. Late-Filed Exhibits 6
4. Alliance for Retail Energy Market/Electric Service Provider Issues 8
5. Integrated Demand-Side Management Proposals
Deferred to A.08-07-021 9
6. Summary of the Applications 10
7. Factors Considered in Review of Proposals 12
7.1. Usefulness and Limitations of Cost Effectiveness Analysis 15
8. Positions of the Parties 19
8.1. BluePoint 19
8.2. Transphase 20
8.3. SF Power 20
8.4. CLECA 21
8.5. CDRC 22
8.6. TURN 23
8.7. DRA 23
8.8. CAISO 25
8.9. Energy Curtailment Specialists 25
8.10. CPower 25
8.11. Ice Energy 26
9. Policy on Development of Emergency-triggered and Price Responsive Demand Response Activities 26
10. Statewide Emergency and Price Responsive Programs 34
10.1. Emergency Programs 34
10.1.1. Base Interruptible Program 34
10.1.1.1. Utility Proposals for the Base Interruptible
Program 34
10.1.1.2. Party Positions 36
10.1.1.3. Discussion 37
10.1.2. Optional Binding Mandatory Curtailment Program 40
10.1.2.1. Utility Proposals 40
10.1.2.2. Discussion 41
10.1.3. Scheduled Load Reduction Program 41
10.1.4. Utility Proposals 42
10.1.4.1. Discussion 42
10.2. Price Responsive Programs 43
10.2.1. Demand Bidding Program 43
10.2.1.1. Utility Proposals 43
10.2.1.2. Other Party Positions on the Demand
Bidding Program 44
10.2.1.3. Discussion 45
10.2.2. Capacity Bidding Program 47
10.2.2.1. Utility Proposals 48
10.2.2.2. Party Positions on the Capacity
Bidding Program 49
10.2.2.3. Discussion 49
10.2.3. Critical Peak Pricing 52
10.2.3.1. Utility Proposals 52
10.2.3.2. Other Party Positions 54
10.2.3.3. Discussion 54
10.2.4. Real Time Pricing 56
10.2.4.1. Other Party Positions 56
10.2.4.2. Discussion 56
11. Individual Utility Programs 57
11.1. PG&E 57
11.1.1. SmartAC 57
11.1.2. SmartRate 58
11.1.3. PeakChoice 58
11.1.3.1. Other Party Positions on PeakChoice 59
11.1.3.2. Discussion 59
11.1.4. Business Energy Coalition/ABEC 61
11.1.4.1. Other Party Positions 63
11.1.4.2. Discussion 63
11.2. SCE 64
11.2.1. Summer Discount Plan 64
11.2.1.1. Discussion 65
11.2.2. Agricultural Pumping - Interruptible 66
11.2.2.1. Discussion 66
11.2.3. Rotating Outage Program 67
11.2.4. Agricultural Pump Timer Program 67
11.2.5. Energy Options Program 68
11.2.5.1. Other Party Positions 69
11.2.5.2. Discussion 69
11.3. SDG&E 70
11.3.1. Critical Peak Pricing -- Emergency 70
11.3.2. Summer Saver 71
11.3.3. Peak Day Credit Program 71
11.4. Miscellaneous Supportive Activities 72
12. Enabling Technologies, Automated Demand Response,
and Related Activities 73
12.1. Technical Assistance and Technology Incentives Programs 73
12.1.1. Utility Technical Assistance and Technology Incentives Proposals 74
12.1.1.1. SCE 74
12.1.1.2. PG&E Proposals 74
12.1.1.3. SDG&E Proposals 76
12.1.2. Other Party Positions 77
12.1.3. Discussion 80
12.2. Emerging Markets and Technologies 85
12.2.1. Utility Emerging Markets and Technologies Proposals 85
12.2.1.1. SCE Proposal 85
12.2.1.2. PG&E Proposal 86
12.2.1.3. SDG&E Proposal 87
12.2.2. Party Positions on Emerging Markets and Technology Funding 87
12.2.3. Discussion 88
12.3. Automated Demand Response 90
13. Marketing, Education, and Outreach 94
14. Proposed Pilot Programs for 2010-2011 98
14.1. PG&E 99
14.1.1. Commercial and Industrial Intermittent Resource Management Pilot 99
14.1.1.1. Party Positions 100
14.1.1.2. Discussion 101
14.1.2. PHEV/EV Smart Charging Pilot 102
14.1.2.1. Party Positions on the PHEV/EV Smart
Charging Pilot 102
14.1.2.2. Discussion 102
14.1.3. Small Customer Load Aggregation Pilot 103
14.1.3.1. Party Positions 104
14.1.3.2. Discussion 104
14.2. SCE 107
14.2.1. SCE Proposals 107
14.2.1.1. Smart Thermostat Customer Experience Pilot 107
14.2.1.2. Proactive Residential Tier Alert 108
14.2.1.3. Optional Programmable Communicating
Thermostats 109
14.2.2. Party Positions 109
14.2.3. Discussion 110
14.2.3.1. Discussion of Smart Thermostat Customer
Experience Pilot 111
14.2.3.2. Discussion of Residential Tier Alert 111
14.2.3.3. Discussion of Optional Programmable
Communicating Thermostats 112
14.3. SDG&E Residential Automated Controls Technology Pilot 113
15. PG&E's Aggregator Managed Portfolio 116
16. Program Transition to Function Under the New CAISO Markets 119
16.1. Background 119
16.2. Utility Proposals for Transition of Demand Response Activities under the New CAISO Market 122
16.3. Party Positions 126
16.4. Discussion 127
17. Settlement Baseline for Utility Programs 132
17.1. Current Baseline for Settlement and Studies 132
17.2. Utilities' Baseline Proposals 133
17.3. Party Positions on Appropriate Settlement Baselines 134
17.3.1. Individual vs. Aggregated Baselines for Aggregator-Managed Customers 134
17.3.2. Average Day Calculation 136
17.3.3. Adjustment 138
17.4. Baseline Recommendations 139
18. Concurrent Customer Participation in Multiple Demand Response Programs 142
18.1. Utility Proposals for Concurrent Customer Participation in Two Demand Response Programs 142
18.2. Party Positions on Dual Program Participation 145
18.3. Discussion of Dual Program Participation 149
18.3.1. Possibility of Negative Demand Charges 153
18.4. Requirements for Dual Program Participation 154
18.5. PG&E Partial Standby Metering Customers 158
19. SCE Contracts with Demand Response Aggregators 158
19.1. Procedural Background 158
19.2. DRA Analysis of the Proposed Contracts 160
19.3. Discussion 161
20. BluePoint Proposal: Backup Generation 162
20.1. Discussion 165
21. Permanent Load Shifting 167
21.1. Utility Permanent Load Shifting Proposals 168
21.2. Ice Energy Proposal 172
21.3. Transphase Proposal: Thermal Energy Storage
Standard Offer 173
22. SF Community Power Issues 182
22.1. Small Commercial Aggregation Pilot 182
22.1.1. Pilot Background 182
22.1.2. SF Power Litigation Position on Small Commercial Aggregation Pilot 183
22.1.3. PG&E Litigation Position on Small Commercial Aggregation Pilot 184
22.1.4. Proposed Settlement Agreement on Small Commercial Aggregation Pilot 185
22.1.5. Discussion of Settlement Agreement 188
22.2. Additional SF Power Issues 190
23. Evaluation, Measurement and Verification Activities 193
23.1. Party Positions on EM&V Funding 194
23.2. Discussion 195
23.3. Authority to Continue the Demand Response
Measurement and Evaluation Committee 197
24. Approved Budgets and Authorized Expenses 198
25. Program and Budget Changes During 2010 and 2011 204
25.1. Utility Proposals on Program and Budget Changes During 2010 and 2011 204
25.2. Party Positions on Methods for Program Modification 206
25.3. Discussion 207
26. Fund Shifting Rules 208
27. Cost Recovery Mechanisms 214
28. Modification of Reporting Requirements 221
29. Transition Period 222
30. Comments on Proposed Decision 223
31. Categorization and Assignment of Proceeding 224
Findings of Fact 224
Conclusions of Law 230
ORDER.. 235
ATTACHMENT A -Settlement Agreement of DRA, SCE, EnerNOC, and Alternative Energy Resources, collectively, the Parties
ATTACHMENT B -Settlement Agreement Between PG&E and SF Power
1. Summary
This decision adopts demand response activities and budgets for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) (collectively, the utilities) to conduct demand response programs and pilots for the remainder of 2009 through December 31, 2011. This decision approves utility demand response programs, some with modifications from previous years, and authorizes several demand response pilot programs to test new demand response-related technologies and integration of demand response with Advanced Metering Infrastructure systems. This decision also provides funding for evaluation, measurement, and verification of demand response activities, and continues existing cost recovery mechanisms for demand response-related funding. In addition, this decision adopts a new methodology for calculating settlement baselines for certain demand response activities, and adopts rules on concurrent customer participation in more than one demand response program.
The total adopted budget for all three utilities' demand response programs for 2009-2011 is $349,509,463. This decision adopts a budget of $188,806,349 for SCE, of which approximately $38.8 million will support the aggregator contracts adopted in this decision. The total adopted budget for PG&E is $109,060,072, and the total adopted budget for SDG&E is $51,643,042. With the adoption of this decision, this proceeding is closed.
