3. SGIP Budget in 2010 and 2011
In this decision, the Commission must decide what amount to authorize as the SGIP budget for 2010 and 2011. In addition, it must decide what to do with previously authorized budget amounts that have been carried over from prior program years.
In the ALJ Ruling, the ALJ proposed the SGIP budget remain at the
$83 million annual amount established for the three prior calendar years, 2007, 2008, and 2009, with allocation across the four IOUs in the same percentages as in those prior years. Specifically, the ruling proposed the IOUs should collect
$83 million from ratepayers, in both 2010 and 2011, as follows:
SGIP Budget Allocation for 2010 and 2011
Utility |
Annual SGIP Budget (in millions) |
PG&E |
$36 |
SCE |
$28 |
SDG&E |
$11 |
SoCalGas |
$8 |
Total |
$83 million |
The ALJ Ruling also proposed that the SGIP PAs may reserve and spend the $166 million collected in 2010 and 2011 through December 31, 2015, in keeping with SB 412 language allowing program administration until January 1, 2016.
Most parties that commented supported the continuation of the budget at $83 million annually. CESA and Bloom support a budget of $83 million for 2010, but believe that additional funds may be needed in 2011. DRA supports a budget of $83 million annually, but recommends that the amount collected from ratepayers be determined if and when SB 412 is enacted. TURN agrees with DRA that because of large projected overcollections from prior program years, additional collections from ratepayers are not necessary at this time.
As noted above, SB 412 was enacted in October 2009. The legislation limits the annual collection amount the Commission can authorize in 2010 and 2011 for SGIP. We will adopt the proposal from the ALJ Ruling to direct the four IOUs to collect an authorized budget of $83 million in both 2010 and 2011 for SGIP, according to the allocations set forth above. We find this meets the SB 412 requirement that we not authorize more than was authorized for SGIP in 2008.
Although CESA and Bloom ask us to wait and not adopt a budget yet for 2011, we see no reason to wait, as the legislation sets the maximum amount we can authorize in those two years. Given recent decisions to expand program eligibility, we conclude we should continue to budget the maximum allowed for this program in the expectation that these recent decisions will increase program participation and bring additional DG on line in California over the next few years. In addition, the legislation allows administration of the program through January 1, 2016, thereby allowing additional years for the funds collected in 2010 and 2011 to be spent. It is reasonable to collect the maximum allowed by statute so that it can be available for use by the PAs until January 1, 2016 to achieve SGIP goals.
We address the TURN and DRA arguments that no additional funds be collected from ratepayers for SGIP in the section below.
