Assignment of Proceeding

Michael R. Peevey is the assigned Commissioner and Katherine MacDonald is the assigned ALJ in this proceeding.

Findings of Fact

1. Everyday Energy Corporation, d/b/a/ Everyday Energy, is a B licensed contractor who specializes in the design and installation of solar PV generating systems.

2. Everyday Energy contracted with Community Housing, the owner of the Los Robles apartment complex, to install a 140.5 kW AC solar PV generator at the Los Robles apartment complex.

3. Everyday Energy was required by its contract with Community Housing to secure appropriate interconnection and serving arrangements on Community Housing's behalf to allow the power produced by the PV generator to be delivered to SDG&E for the purpose of offsetting tenant and common area loads.

4. Complainant's request to be served under SDG&E's tariff Schedule VNM-A was denied by SDG&E.

5. Complainant modified the existing electrical system at the Los Robles Apartments to allow direct net metering.

6. D.08-10-036 established virtual net metering as part of the Commission's MASH program.

7. D.08-10-036 required SDG&E to establish a tariff that would allow for the allocation of net energy metering benefits from a single solar energy system to all meters on an individually metered multifamily affordable housing complex. SDG&E established tariff Schedule VNM-A.

8. Schedule VNM-A defines a Qualified Customer as either (a) "located on the same property as the Owner's eligible customer generator and physically connected to the Same Delivery Point (as defined by Rule 16) as the Owner's eligible generator" or (b) "located on the same property as the Owner's eligible customer-generator, and is physically connected to a different Service Delivery Point, where the Owner is a Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing Program Participant."

9. Customers wishing to take service under VNM-A must currently receive service on a rate schedule that would be applicable to a similar customer receiving service in combination with Schedule NEM.

10. The tenants of the Los Robles apartment complex are not SDG&E customers and do not currently receive service on a rate schedule that could be in used in combination with Schedule NEM.

11. The Los Robles apartment complex is master-metered. Community Housing is the customer of record to SDG&E.

12. The relief requested by Complainant, for an order determining that SDG&E improperly refused to allow Community Housing to take service under SDG&E tariff Schedule VNM-A and requiring SDG&E to pay reparations to Everyday Energy for amounts they incurred making the modifications needed to take service under SDG&E's direct net metering tariff schedule, does not comport with Commission decisions and policy.

Conclusions of Law

1. Even assuming the validity of the facts alleged in the Complaint, the case should be dismissed.

2. The Commission designed virtual net metering for individually metered units in multifamily residential housing and limited the use of virtual net metering to instances where units are individually metered.

3. Neither Community Housing nor the tenants of the Los Robles Apartments meet the tariff requirements to be considered "Qualified Customers" under SDG&E tariff Schedule VNM-A.

4. Neither Community Housing nor the tenants of the Los Robles Apartments currently receive service under a rate schedule that would be applicable to a similar customer receiving service in combination with Schedule NEM.

5. Community Housing is not eligible to take service under SDG&E Schedule VNM-A.

6. The tenants of the Los Robles Apartments are not eligible to take service under SDG&E Schedule VNM-A.

7. SDG&E should not be required to offer service to Community Housing under tariff Schedule VNM-A.

8. The complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action.

9. Hearings are not necessary.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. San Diego Gas & Electric Company's Motion to Dismiss dated November 28, 2011, is granted.

2. The hearing determination is changed to no hearings necessary.

3. Case 11-09-013 is dismissed.

4. Case 11-09-013 is closed.

This order is effective today.

Dated March 22, 2012, at San Francisco, California.

Previous PageTop Of PageGo To First Page