18. Assignment of Proceeding

Dian M. Grueneich is the assigned Commissioner and Sarah R. Thomas is the assigned Administrative Law Judge in this proceeding.

Findings of Fact

1. In D.07-12-051 and the Plan, the Commission stated its long-term vision for the LIEE program: "By 2020, 100% of eligible and willing customers will have received all cost effective Low-income Energy Efficiency measures."

2. In D.07-12-051, we ordered the SMJUs to file their applications no later than July 1, 2008. We did not require the applications to include all of the specific elements required of the larger utilities, although we encouraged them to modify their programs and portfolios in ways that would accomplish the Plan's objectives.

3. In D.07-12-051, the Commission held that "[t]he complementary objectives of LIEE programs will be to provide an energy resource for California while concurrently providing low-income customers with ways to reduce their bills and improve their quality of life."

4. Approximately 1/3 of California's population is low-income, although this rate may vary in some SMJUs' territory.

5. Sierra proposes to expand its CFL installations per residence from 5 to 10 light bulbs.

6. Bear Valley focuses a large portion of its budget on refrigerator replacement with substantial energy savings.

7. PacifiCorp plans to increase its energy savings for 2007-2011 by 596,259 kWhs but plans limited refrigerator replacement. PacifiCorp did not meet its LIEE penetration goals for 2007-2008 and plans no increase in penetration for 2009-2011.

8. If PacifiCorp aims to serve 25% of eligible LIEE customers for 2009-2011, it could be required to add 980 customers per year at the highest extreme.

9. Significant state and federal legislation will mandate energy efficient and non-toxic lighting fixtures starting in 2011.

10. CFLs still garner significant energy savings for low-income customers.

11. At current rates of growth, Southwest will achieve only a 60% LIEE penetration level by 2020.

12. Sierra plans to serve approximately 507 homes over the next three years.

13. Sierra and Southwest are having trouble finding qualified LIEE measure installation contractors in the Lake Tahoe area. The Commission's WE&T efforts may benefit the SMJUs.

14. In the large IOU decision for 2009-2011, we adopted a uniform CARE participation goal of 90%.

15. The Commission has not traditionally allowed fund shifting between LIEE and CARE budgets.

16. Energy burden represents the portion of a household's total income that is spent on energy bills; households that spend a large portion of income on such bills have a high energy burden.

17. High energy insecurity refers to customers who have trouble paying their bills, late payments, and actual or threatened utility shutoffs.

18. The Plan mandates a single statewide ME&O program that combines low-income and non-low-income energy efficiency messages, uses a single program name and tagline, and targets all eligible communities.

19. The small size and geographic scope of the SMJUs may render impracticable many of the requirements we impose on the large IOUs in connection with their 2009-2011 applications.

20. Refrigerator replacement provides significant energy savings for low-income customers.

21. Refrigerators and lighting together deliver the greatest energy savings for the large IOUs' customers.

22. Sierra has approximately 3,000 low-income customers.

23. In D.07-12-051, our policy decision on the large IOU LIEE programs, we urged the large IOUs to focus their outreach efforts on customers with the greatest need.

24. The SMJUs have information at their disposal that would enable them to target marketing to customers with the highest energy usage, insecurity and burden.

25. The SMJUs have records indicating which customers have highest energy usage and insecurity, since they bill their customers for usage and also have information on when customers pay bills late or are threatened with shut-off. SMJUs also learn customers' incomes when they recertify them for CARE.

26. Bear Valley's increase in program eligibility to 200% of federal poverty guidelines will not affect its ratepayers in the 2009-2011 period if it does not serve more customers during that period.

27. An increase in Bear Valley's income eligibility from 175% to 200% will render 500 more customers eligible for CARE, 309 of whom the company estimates will participate in the program.

28. The impact on nonparticipating Bear Valley ratepayers of raising LIEE/CARE income eligibility from 175% to 200% will be 14 cents a month in 2009 and 27 cents a month in 2012, based on impact figures of $.00033/kWh for 2009 and $.00062/kWh for 2012.

29. The Commission will, as part of the Plan, be embarking on a WE&T program aimed at training the next generation of LIEE installation contractors.

30. Bear Valley's CARE penetration is only 55% of eligible low-income customers in its territory.

31. Bear Valley does not justify why its CARE administrative budget should be proportionately larger than that of the other three largest SMJUs.

32. In the large IOU decision on the 2009-2011 programs, we set a uniform goal for CARE enrollment of 90% of eligible customers.

33. The KEMA Report found for the large IOUs that a CARE penetration goal of 100% might not be attainable.

34. The CARE administrative budgets for the SMJUs are very small; indeed, some (Bear Valley) fund most CARE administration out of general rates, and have no dedicated CARE outreach funding.

35. The higher the penetration goal, the more difficult it is for a SMJU to reach, since the universe of unserved customers is small.

36. Many CARE customers are dropped at recertification.

37. Bear Valley has experienced a decline in CARE enrollment over the past few years. The main driver of such decline, according to Bear Valley, is recertification.

38. The capitation fee for adding a new customer - the amount a CBO receives if it delivers a new CARE customer to the SMJU - is in the $12 range.

39. PacifiCorp carried over nearly 20% of its 2007 budget into 2008. Southwest carried over 50% of its approved budget. Sierra carried over $33,000 from 2006 to 2007 and $46,000 from 2007 to 2008.

40. It is Commission policy for all SMJUs that CARE balancing accounts are two-way balancing accounts where the actual funds spent on the CARE program are recovered.

41. LIEE funds are recovered through one-way balancing accounts where the approved budgeted amounts by the Commission are recovered. Any LIEE funds spent over the approved budgeted amount are disallowed and any under-spent funds are carried over to the future years.

Conclusions of Law

1. The SMJUs should make meaningful progress in 2009-2011 toward meeting the key strategic vision set forth in the Plan:

By 2020, 100% of eligible and willing customers will have received all cost effective Low-income Energy Efficiency measures.

2. In order for SMJUs to reach the 100% LIEE goal by 2020, they should be reaching approximately 25% of eligible customers who have not already received service in the three-year period from 2009-2011.

3. The first key area on which the SMJUs should begin to focus is energy savings.

4. Southwest may continue to deliver the mix of LIEE program measures it currently delivers, and may add its new proposed measures.

5. PacifiCorp should incorporate greater refrigerator replacement into its LIEE program.

6. PacifiCorp should strive to serve 500 new LIEE customers for each year, 2009-2011. It should start by serving with the LIEE program all of its CARE customers, and customers with high energy use, burden and insecurity.

7. Instead of increasing CFL deliveries from five to ten light bulbs, Sierra should redirect the additional budget it would spend on light bulbs to refrigerator replacement.

8. Bear Valley's LIEE measure mix ensures good overall energy savings, consistent with the Plan, and we should approve its mix.

9. We should allow the SMJUs to use CFLs in their LIEE programs because energy efficient lighting continues to deliver significant energy savings for low-income customers.

10. The SMJUs should begin preparing now to meet the requirements of AB 1109 (Huffman) and related lighting legislation, phasing out non-energy efficient, toxic lighting fixtures.

11. The second key goal of the Plan that we apply to the SMJUs relates to the number of customers served.

12. Southwest should increase the number of LIEE customers it serves.

13. Sierra's penetration goals of 153 homes in 2009, 171 in 2010, and 183 in 2011 are too low in proportion to its number of low-income customers.

14. We should set a goal for Sierra of 250 LIEE customers per year for 2009-2011. We should adjust Sierra's budget downward mid-cycle if it fails to approach the foregoing goal.

15. Alpine should reach 22 new LIEE customers each year between 2009 and 2011.

16. To the extent SMJU records permit, they should focus extra outreach on customers with high energy usage, burden or insecurity, and on customers in the most extreme climate zones.

17. The SMJUs should install all feasible energy efficiency measures in each customer's home.

18. Conducting outreach in homes with the greatest need has the potential to increase the overall energy savings of the SMJUs' LIEE programs.

19. The bill impacts from increasing LIEE/CARE income eligibility to 200% of the federal poverty guidelines are small enough to warrant granting Bear Valley's request as to the CARE program.

20. We should grant all of the SMJUs' requested funding for ME&O, but should only allow them to spend the amounts they seek for 2009, and hold the other funding in abeyance pending our decision on how to incorporate SMJUs' programs into the single statewide ME&O program.

21. The SMJUs should make sure they are in contact with the Commission's Energy Division if they are interested in WE&T efforts in their communities.

22. We should set a uniform 90% CARE penetration goal across all SMJUs, except that SMJUs that already exceed this goal should not reduce their number of customers served.

23. Bear Valley should reach our 90% CARE penetration goal over the next three years. Bear Valley's annual reports should show significant progress toward this goal; if they do not, we may take additional action.

24. We should require Southwest to report the results of its CARE recertification drop-off tracking with its May 1, 2009 annual report. Southwest should also report the number of complaints (however received) stemming from its recertification efforts, and discuss what it is doing to ensure it is only losing customers that are not CARE-eligible.

25. The SMJUs should use the Internet for recertification purposes, but only if they do so in a manner that secures the privacy of customer financial data. Each SMJU that uses the Internet in this manner should report annually on its success as a recertification tool.

26. Bear Valley should report on CARE drop-offs in its May 1, 2009 annual report, give the number of complaints (however received) stemming from its recertification efforts, and discuss what it is doing to ensure it is only losing customers that are not CARE-eligible.

27. Bear Valley has failed to justify the full amount of its requested CARE budget increases in the amount of $52,720. We award it an increased budget equivalent to $15 per new customer ($15 x 568), or $8,520. Bear Valley shall submit its CARE outreach plan to the Energy Division as a Tier 2 Advice Letter filing no later than 90 days after the effective date of this decision. Energy Division may approve the program by letter, after asking DRA to comment.

28. We should not allow fund shifting between LIEE and CARE budgets.

29. We should allow Bear Valley to increase its LIEE income eligibility guidelines from 175% to 200% of the federal poverty limit.

30. We are not convinced that LIEE program should subsidize CFLs to the low-income community beyond 2011.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. We approve the following budgets for the small and multijurisdictional utilities (SMJUs):

2. Southwest Gas Corporation (Southwest) may continue to deliver the Low Income Energy Efficiency (LIEE) program it currently delivers, and may add its new proposed measures, but shall increase the number of customers who benefit from the program.

3. PacifiCorp shall increase the level of refrigerator replacement in its LIEE program.

4. PacifiCorp shall strive to serve 500 new LIEE customers for each year, 2009-2011. It shall start by focusing on its California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) customers, and customers with high energy use, burden and insecurity. It shall report its progress in its Annual Report.

5. We decline Sierra Pacific Power Company's (Sierra) request to increase light bulb deliveries, and redirect the requested funding to refrigerator replacement.

6. We approve Golden State Water Company/Bear Valley Electric's (Bear Valley) LIEE program measure mix as is.

7. We allow Alpine Natural Gas Operating Company (Alpine) and West Coast Gas Company (West Coast) to continue with their current LIEE measure mixes.

8. The SMJUs shall begin preparing now to meet the energy efficiency and non-toxic lighting requirements of Assembly Bill 1109 (Huffman) and related legislation. We will designate a contact for them in the Energy Division whom they can consult for guidance. Before the new lighting requirements go into effect, the SMJUs shall begin to phase out non-conforming light bulbs, and inform customers about how to dispose of bulbs containing toxic materials.

9. Southwest shall strive to increase its LIEE penetration to 25% during 2009-2011.

10. Sierra shall strive to serve at least 250 LIEE customers per year for 2009-2011.

11. Alpine shall attempt to serve at least 22 new LIEE customers each year.

12. To the extent their records permit, SMJUs shall focus extra outreach on customers with high energy usage, burden or insecurity, and on customers in the most extreme climate zones by making at least one modification to their outreach efforts that focuses greater outreach on this subset of customers. Each SMJU shall report on what it did, and what it accomplished, in their 2009 annual reports.

13. SMJUs shall install all feasible energy efficiency measures in each eligible LIEE customer's home once they make their installation visits.

14. We grant Bear Valley's request to increase its CARE and LIEE program income eligibility levels to 200% of federal poverty guidelines. As to LIEE, Bear Valley shall increase the number of LIEE customers it serves by at least 150 new LIEE customers in each year 2009-2011. We grant Bear Valley an additional $41,550 to serve these additional customers.

15. We grant all of the SMJUs' requested funding for marketing, education and outreach (ME&O). They may only spend the amounts they seek for 2009, and shall hold the other funding in abeyance. Once we decide how to incorporate SMJUs' programs into the single statewide ME&O program, we will provide the SMJUs further direction regarding their ME&O budgets for 2010 and 2011.

16. The SMJUs and the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) shall be in contact with the Commission's Energy Division and advocate for workforce education and training (WE&T) in the Lake Tahoe and Needles region when the WE&T program rolls out, if they are interested in WE&T efforts in those communities.

17. We adopt a uniform 90% CARE penetration goal across all SMJUs. No SMJU that already exceeds this level shall reduce its current penetration.

18. Bear Valley shall reach our 90% CARE penetration goal over the next three years. Bear Valley's annual reports shall show significant progress toward this goal; if they do not, we may take additional action.

19. Southwest shall report the results of its CARE recertification tracking with its May 1, 2009 annual report. Southwest shall also report the number of complaints (however received) stemming from its recertification efforts, and discuss what it is doing to ensure it is only losing customers that are not CARE-eligible.

20. We grant Southwest's request to require recertification every other year, rather than annually, for submetered customers and "expanded CARE programs."

21. Bear Valley has failed to justify the full amount of its requested CARE budget increases in the amount of $52,720. We award it an increased budget equivalent to $15 per new customer ($15 x 568), or $8,520. Bear Valley shall submit its CARE outreach plan to the Energy Division as a Tier 2 Advice Letter filing no later than 90 days after the effective date of this decision. Energy Division may approve the program by letter, after asking DRA to comment.

22. The four largest SMJUs (Bear Valley, Southwest, Sierra, and PacifiCorp) shall spend CARE and LIEE carry-over funds granted for one year in the subsequent year and file an Advice Letter to adjust the CARE and LIEE surcharge annually to account for any carryovers. The smallest SMJUs, Alpine and West Coast, may continue their current practice.

23. We deny Southwest's request to be allowed to shift CARE and LIEE funds across categories, and retain existing fund shifting requirements. Southwest shall recalibrate its LIEE and CARE surcharges annually to minimize overcollections it carries forward from year to year.

24. Bear Valley shall file an Advice Letter within 90 days from the date of this decision to recover its LIEE and CARE program budgets via a Public Purpose Program surcharge. The Advice Letter shall clearly define the recovery mechanism to recover all costs prudently incurred and exclude any costs disallowed by the Commission in past decisions. The recovery mechanism shall conform to the Commission decisions, policies and practices applicable to such programs.

25. To the extent we do not deny any other request by an SMJU in its application, we approve each such request.

26. Energy Division shall monitor all progress set forth in the SMJU's reporting and inform the Commission if the SMJUs are not meeting the goals we set forth for them in this decision.

27. We order the SMJUs to update their tariffs in order to comply with the amendment to Assembly Bill 2857 (Lieber) within 60 days of the effective date of this decision.

28. Application (A.) 08-06-031, A.08-07-005, A.08-07-007, A.08-07-015, A.08-07-019, and A.08-07-027 are closed.

This order is effective today.

Dated December 4, 2008, at San Francisco, California.

MICHAEL R. PEEVEY

President

DIAN M. GRUENEICH

JOHN A. BOHN

RACHELLE B. CHONG

TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON

Commissioners

APPENDIX A

SMJU Application Summaries

Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

PacifiCorp

I. Overview

· Serves 46,500 customers in California (Shasta, Modoc, Del Norte, Siskiyou counties)

· 35,3000 are residential

· Requesting a total of approx. $6.682M for 2009-2011 for LIAP: $6.082M for CARE and $600k for LIEE

· Currently uses 175% of FPG for income qualification

II.CARE

1. Goals

· Expects 10, 500 enrolled by year-end 2008 @ participation rate of 85%

· For 2007, the participation rate was 73%

· Increased participation significantly due to increased outreach efforts and implementation of a self-certification process.

· Based on 2008 est. eligible 12,292; increase net CARE participation by

a. 500 for PY 2009 (participation rate 85%)

b. 250 for PY 2010 (participation rate 92%)

c. 250 for PY 2011 (participation rate 94%)

2. Budget

a. $ 2.834M for PY2009

b. $2.899M for PY 2010

c. $2.958M for PY 2011

Program Administration

1. Processing/Certification/Verification

· Includes Opening and sorting of applications, Processing applications, Initiating and responding to customer inquiries and Tracking CARE enrollment and Regulatory reporting. The auth. budget for 2008 was $12K.

· Proposed budget

a. $25K for PY 2009

b. $25K for PY 2010

c. $27K for PY 2011

· The Department of Community Service Development (CSD) administered the certification and verification process in 2006, but in 2007 began to process internally. The company had no costs in 2007, but have included such costs in the forecast years

· The average cost per enrolled customer for the forecast period is lower than the recorded years

· Income eligibility is re-established every two years and the such costs are included in the budget cycle

2. General Administration

· Includes programming for reporting and regulatory compliance, the authorized for 2008 was $8K.

· Proposed budget

a. $8K for PY 2009

b. $8K for PY 2010

c. $8K for PY 2011

Outreach

· Will continue to use bill inserts, bill messages, on-hold messages, informational web page, web enrollment/recertification, direct mailings, customer newsletters, program application on grocery bags at food banks, etc.

· Partners with CBOs to help enroll CARE customers

· Complies with AB 2104 requirement set forth regarding master-metered customers

· Distributes packets in June of each year to landlords of master-metered accounts and requests updates and follows up with telephone calls to the landlords

· Authorized budget for 2008 was $50K, the proposed budget is

a. $50K for PY 2009

b. $55K for PY 2010

c. $55K for PY 2011

III. LIEE

· Partners with CBOs such as Del Norte Senior Center in Crescent City and Energy Demonstration Center in Eureka for LIEE program administration.

· Partners directly with 3CBOs (LIHEAP) receiving federal funds to weatherize homes for income eligible families thus saving the utility 50 percent of the installation cost.

· Participants with electric heating are eligible for shell measures such as insulation and window replacement.

· All participants are eligible for other measures such as light bulbs, and low-flow shower heads.

· Reimburses CBOs for 50 percent of the measure installed cost and another 15percent for administrative cost

· Serves rural area with small population, CBOs spend considerable time traveling large area for fewer customers compared to densely populated areas

Goals

· Homes Treated or Weatherized estimated

a. 90 T; 90 W (PY 2008)

b. 110 T; 110 W (PY 2009)

c. 115 T; 115 W (PY 2010)

d. 120 T; 120 W (PY 2011)

· Estimated energy savings in kWh's

a. 99,993 (PY 2008)

b. 109,993 (PY 2009)

c. 137,491 (PY 2010)

d. 171,864 (PY 2011)

Budget

The adopted for PY 2008 was $168k

· $175k for PY 2009

· $200k for PY 2010

· $225k for PY2011

- Will continue to partner with CBOs such as Del Norte Senior Center in Crescent City and Energy Demonstration Center in Eureka as it provides the most efficient delivery mechanism for customers

Program Delivery, Portfolio Composition and Leveraging

- Continue working with CBOs as the best mechanism for delivery to LIEE customers

- Improve upon the number of homes to be weatherized.

Outreach

- Proposes to spend $50K for 2009 and $55k annually for 2010-2011.

- General Administration costs stay @$8k per year for the forecast years

-

IV. Revenue Requirement

A. Subsidy and Benefit Costs

- For 2008 expects deficit of $215, 459

- For 2009-2011 expects annual deficit of $389,030

- Estimated negative balance in the account of $2,828,380 by 12/31/08, to recover approved costs, one third each year for 2009-2011 in the amount of $942,793

- Current annual collection in rates $1,489,151

- Annual revenue collection required for the forecast period including under collection and the 2009-2011 revenues in rates is $3,925,420; an increase over the current collection of $2, 436,268

- Proposed rate 0.508 cents/kwh

B. LIEE

- 2008 budget in rates is $168,000

- 2009-2011 proposed budget in rates is $200,000

V. Request to continue funding and allow for fund shifting

- In case of delayed decision by the commission, requests interim authorization to continue LIEE and CARE programs into PY 2009

- Requests flexibility in managing the funds for each program year

End of Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

PacifiCorp

Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Bear Valley Electric Service (BVES)

I. Overview

· Serves 23,000 customers in Big Bear Lake area in San Bernardino Mountains

· 94% or 21,500 are residential. Approx. two third are part time residents (vacation or second homes)

· 8,150 are full time residents including mobile homes and master-meter customers. Also serves 1,400 commercial customers

· Wants FPG increased from 175% to 200%, this will increase eligible customers from 2,132 to 2700

· Currently no revenue collection in rates for this program, but as of Dec. 2007 has uncollected balances of $318,800 for CARE and $285,300 for LIEE

· Will file an Advice letter to recover program costs in 2009 as well as to amortize current balancing account balances over next 3 years

· Seeks to increase its LIEE budget by 50% over 2008 level

· ****(Utility has not provided avg. cost data as required in the guidelines template)

II.CARE

1. Goals

· CARE program is funded through the PPP surcharge and paid through non-participating customer's energy bills

· Estimates its CARE eligible 2,132 and 2,700 if 200% FPG approved

· Expects 1,310 enrolled by year-end 2008 @ penetration of 61%

· The forecast is based on approved 200% FPG

· For 2009-2011 to add 350 new CARE customers per year.

· Based on 2008 eligible of 2,132; increase net CARE program participation by

a. 327 for PY 2009 (participation rate 61%)

b. 548 for PY 2010 (participation rate 81%)

c. 507 for PY 2011 (participation rate 100%)

- Net enrolled in 2008 was 28

- Participation rates for 2007 and 2008 were 55% and 61% respectively

- The forecast additions based on 200 FPG approval

2. Budget

a. $ 217K for PY2009

b. $223K for PY 2010

c. $285K for PY 2011

Program Administration

1. Processing/Certification/Verification

· All of these functions performed by existing customer service representatives and were not booked to this account in previous years

· Re-certification and re-verification performed every two years

· Proposed budget

a. $27K for PY 2009

b. $27K for PY 2010

c. $27K for PY 2011

2. General Administration

· Includes programming for reporting and regulatory compliance, travel expense to meetings and workshops, labor for CARE program administration.

· Does not report any of these expenses as part of its CARE budgets as these costs are included in General rates.

· Plans to leverage with SW Gas to increase CARE enrollment if 200% FPG approved by the commission

· Estimated costs:

2008: $1,600

2009: $5,850

2010: $5,850

2011: $5,850

Outreach

· Will continue to use bill inserts, increase participation at Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program events, and print in local newspaper

· Closer coordination with SW Gas, San Bernardino Community Action Program activities

· The average outreach cost per enrolled customer for the forecast period is not provided

· Authorized budget for 2008 was $3.5K, the proposed budget is

a. $19.9K for PY 2009

b. $19.9K for PY 2010

c. $19.9K for PY 2011

III. LIEE

· Will implement the commission adopted programmatic LIEE initiative and its strategic plan to the extent possible, without increasing customer rates or the utility's administrative costs

· Has realized improvements to the LIEE program as a result of its association with RHA , which is the prime administrative contractor for 2008

· High density, low-income areas are selected to participate in the LIEE program, and specialized recipients such as low-income senior complexes are targeted for greatest dollar benefit

· Program costs are recovered through PPP surcharge from both participating and non-participating customers

Goals

· Homes Treated and/or Weatherized estimated

a. 105 T (PY 2008)

b. 163 T; (PY 2009)

c. 163 T; (PY 2010)

d. 163 T; (PY 2011)

· Estimated energy savings in kWh

a. 85,468 (PY 2008)

b. 132,679(PY 2009)

c. 132,679(PY 2010)

d. 132,679(PY 2011)

Budget

The adopted for PY 2008 was $110k,

· $188k (PY 2009)

· $188k (PY 2010)

· $188k (PY2011)

- Budget includes 25% of an FTE dedicated to LIEE

- The cost increases are due to increased enrollment and more customer services, increased measures and materials.

- Program currently administered and implemented by San Bernardino Community Action Partnership(SBCAP)

- With this budget it can serve approx. 165 customers per year

Program Delivery, Portfolio Composition and Leveraging

- Seeks guidance for the future regarding new measures

- Customers receive max. number of measures as the installation contractor is a contractor working for both SW Gas, thus reducing shared program costs

- Does not propose any major changes to current program design except for changing its income guidelines from 175% to 200% FPG

Outreach

- Plans to increase its outreach efforts considerably from $3k in 2007 to an annual budget of $9k for the forecast years in order to achieve a 55% higher participation goal

- Direct mailers and brochures are most successful outreach methods. Program contractors are also effective

- Cross-qualify customers for the CARE and LIEE programs

- Leverage with SW Gas to enroll customers through data exchange

IV. Revenue Requirement

A. Subsidy and Benefit Costs

- Proposes to merge LIEE, CARE and RD&D into a single PPP surcharge and amortize the under-collected amounts over a 3 year budget cycle

- CARE under-collection of $318,800 and LIEE under-collection of $285,300

- Plan to file an advice letter within next 30-60days seeking authority to establish a single Public Purpose Programs surcharge.

VI. Request to continue funding and allow for fund shifting

- In case of delayed decision by the commission, requests interim authorization to continue LIEE and CARE programs into PY 2009

- Requests to permit fund shifting by category for the LIEE program and also to allow fund shifting among the administration and program categories in order to respond to changing market conditions.

End of Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Bear Valley Electric Service (BVES)

Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Alpine Natural Gas (Alpine)

I. Overview

· Serves 1,150 customers in Calaveras County

· 99% are residential.

· Requesting a combined total for three years 2009-2011 is: $129, 600. Of these $47, 550 for CARE and $82,050 for LIEE

II.CARE

1. Goals

· CARE program is funded through the PPP surcharge and paid through non-participating customer's energy bills

· Estimates its CARE eligible 1,150 for 2008 @175% FPG

· Expects 59 enrolled by year-end 2008 @ penetration of 98%

· For 2009-2011 to add 8 new CARE customers.

· Based on 2008 eligible of 1,150; increase net CARE program participation by

a. 3 for PY 2009 (participation rate 100%)

b. 3 for PY 2010 (participation rate 100%)

c. 2 for PY 2011 (participation rate 100%)

- Net enrolled in 2008 was 7

- Expects a Participation rate of 98% for 2008

2. Budget

a. $14.8K for PY2009

b. $16.0K for PY 2010

c. $16.8K for PY 2011

-Authorized budget for 2008 was $9.9K and estimated for 2008 is $12.5K

Program Administration

1. Processing/Certification/Verification

· All of these functions performed by existing customer service representatives and were not booked to this account in previous years

· Re-certification and re-verification performed every two years

· Proposed budget

a. $250 for PY 2009

b. $275 for PY 2010

c. $300 for PY 2011

2. General Administration

· Includes programming for reporting and regulatory compliance, travel expense to meetings and workshops, labor for CARE program administration.

· Estimated costs:

2008: $1,000

2009: $2,500

2010: $2,750

2011: $3,000

Outreach

· Will continue to use multiple communication channels and use current outreach efforts such as CARE program printed on every monthly bill, direct mailings and CARE information at time of initial start of service.

· Authorized budget for 2008 was $200 and estimated is $500, the proposed budget for the forecast period is:

a. $525 for PY 2009

b. $550 for PY 2010

c. $600 for PY 2011

III. LIEE

· Will implement the commission adopted programmatic LIEE initiative and its strategic plan to the extent possible, without increasing customer rates or the utility's administrative costs

· Program costs are recovered through PPP surcharge from both participating and non-participating customers

Goals

· Homes Treated and/or Weatherized estimated

a. 12 T; 12W (PY 2008)

b. 12 T; 12W (PY 2009)

c. 15 T; 15W (PY 2010)

d. 16 T; 16W (PY 2011)

Budget

The adopted for PY 2008 was $26.3k,

· $24.4 (PY 2009)

· $27.9k (PY 2010)

· $29.8k (PY2011)

- The cost increases are due to increased enrollment and more customer services, increased measures and materials.

- For year 2007, requests approval to reallocate carry-over admin. funds to the Program cost categories

- Requests the continuation of fund shifting among LIEE program categories and program years, considers it critical to the success of the program.

Program Delivery, Portfolio Composition and Leveraging

- Contracts with RHA as a contractor to deliver LIEE services

- Follows standardized protocols developed for installation and policies for all California utilities

- Leverages with PG&E as the other utility providing electric service in the overlapping utility territory

- Requests Commission guidance and direction going forward about standardization of measures and policies applicable to SMJUs

- All ceiling and furnace repair/replacement jobs are inspected and random verification conducted for a sample of dwelling units.

Outreach

- Promotes LIEE program in conjunction with CARE and Medical Baseline programs in addition to direct mailings, on-hold messages, information web page, and other multiple communication channels.

- Postcards, flyers, brochures and posters are currently are most effective outreach methods

IV. Revenue Requirement

A. Subsidy and Benefit Costs

- CARE costs are recovered from non-exempt customers on an equal cents per therm basis

- Both CARE and LIEE balancing accounts are recovered through PPP surcharge and the utility does not propos any changes to its authorized PPP balancing accounts

-

VI. Request to continue funding and allow for fund shifting

- In case of delayed decision by the commission, requests interim authorization to continue LIEE and CARE programs into PY 2009

- Requests to permit fund shifting by category for the LIEE program and also to allow fund shifting among the administration and program categories in order to respond to changing market conditions.

End of Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Alpine Natural Gas (Alpine)

Summary of Budget Application 2009-2011

West Coast Gas (WC Gas)

I & II. Introduction and Overview

· Serves approx. 1,500 natural gas customers at Mather Field in
Sacramento

· 1,271 are residential and new single-family homes

· All residential dwellings meet Title 24 and appliances meet Title 20 standards

· Energy Efficiency retrofits and gas appliance replacement program not cost-effective and are not instituted. CARE program in effect. Requests that the customer conservation education portion of LIEE to continue at $1.1K level

III Summary of Request

Requests a total of $22,680 for 3 yr. cycle. Currently approved for 2007 and 2008 is $7.1K annually

· -2009 $7.1k

-2010 $7.6K

-2011 $8.1K

· Requesting no change in customer rates for LIAP and proposed any change in rates be handled through advice letter filing

IV. CARE Program

· Net enrollment for CARE of 4 for each of the forecast years 2009-2011 resulting in 100% participation rate

· Currently approved for 2007 and 2008 is $6.0K

- 2009 $6.0K

- 2010 $6.5K

- 2011 $7.0K

V.&VI Program Administration and Outreach

· All admin. of the program is conducted in-house and for 2007-2008 was $850. Recommend approval $280 for Processing/Certification/and Verification; $500 for General and $280 for Outreach for 2009-2011

· Outreach is conducted via quarterly bill inserts, on-hold phone messages and time of new customer sign ups.

VIII Revenue Requirements and Rate impacts

· Maintains a two-way CARE balancing account, as of Dec. 31, 2007 with a $5K over-collection and will reduce to Zero by the end of 2008.

End of Summary of Budget Application 2009-2011

West Coast Gas (WC Gas)

Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Sierra Pacific Power Co. (SPPC)

I. Introduction

II. Overview

· Serves 46,000 customers in Northern California, 80% located in Tahoe Basin

· 50% of 41,000 residential are vacation homes or vacation rentals

· Requesting a total of approx. $2.17M for 2009-2011 for LIAP: $1.77M for CARE and $.40M for LIEE

· Mostly mountain territory above 6,000ft elevation

·

III.CARE

1. Goals

· CARE program is funded through the PPP surcharge and paid through non-participating customer's energy bills

· Expects 2,496 enrolled by year-end 2008 @ penetration of 83% against adopted goal of 82.7% in D.06-12-036.

· For 2007, penetration rate was 78.8% against adopted 79.9%.

· The customer participation increased both in 2007 and 2008 due to increased income guidelines to 200% FPG, data sharing among Sierra and SW Gas, Self certification and other outreach efforts

· For 2009-2011 to add 132 new CARE customers per year.

· Based on 2008 eligible 3,000; increase net CARE program participation by

a. 132 for PY 2009 (penetration rate 88%)

b. 132 for PY 2010 (penetration rate 92%)

c. 132 for PY 2011 (penetration rate 96%)

2. Budget

a. $ 21K for PY2009

b. $22K for PY 2010

c. $22K for PY 2011

Program Administration

1. Processing/Certification/Verification

· Contracts with California Community Services and Development (CSD) to perform all functions related to the eligibility and re-certification or CARE customers

· Includes verification services, weekly computer printout, notification letters, sub-metered tenants, and review of applications for annual recertification. The auth. budget for 2008 was $11.1K.

· Proposed budget

a. $15K for PY 2009

b. $16K for PY 2010

c. $16K for PY 2011

· Has exceeded it's approved budget for PY 2007 and PY 2008 by $3.7K, and $3.4K respectively due to labor costs and added labor to process the increased volume of applications

· The average cost per enrolled customer for the forecast period is lower than the recorded years

· Income eligibility is re-established every year

2. General Administration

· Includes programming for reporting and regulatory compliance, travel expense to meetings and workshops, labor for CARE program administration.

· Does not report any of these expenses as part of its CARE budgets as these costs are included in General rates.

Outreach

· Will continue to use bill inserts, bill messages, on-hold messages, informational web page, web enrollment/recertification, direct mailings, contractor capitation program, utility data sharing, and community outreach.

· Data sharing with SW Gas identified 132 new CARE customers in 2008, and have added additional 29 new customers through capitation

· The average outreach cost per enrolled customer for the forecast period is lower than the recorded years

· Authorized budget for 2008 was $4.5K, the proposed budget is

a. $6K for PY 2009

b. $6K for PY 2010

c. $6K for PY 2011

IV. LIEE

· Will implement the commission adopted programmatic LIEE initiative and its strategic plan to the extent possible, without increasing customer rates or the utility's administrative costs

· Has realized improvements to the LIEE program as a result of its association with RHA , which is the prime administrative contractor for 2008

· High density, low-income areas are selected to participate in the LIEE program, and specialized recipients such as low-income senior complexes are targeted for greatest dollar benefit

· Program costs are recovered through PPP surcharge from both participating and non-participating customers

Goals

· LIEE eligible estimated

a. 3,000 (PY 2008)

b. 2,860 (PY 2009)

c. 2,707 (PY 2010)

d. 2,536 (PY 2011)

· Homes Treated and/or Weatherized estimated

a. 115 T; 25 W (PY 2008)

b. 125 T; 28 W (PY 2009)

c. 140 T; 31 W (PY 2010)

d. 150 T; 33 W (PY 2011)

· Estimated energy savings in kWh

a. 75,000 (PY 2008)

b. 91000 (PY 2009)

c. 93.730 (PY 2010)

d. 96,500 (PY 2011)

· Estimated Penetration rates and net enrollment

a. 83%; 132 (PY 2008)

b. 88%; 129 (PY 2009)

c. 92%; 132 (PY 2010)

d. 96%; 132 (PY 2011)

One hundred percent penetration is difficult to achieve due to:

- High cost living area, low-income residents being forced out and on the move

- Seasonal residency does not qualify for the LIEE program.

- Income documentation is difficult due to multiple temporary jobs

- Income documentation process is unwieldy or excessive; proof of income for all jobs during the year is required

- Severe winter conditions prevent year-around installations

- Sierra sub-contractor- Project Go, is located 100 miles away in Roseville, California, and in Tahoe region difficult to find qualified, and willing contractors to provide the appliance repair and replacement work

Budget

The adopted for PY 2008 was $110k, seeks 10% increase each year for forecast period to expand program to meet 2020 goal

· $121k (PY 2009)

· $133k (PY 2010)

· $147k (PY2011)

- The cost increases are due to more customer services, increases in labor, materials and mileage costs.

- Seeks approval to shift funds between LIEE program categories and program years for 2009-2011 and finds critical to the success of the program. The reasons are: eliminates potential delays, faster response to changes in policies, assist more homes, lower admin. costs

-

Program Delivery, Portfolio Composition and Leveraging

- Proposes maintaining list of measures adopted in 2006 P&P Manual, with addition of storm windows, floor insulation and duct wrap

- Seeks permission to discontinue 10-year go back rule and provide new measures not available in the past

- Seeks guidance for the future regarding new measures

- Customers receive max. number of measures as the installation contractor is a LIHEAP contractor working for both SW Gas and Sierra Pacific thus reducing shared program costs

- Has assisted 6,833 homes since PY 2001 and plans to assist 10,783 by year end 2011.

Outreach

- Plans to target high energy usage customers above baseline and will notify them about LIEE program

- 35 percent of customers were above baseline during 2007.

- Direct mailers and brochures are most successful outreach methods. Website and Program contractors are also effective

- Cross-qualify customers for the CARE and LIEE programs

- Leverage with SW Gas to enroll customers

- To track customer response to all methods would be an expensive action

V. Revenue Requirement

A. Subsidy and Benefit Costs

- Does not propose any change to CARE costs recovery mechanism, costs are recovered from non-exempt customers through two-way balancing account

- The costs are collected thru its PPP surcharge.

VI. Request to continue funding and allow for fund shifting

- In case of delayed decision by the commission, requests interim authorization to continue LIEE and CARE programs into PY 2009

- Requests to permit fund shifting by category for the LIEE program and also to allow fund shifting among the administration and program categories.

End of Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

Sierra Pacific Power Co. (SPPC)

Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

SW Gas

I. Overview

· Serves 177,000 customers in California (10% of total customer base)

· 95% of California customer base is residential

· Non-Care PPP surcharge in southern California service area is highest of any utility in the State @ $0.10212 per therm

· Requesting a total of approx. $31.4M for 2009-2011 for LIAP: $26.7M for CARE and $4.7M for LIEE

·

II.CARE

1. Goals

· Expects 37, 539 enrolled by year-end 2008 @ penetration of 81% against adopted goal of 95% in D.06-12-036.

· For 2007, SW penetration rate was 79% against adopted 93%.

· The reasons stated for not achieving the penetration rates were U.S. housing slump and related sub-prime mortgage crisis that have impacted the Southwest's customer growth in Southern California and thus has revised its penetration goal for 2008 to 81%

· Proposes several program modifications to improve customer enrollment including phone enrollment and certification, along with extending the recertification timeframe for CARE sub metered tenants and CARE Expanded Programs with minimal impact to its CARE administration budget.

· Based on 2008 eligible 46, 281; increase net CARE program participation by

a. 538 for PY 2009 (penetration rate 82%)

b. 676 for PY 2010 (penetration rate 84%)

c. 781 for PY 2011 (penetration rate 85%)

2. Budget

a. $ 8.74M for PY2009

b. $8.89M for PY 2010

c. $9.07M for PY 2011

Program Administration

1. Processing/Certification/Verification

· Includes Opening and sorting of applications, Processing applications, Initiating and responding to customer inquiries and Tracking CARE enrollment and Regulatory reporting. The auth. budget for 2008 was $42K.

· Proposed budget

a. $96K for PY 2009

b. $97K for PY 2010

c. $98K for PY 2011

· Has exceeded it's approved budget for PY 2006, PY 2007 and PY 2008 by $59.2K, $56.2K and $52.9K due to labor costs and added labor to process the increased volume of applications

· The average cost per enrolled customer for the forecast period is lower than the recorded years

· Income eligibility is re-established every two years and 10% of CARE customers are post-verified annually

· Plans to change annual recertification to every two years for sub-metered tenants

· Requests that the timeframe for CARE expanded programs (Nonprofit Group Living Facilities, Migrant Farm Worker Housing Centers, Privately-Owned Employee Housing, Agricultural Housing) be extended to every 2 years, instead of annually.

· Proposes to implement phone enrollment and recertification in PY2009-2011.

2. General Administration

· Includes programming for reporting and regulatory compliance, the authorized for 2008 was $24K.

· Proposed budget

a. $26K for PY 2009

b. $28K for PY 2010

c. $30K for PY 2011

· Have instituted measures in 2008 to comply with AB 2104 requiring utilities to improve the CARE program application process for tenants receiving electric or gas service from a master-meter customer through a sub-metered system by Jan. 1, 2008

Outreach

· Will continue to use bill inserts, bill messages, on-hold messages, informational web page, web enrollment/recertification, direct mailings, contractor capitation program, utility data sharing, community outreach and California's Flex Your Power statewide energy efficiency marketing and outreach campaign

· Data sharing with SCE and Sierra Pacific identified 4,200 and 130 respectively qualified CARE customers in 2007

· Have instituted discussions to collaborate with municipalities and local governments regarding CARE program and the possibility of sharing data.

· Authorized budget for 2008 was $95K, the proposed budget is

a. $100K for PY 2009

b. $100K for PY 2010

c. $100K for PY 2011

III. LIEE

· Serves California climate zones 14(Needles), 15 (Victorville, Barstow, high desert and 16 (Tahoe, Truckee and Big Bear)

· In Arizona, SW weatherization program implemented in 1998 is based on DOE Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP)

· California LIEE program is funded through the PPP surcharge paid by participating and non-participating customers.

Goals

· LIEE eligible estimated

a. 30,706 (PY 2008)

b. 29,306 (PY 2009)

c. 28,644 (PY 2010)

d. 27,970 (PY 2011)

· Homes Treated or Weatherized estimated

a. 1,400 T; 1,300 W (PY 2008)

b. 1,200 T; 1,100 W (PY 2009)

c. 1,350 T; 1, 250 W (PY 2010)

d. 1,500 T; 1,400 W (PY 2011)

· Estimated energy savings in therms

a. 54, 290 (PY 2008)

b. 46, 013 (PY 2009)

c. 52, 321 (PY 2010)

d. 58, 653 (PY 2011)

· Estimated Penetration rates and net enrollment

a. 81%; 273(PY 2008)

b. 82%; 538 (PY 2009)

c. 84%; 676 (PY 2010)

d. 85%; 781 (PY 2011)

One hundred percent penetration is difficult to achieve due to:

- Seasonal residency in resort areas of Lake Tahoe and Big Bear areas.

- Income documentation difficult due to Potential customers being temporary and undocumented

- Severe winter conditions prevent year-around installations

- Sub-contractors located 100 miles away in some areas and in Tahoe region difficult to find local contractors due to overwork and LIEE cost caps prohibitive

Budget

The adopted for PY 2008 was $1.08M

· $1.255M for PY 2009

· $1.56M for PY 2010

· $1.86M for PY2011

- The cost increases are due to more customer services, increases in labor, materials and mileage costs.

- Seeks approval to shift carry-over funds from Administration to Program costs in weatherization, energy education and appliance repair/replacement

-

Program Delivery, Portfolio Composition and Leveraging

- Proposes maintaining list of measures adopted in P&P Manual, with addition of storm windows, floor insulation and duct wrap for Climate Zone 16(Tahoe, Truckee, Big Bear)

- Seeks permission to discontinue 10-year go back rule and provide new measures not available in the past

- Seeks guidance for the future regarding the adopted statewide standardized program

- SW has assisted 6,833 homes since PY 2001 and plans to assist 10,783 by year end 2011.

Outreach

- Proposes to spend $20K annually for 2009-2011.

- Average cost per enrolled customer as well as residential customer is decreasing from 2008 to 2011

- Plans to target high energy usage customers above baseline and will notify them about LIEE program

- 35 percent of customers were above baseline during 2007.

- Direct mailers and brochures are most successful outreach methods. Website and Program contractors are also effective

IV. Revenue Requirement

A. Subsidy and Benefit Costs

- Does not propose any change to CARE costs recovery mechanism, costs are recovered from non-exempt customers through two-way balancing account

- The costs are collected thru its PPP surcharge.

V. Request to continue funding and allow for fund shifting

- In case of delayed decision by the commission, requests interim authorization to continue LIEE and CARE programs into PY 2009

- Requests to permit fund shifting by category for the LIEE program and also to allow fund shifting among the administration and program categories.

End of Summary Budget Application 2009-2011

SW Gas