SK1/avs 8/7/2003
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Annual Earnings Assessment Proceeding (AEAP) Application of Pacific Gas and Electric Company for Approval of Energy Efficient Shareholder Incentives for Third Claim for Incentives for 1998 Accomplishments for Pre-1998 Programs, and for Recovery of Costs for the 2002 Interruptible Load Programs.
Application 03-05-002
And Related Matters.
Application 03-05-003
Application 03-05-004
Application 03-05-009
ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER'S RULING ESTABLISHING
CATEGORY AND PROVIDING SCOPING MEMOPursuant to Rules 6(c)(2) and 6.3 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, this ruling designates the category of this 2003 Annual Earnings Assessment (AEAP) proceeding, addresses the need for hearings, and also provides a scoping memo confirming and clarifying the issues and schedule discussed at the prehearing conference (PHC) held on July 24, 2003.
The Utilities' Applications
On May 1, 2003, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCal), collectively referred to as "the utilities" filed their 2003 AEAP applications. The applications were consolidated into a single proceeding by Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruling on June 25, 2003. A summary of the claims associated with these applications is presented in Attachment 1.
Throughout this ruing, I use the term "energy efficiency" to refer to non low-income energy efficiency programs, and "LIEE" to refer to low-income energy efficiency programs. The 2003 AEAP applications include earnings claims for LIEE program activities in 2001 and 2002, as well as claims for certain energy efficiency activities still subject to the pre-1998 shared-savings incentive mechanism. However, they do not include earnings claims related to the "milestone" incentive mechanisms in place for PY1998-PY2001 energy efficiency activities. All of those claims have already been submitted in the consolidated 2000, 2001 and 2002 AEAPs (A.00-05-002 et al.), herein referred to as the "Consolidated AEAP."
As of PY2002, shareholder incentives for all energy efficiency activities have been discontinued. However, in order to "spur superior program delivery," the Commission directed that 15% of all program payments (except for information and training programs) be contingent upon performance goals developed as part of the approved program design.1 The utilities' applications and ORA's protest raise this 15% "holdback/refund" issue for PY2002 activities, as discussed further below.
More specifically, the utilities request the following in their 2003 AEAP applications:
1. SDG&E, SoCal and SCE request Commission authorization for the second earnings claim associated with program year (PY) 2001 LIEE activities. Because PG&E did not meet the minimum performance threshold for this program, it did not submit earnings claims for PY2001 LIEE program activities in either the 2002 or 2003 AEAPs.
2. SDG&E, SoCal and SCE request Commission authorization for the second earnings claim associated with program year (PY) 2001 LIEE activities. Because PG&E did not meet the minimum performance threshold for this program, it did not submit earnings claims for PY2001 LIEE program activities in either the 2002 or 2003 AEAPs.
3. SDG&E, SoCal and SCE request Commission authorization for the second earnings claim associated with program year (PY) 2001 LIEE activities. Because PG&E did not meet the minimum performance threshold for this program, it did not submit earnings claims for PY2001 LIEE program activities in either the 2002 or 2003 AEAPs.
4. SCE requests recovery of its third earnings claim for 1996 and 1997 New Construction Portfolio activities completed in 1998. This program is subject to the shared-savings mechanism adopted in D.94-10-059.
5. PG&E requests collection of its third claim for its 1994 New Construction program, which is subject to a performance adder incentive mechanism. As with the shared-savings mechanism, incentives under this performance adder mechanism are paid out in four installments based on ex post verification.
6. SDG&E requests that the Commission adopt the sixth-year retention and performance studies for several of the 1996 and 1997 energy efficiency programs. SDG&E plans to use the results of these studies to revise lifecycle savings estimates for the fourth earnings claims, which SDG&E will submit in the 2007 and 2008 AEAPs.
7. The utilities also provide information on 2002 energy efficiency program activities. PG&E, SDG&E and SoCal do not request Commission action with respect to whether a refund is required for the 2002 program activities, per the "hold back" requirements the Commission adopted for PY2002. However, SCE requests a Commission finding in this AEAP that performance of its 2002 energy efficiency programs provides no basis for a holdback/refund of funds.2
8. PG&E, SDG&E and SCE request recovery of administrative costs booked to the electric Interruptible Load Program Memorandum Account in 2002. Per Decision (D.) 01-07-029, the reasonableness review of these costs is conducted in the AEAPs.
1 D.01-11-066, Attachment 1, p. 28. As discussed at the PHC, further discussion of the 15% holdback/refund requirement is provided in D.02-03-056. In addition, D.02-03-056 and D.03-04-055 address requirements for retention of final quarterly payments for information and training programs.
2 See PHC Reporter's Transcript (RT) at 84 and SCE PHC Statement, July 18, 2003, pp. 6-7.
