2. Background
In Decision (D.) 09-09-047, the Commission adopted energy efficiency portfolios for 2010 through 2012 for Southern California Edison Company (SCE), Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) (collectively, Joint Utilities or Joint Investor-Owned Utilities (Joint IOUs)). A subsequent Ruling on November 18, 2009 clarified a number of issues regarding evaluation, measurement and verification (EM&V) for the 2010-2012 portfolios. For example, the Ruling provided for Energy Division review and approval of ex ante (also known as estimated) energy savings1 value workpapers for energy efficiency measures after utility submission of these workpapers to Energy Division. D.10-04-029 required the IOUs to cooperate and collaborate with Energy Division in the development of these workpapers, consistent with the November 18, 2009 Ruling.
On September 17, 2010, Joint Utilities filed a Petition for Modification of D.09-09-047, seeking 28 separate changes to the Decision, in eight subject areas.
D.10-12-054 adopted modifications to D.09-09-047 in the following areas:
· Freezing ex ante energy savings values for energy efficiency measures based on the 2008 DEER, version 2.05.2 Issues regarding ex ante values for non-DEER energy efficiency measures were deferred to the current decision.
· Clarifying that co-branding requirements with the Engage 360 brand apply to all energy efficiency programs provided through energy efficiency funds, but not to programs provided solely through other funds. Also, the decision clarified the timing for the start of the co-branding efforts.
· Reducing annual energy savings goals per home for the statewide Prescriptive Whole House Retrofit Program (PHWRP) from 20% in utility service territories to 10%, while retaining the annual energy savings goals per home for the utilities Whole House Performance Programs (WHPP) at 20%. The decision clarified that these are average annual savings goals per home; the annual savings at individual participant homes will fall below and above these levels.
· Providing that the required $1,000 performance bonus applies only to single family units in the California Advanced Home Program. The decision also provided that a lower $200 bonus or a territory-specific incentive (e.g., marketing dollars, customized engineering reports, etc.) apply for each applicable multi-family unit.
· Adding language to provide a State Action Doctrine defense for utilities engaging in certain joint energy efficiency activities which are consistent with state policy and supervised by the Commission.
Joint Utilities also request a number of other changes to D.09-09-047, which are considered in a separate decision in this docket:
· Modify IOU benchmarking requirements to exclusively promote the Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool for all IOU benchmarking activities; target larger facilities first; and remove the requirement to benchmark all facilities now specified in D.09-09-047.
· Adopt a reporting process for limited statewide program variations among IOUs to allow flexibility for appropriate regional and IOU differences.
· Clarify that sponsorships for energy efficiency events or activities that directly promote programs or partnerships are considered allowable administrative costs.
Today's decision deals solely with remaining issues concerning determination of non-DEER (including custom project) ex ante energy savings values.
Comments on all issues in the Petition were jointly filed on October 18, 2010 by the Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) and The Utility Reform Network (TURN), and comments were separately filed by EnerNOC, Inc. A Prehearing Conference (PHC) was held on October 22, 2010. A major theme of both the Petition and the PHC involved Energy Division implementation of provisions of D.09-09-047 and the subsequent November 18, 2009 Ruling.
At the PHC, it became clear that, despite the requirements in D.09-09-047 and the November 18, 2009 Ruling, the utilities and Energy Division had been unable to reach agreement on determination of ex ante values and other matters since implementation of the portfolio began in January 2010. Because D.09-09-047 provided that Energy Division would have a number of significant tasks in implementing the decision, the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that certain information concerning Energy Division's efforts since D.09-09-047 should be placed on the record in order to provide perspective on the Petition. Energy Division staff provided insights into their process and implementation recommendations at the PHC, and parties were able to question Energy Division staff on the record. In a Ruling dated October 29, 2010, parties were given the opportunity to comment upon specific written Energy Division implementation recommendations concerning ex ante values discussed at the PHC. Comments were filed by EnerNOC and DRA/TURN on November 5, 2010.
D.10-12-054 resolved issues from the Petition, including which version of DEER to use, but called for further consideration of non-DEER ex ante issues. A workshop was held on January 5, 2011 for this purpose. After the workshop and subsequent discussions involving Energy Division and parties, SDG&E (on behalf of a number of parties) filed a Motion on February 18, 2011 seeking the right to file a Case Management Statement Report (CMS Report). The CMS Report was attached to the Motion. The ALJ granted the Motion.
The CMS Report sets forth issues for resolution, the sponsoring parties' positions on the issues, and alternative proposals to both Energy Division's recommendations regarding certain non-DEER ex ante values and Energy Division's proposed review and approval process of utility custom application/project ex ante values.
1 Energy efficiency measures may result in both energy savings (measured in kilowatt-hours or therms) and demand (measured in kilowatts). In this decision, we use the term "energy savings" to refer to both energy and demand reductions.
2 DEER stands for Database for Energy Efficient Resources. This database contains estimated energy savings values for standard energy efficiency measures. Non-standard energy efficiency measures are referred to as non-DEER measures. Non-DEER measures include custom energy efficiency projects designed for a single customer. The most recent updated DEER (the 2008 DEER version 2.05) was adopted by Ruling in R.06-04-010 in August 2008.
