15. Marketing, Education, and Outreach
Both the Strategic Plan and a 2008 Joint Assigned Commissioner Ruling407 on Guidance for integrated demand-side management stressed the need for utilities to integrate and coordinate marketing messages for customers. In the 2009-2012 energy efficiency and demand response program portfolio decisions,408 the Commission took steps to integrate statewide energy efficiency and demand response marketing by directing the utilities to reduce redundancies in marketing efforts and to have one contract with a single marketing agency for both statewide marketing campaigns.
In October 2010, the new Engage 360 campaign was launched as the brand for statewide ME&O. Since that time, certain demand response marketing activities have also continued in parallel. This decision provides further direction on integrated statewide ME&O for demand-side programs overall for 2013 and 2014.
Engage 360 is the current name for the energy efficiency statewide marketing brand developed as required by D.09-09-047. That decision directed the utilities to implement the recommendations of the brand assessment study of Flex Your Power and, if applicable, develop a new smart energy statewide brand. The scope of the brand was to elevate customer participation in program options including, energy efficiency, low income energy efficiency, demand response, and renewable self-generation.409 D.09-09-047 also ordered utilities to conduct audience segmentation research, develop an integrated communications plan, and create a web portal. In addition, the utilities were required to review marketing specific to individual energy efficiency programs, and eliminate any redundancies in local and statewide marketing efforts.410
On October 13, 2011, an ACR regarding statewide marketing noted that development and delivery of the Engage 360 brand was costly and likely not producing enough ratepayer benefits to justify its continuance. The ruling directed SCE to freeze spending on Engage 360, including the Engage360.com web portal, until further direction was provided by the Commission. The ACR further asked that parties file responses addressing whether or not the Engage 360 campaign should continue and whether there should be a statewide ME&O effort in any form. Parties were asked to comment on the appropriate objectives and elements of a statewide marketing campaign and on an appropriate brand name. Parties were asked to consider the merits of using one of the following names as the statewide brand, "Engage 360," "Flex Your Power," or "Energy Upgrade California." The ACR also requested that parties provide input about the size of the budget for statewide marketing and format for administration of the program. Approximately $48.5 million was remaining in the Engage 360 budget at the time of the ACR.
Meanwhile, in August 2010 in the demand response rulemaking, an ALJ ruling was issued on guidance for the utilities' 2012-2014 demand response applications.411 This demand response guidance ruling directed the utilities to request one year of bridge funding for 2012, for the demand response portion of Integrated Demand-Side Management activities, including marketing, in the demand response applications. The ruling further stated that future authority and funding for Integrated Demand-Side Management activities will be considered in future energy efficiency proceedings starting with the energy efficiency applications for 2013-2015.412
A proposed decision has been issued but not yet adopted by the Commission for demand response applications for 2012-2014. That decision, if adopted, would direct the utilities to request funding for post-2012 statewide demand response ME&O as part of their request for energy efficiency "bridge funding."413 The proposed decision also would direct the utilities to have two statewide demand response marketing campaigns in 2012, one for emergency alerts and one for general awareness of dynamic rates.414 Finally, the demand response proposed decision states that during the approval process for the energy efficiency program budget for 2013 and beyond the Commission will determine strategies for statewide campaigns.415
The October 13, 2011 ACR in this proceeding regarding the statewide marketing and outreach program requested that parties respond to a series of questions about how to move forward with or discontinue statewide marketing and outreach.
15.1. Positions of Parties
On November 2, 2011, nine parties filed comments on the October 13, 2011 ACR regarding statewide marketing and outreach. Those parties are PG&E, SCE, SDG&E/SCG, Ecology Action, CAISO, NRDC, WEM, LGSEC, and CCSE. On November 7, seven parties filed reply comments, including the utilities, LGSEC, CCSE, DRA, and Ecology Action.
In response to the ACR, no party advocates for Engage 360 to continue. However, two parties, Ecology Action and CCSE, request that the Engage 360 rebate database on Engage360.com be moved to a new host website. The parties recommend curtailment of the Engage 360 campaign because of its lack of traction, its confusing nature, and the existence of more suitable brands.
In response to whether there should be a statewide marketing program, all parties agree there should be, except for SCE and WEM. SCE comments that given the weak economy and rate pressures on customers, statewide ME&O funds would be best used by directing them to resource programs or refunded to ratepayers. WEM asks that funds be redirected toward local government programs.
With regard to the appropriate brand name for a statewide marketing program, PG&E, SCE and SDG&E/SoCalGas advocate that messages should come from the Commission or the IOUs without a brand name. The utilities identify several concerns with using Flex Your Power. The utilities cite that the brand assessment determined that unaided awareness of Flex Your Power was low, and the message was confusing, and the brand is focused on electricity but not natural gas. The utilities also oppose a transition to Energy Upgrade California as a statewide brand because they contend that it is a program that is focused on retrofits and upgrades and that Energy Upgrade California does not fit as a brand that can be the umbrella for all of the other demand-side management programs.
Some other stakeholders advocate for a specific brand, while others are agreeable to any of the proposed options other than Engage 360. NRDC and CCSE are open to using either Flex Your Power or Energy Upgrade California. CAISO argues that the advantage of a two-pronged Flex Your Power and Flex Alert campaign was that it would result in load reduction on critical peak days. Ecology Action and LGSEC recommend adopting Energy Upgrade California, arguing that it is scalable and could be expanded to be an umbrella brand for energy efficiency programs. Further, Ecology Action and LGSEC argue that the existing pilot programs fit with the objectives of the Strategic Plan. Ecology Action also argues that Integrated Demand-Side Management messages can be incorporated into Energy Upgrade California.
All of the utilities argue that the remaining budget should be divided. PG&E argues that half of the budget should be used for statewide marketing and the remaining half should be returned to the utilities for Integrated Demand-Side Management marketing. SCE requests the entire budget be returned to ratepayers. SDG&E/SoCalGas argues that the funds should be divided, with a percentage for statewide marketing (35%), IOU individual program marketing (40%), and some returned to ratepayers (25%).
Some other stakeholders also comment on what to do with the remaining budget. WEM argues not to have a statewide marketing program, so it requests that the funding be shifted to local governments and Community Choice Aggregators. Ecology Action requests that $12 million be used to fund Energy Upgrade California from April to December of 2012 after American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds are exhausted. CAISO requests that between $6 and $15 million be used for Flex Alerts. CCSE requests that $10 million be used for statewide marketing, $20 million to conduct another brand assessment and develop a new brand, and that $20 million be made available to non-profits so that regional networks could implement statewide messages.
The utilities argue that if there is a statewide marketing program, it should continue to be administered by the utilities with Commission oversight. NRDC advocates that the Commission or a joint authority of the Commission and the California Energy Commission administer statewide marketing program. WEM, LGSEC, and CCSE advocate for the transfer of administration to non-profit organizations, following the model of Energy Upgrade California. CCSE also volunteers to run the statewide campaign.
15.2. Discussion
In this section, we address guidance for the statewide ME&O efforts both for the 2013-2014 energy efficiency portfolios, as well as give direction for the balance of 2012. The 2008 Strategic Plan, along with its 2011 update, articulated the following vision for ME&O: "Californians will be engaged as partners in the state's energy efficiency, demand-side management and clean energy efforts by becoming fully informed of the importance of energy efficiency and their opportunities to act."416
Between 2009 and 2010, the Commission engaged in a careful evaluation of prior statewide marketing and branding efforts, as well as market and demographic research to understand how best to encourage energy awareness as well as energy efficiency action. Much of this work and research is still extremely relevant to tailoring education and outreach messages to certain communities and groups.
In October 2010, the Engage 360 brand name was launched as a "community-based effort to provide Californians with clear and relevant options for smart energy solutions."417 Engage 360 was focused on building a "movement" from the ground up, using grass roots and social media platforms to encourage awareness and engagement. Engage 360 was designed to build slowly by first reaching out to community and thought leaders, who in turn would reach out to individual consumers in their communities.
According to IOU comments, early experience with the Engage 360 brand was that its name did not resonate quickly with consumers and that a great deal of explanation was required for consumers to connect Engage 360 with action on energy efficiency. In addition, most parties who commented on the October 13, 2011 ACR do not support continuing the Engage 360 campaign.
Most parties, however, do support continuing a statewide ME&O program in some form. The original rationale for creation of a ME&O platform is still valid, including the following:
· There are many small individual brands in the energy efficiency space, such as utility brands, Energy Star, and individual program names, which is confusing to consumers.
· The utility ME&O efforts for various programs including energy efficiency, demand response, and energy savings assistance programs are disparate and potentially duplicative.
· A single brand or platform to which consumers may connect a number of different actions or programs would be beneficial.
As originally conceived, the statewide ME&O effort, though it may not have explicitly stated it, was aimed at mass market consumers, chiefly residential and small business customers. Larger commercial and industrial customers usually have employees such as energy managers who are responsible for their companies' energy consumption and expenses, and thus these types of customers have other independent channels through which to learn about energy efficiency opportunities. Residential and small business customers, by contrast, do not typically have specialized knowledge or experience in the energy area. Therefore, a targeted campaign for energy education and outreach for energy efficiency is most relevant for those residential and small business consumers.
Residential and small business consumers are also typically, as a group, less informed about the particulars of program offerings available from utilities and third parties to help meet their energy needs. Part of what the Commission has been trying to achieve for some time with our statewide ME&O efforts, particularly in the most recent energy efficiency and demand response program and budget proceedings, is one integrated approach that includes multiple demand-side options depending on the needs of the consumer. Our efforts at a unified approach and integrated message have been hampered by differing program cycles and proceedings among energy efficiency, demand response, distributed generation, and low-income programs, among other reasons. To help bring these efforts together under one umbrella with one unified approach, for the 2013-2014 time period, we will, for the first time, require all four utilities to file separate applications outlining their approach to statewide ME&O for all demand-side programs as well as generalized energy education. These applications will be separate from the applications for the 2013-2014 energy efficiency program portfolios and shall be filed no later than August 3, 2012.
Having addressed that procedural requirement and approach, we now turn to consideration of the brand options available as the umbrella brand for continuation of a statewide ME&O campaign targeted at residential and small business consumers. As already discussed above, Engage 360, both the brand and the "movement" approach, appear to be confusing and not resonating with consumers. In addition, as noted by Commissioner Ferron in his October 13, 2011 ACR, "building a brand is an extremely difficult undertaking." Given that, we are not prepared, at this time, to launch a whole new effort to develop yet another brand for consumer awareness of energy efficiency.
Instead, we consider two existing brand options: Flex Your Power and Energy Upgrade California. Flex Your Power was originally conceived during the California energy crisis of 2000 and 2001 as an emergency response to the threat of rolling blackouts. As such, its purpose was always more narrow and emergency-oriented than our intention for Engage 360, which was designed as a broad-based energy education and efficiency campaign as described in the Strategic Plan.
Consistent with the comments of the CAISO, we see value in continuing the emergency response portion of Flex Your Power -Flex Alert - in particular for use during hot summer months, or at any other time, when energy supplies have the potential to be tight. Emergency requests for action may be and should be connected to a larger information and education campaign, but they are fundamentally different because they are typically immediate and temporary requests for short-term conservation. Thus, although the emergency requests and an overall education and outreach campaign may co-exist, and they should be coordinated as we discuss further below, a campaign born out of emergency response does not seem appropriate to the larger message of energy education and outreach, or for general energy efficiency action. Further, as several of the utilities point out, the use of the word "power" is problematic for encouraging actions related to natural gas efficiency.
For these reasons, we do not think it appropriate to return to Flex Your Power as the umbrella brand for the overall statewide ME&O program. We do, however, request that the utilities plan to continue the limited use of Flex Alerts for the emergency type of advertising and calls for conservation advocated by the CAISO. In their 2013-2014 applications for statewide ME&O, the utilities should propose a budget for Flex Alerts and explain how they will be coordinated with the overall statewide education and outreach program.
We now consider the option of Energy Upgrade California as the brand name for an overall statewide ME&O program. Around the same time that the Engage 360 campaign began, the Energy Upgrade California program was launched as a residential whole-house retrofit program funded partly by IOU ratepayer energy efficiency programs and partly by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act federal economic stimulus funds. Energy Upgrade California took a much more traditional approach to marketing and outreach by funding advertising, billboards, and collateral materials. Perhaps partly because of this, Energy Upgrade California appears to be more instantly recognizable and associated with taking energy-related, and specifically energy efficiency, actions.
As currently used, Energy Upgrade California is the name of one specific program and not the name of a statewide marketing brand or campaign. However, given the intuitive nature of the name and its association with energy actions, it appears that the brand could be expanded to be more than just the name of one program. We see no reason why this name could not come to represent any and all demand-side management actions taken by homeowners and small businesses. Use of Energy Upgrade California would capture our desire to address these target markets and also continues the important emphasis on encouraging customer to take action.
Thus, for the remainder of 2012 and then for the 2013-2014 application on statewide ME&O, we direct the utilities to focus on transforming the Energy Upgrade California brand from the name of one program to more of an umbrella brand which residential consumers and small businesses can come to associate with learning about energy use information and taking energy efficiency and/or other demand-side management actions. Thus, the messages that come under the Energy Upgrade California umbrella should not be limited to energy efficiency, and should also include generalized energy education and awareness, such as information related to demand response, dynamic rate options, enabling technologies, climate change impacts, the Energy Savings Assistance Program (low-income energy efficiency program), distributed generation investment, smart grid upgrades, and any other general impacts of energy use for individuals or for the state as a whole. However, messages surrounding the use of the Energy Upgrade California brand must also continue to build its usefulness in prompting home and building owners to take immediate steps to achieve deep energy retrofits.
Utilizing Energy Upgrade California as an umbrella brand for statewide demand-side ME&O does not necessarily mean that it must be used exclusively or in every circumstance. Individual program names, IOU brands, or Commission brands or logos may be appropriate in particular circumstances and may serve to reduce confusion about what is being marketed or communicated. In their August 3, 2012 statewide ME&O applications, the utilities should include a narrative description of how they intend to approach brand and message coordination and a transition to the general umbrella of a newly-conceived Energy Upgrade California brand.
In general, the most important objective for all of the ME&O activities for demand-side programs in general is that they be coordinated. Thus, we affirm that the utilities should submit in their 2013-2014 statewide ME&O filings as directed in this decision a comprehensive plan for statewide ME&O of all demand-side programs under the general umbrella of Energy Upgrade California. In doing so, the utilities should utilize all prior work that supported Engage 360 such as the market and demographic research and market segmentation analysis to help tailor future marketing and education messages to relevant audiences, particularly within the residential and small commercial market segments.
As in prior decisions and rulings, our intent is to move away from separately authorized marketing and outreach programs and budgets for statewide demand response, energy efficiency, the California Solar Initiative, the Self-Generation Incentive Program, and other statewide demand-side program efforts. Under the general heading of Energy Upgrade California, we expect the utilities to craft a coordinated and leveraged approach that can offer separate program referrals depending on the desired actions by the customers. Our intent is to eliminate duplicative and potentially contradictory spending on separate marketing by utility or by program type. To the extent that the utilities still believe that program-specific and/or utility-specific marketing is warranted, they should explain, in any budget proposals, how the narrower marketing budget and approach relates to the general Energy Upgrade California umbrella approach.
Next we address how the statewide ME&O program should be overseen and administered. Administratively, the current approach of designating one utility as the coordinator and contracting agent for the statewide ME&O program, on behalf of all utilities whose ratepayers co-fund the program, seems to be a reasonable and straightforward approach that should be continued. However, below we discuss several changes we will make to this model for 2013-2014 statewide ME&O.
First, recent experience with coordinating Energy Upgrade California program marketing among utilities, the California Energy Commission, and local governments with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding, suggests the desirability of and need for an intermediate entity in between the utility coordinator and the marketing and web hosting firms hired to carry out the campaign. We are intrigued with the idea of having CCSE fulfill this intermediary implementation role, as suggested in their comments, for several reasons. First, they are mission-driven organization with a great deal of experience both administering and implementing demand-side programs that are driven by Commission policy. They administer the California Solar Initiative program in the SDG&E territory and have worked with both the California Energy Commission and Commission Staff on the GoSolar campaign, which has statewide reach.
Although the origin of their organization is local, they have expanded to be regional, and therefore they have good working relationships with local and regional government partners and with statewide local government organizations. In addition, they have experience implementing and administering programs for a number of different demand-side management areas including energy efficiency and distributed generation, and are attuned to the integrated nature of the ME&O efforts we are undertaking here. For all of these reasons, we would like to have CCSE serve as the statewide implementer for the ME&O program in 2013-2014.
In comments on the proposed decision, the utilities raised concerns about its recommendation not to conduct a competitive solicitation for this function. Ideally, our preference is always to conduct competitive solicitations. However, it is not required, and in this case, there are several reasons to proceed with CCSE as the statewide coordinator under contract to PG&E. First, the statewide marketing effort has been dormant for some time awaiting Commission direction on Engage 360. Thus, time is of the essence. Second, CCSE's role will be more one of design, oversight, and coordination. We still expect that marketing firms or contractors will be hired by CCSE to execute and deliver a campaign and statewide messages; the selection of such firms will occur through a competitive bid. Third, as we state above, we are confident that CCSE's experience as both an administrator and an implementer of programs qualifies the organization uniquely; there is no other similar organization that we are aware of in the state.
We will also continue to need a utility to serve as the statewide ME&O coordinator and contracting agent, on behalf of all utilities whose ratepayers fund the statewide ME&O activities. SCE is the current statewide ME&O coordinator for energy efficiency and given that SCE, in its comments, did not support continuation of a statewide ME&O campaign at all, it also seems reasonable to reassign contractual responsibility and coordination of the campaign to another utility that is more supportive of the basic concept and willing to devote the necessary resources toward the effort.
The other options for utility coordinators and contracting agents for the statewide ME&O effort are SDG&E/SoCalGas or PG&E. Both the Sempra utilities and PG&E were supportive in their comments of continuing a statewide ME&O campaign in some form. However, given the size of the budget in the past portfolio cycle and the statewide reach of the revised program and approach we discuss herein, we think the Sempra utilities are too small and are unlikely to have the necessary staffing resources immediately to handle the statewide campaign coordination. Thus, we require PG&E to take over coordination of and contracting for the statewide ME&O campaign effectively immediately upon the adoption of this decision.
Thus, in summary, we require PG&E to begin serving as the utility coordinator of the statewide ME&O program immediately after the adoption of this decision in 2012, and to enter into a contract with CCSE by no later than July 1, 2012 to conduct the statewide implementation of the ME&O campaign and to coordinate broader stakeholder input on and participation in the statewide program beginning in 2013. CCSE should have a budget of at least $500,000 for 2012 startup and will likely then need to subcontract with marketing firms and web providers to conduct the actual campaign efforts and create the marketing materials for 2013-2014. We expect that any subcontracts to CCSE will be competitively bid.
These implementation details will be up to CCSE and we do not further specify them in this decision. We do, however, require PG&E and CCSE to coordinate closely with California Energy Commission and Commission Staff to set up a reasonable governance and oversight mechanism to ensure the newly-reformulated Energy Upgrade California brand and campaign is meeting the Commission's objectives.
To that end, the utilities should propose in their 2013-2014 statewide ME&O application program performance metrics for statewide ME&O activities that reflect the direction in this decision, whether they be existing, amended, or new metrics. The utilities shall also propose, in consultation with CCSE, which entities will have responsibility for meeting the performance metrics.
To facilitate a transition to utilizing Energy Upgrade California as more of an umbrella brand in 2013-2014 as directed in this decision, some transitional activity and additional budget for Energy Upgrade California activities will be reasonable to undertake in 2012. Some marketing activity surrounding Energy Upgrade California to date has been funded by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds administered by the California Energy Commission that are set to expire in early 2012.
Ecology Action, in its comments on the October 13, 2011 ACR, suggested augmenting Energy Upgrade California marketing funding in 2012 by $12 million out of funds freed up by freezing Engage 360 spending. SDG&E/SoCalGas, on the other hand, suggested using 35% of the remaining statewide ME&O budget, which would amount to approximately $17 million for the rest of 2012. Both of these figures seem too large, given that we are requesting that the utilities, in cooperation with CCSE, come back to us in their applications with a more robust proposal for how to transition to using Energy Upgrade California more broadly. On the other hand, we do not want to lose momentum with consumer recognition of the Energy Upgrade California brand in the meantime.
Thus, we authorize the utilities to spend no more than $5 million on brand maintenance and transition for Energy Upgrade California in 2012. This includes the amount of funding already authorized via an ACR from Commissioner Ferron issued January 31, 2012 on the Energy Upgrade California web portal expenditures, which are further discussed below. This decision does not disturb the directives in the January 31, 2012 ACR, which essentially require SDG&E to contract to cover web portal expenses for the remainder of 2012; we affirm that direction in this decision and clarify that SDG&E has flexibility to choose the most expeditious contract path to ensure that the Energy Upgrade California web portal functionality is maintained in 2012 and that the expenses do not exceed $588,000.
In funding Energy Upgrade California marketing and outreach expenditures both for the web portal and the transition toward utilizing Energy Upgrade California as an umbrella brand in 2012, the utilities should consult closely with CCSE, the California Energy Commission, Commission Staff, and the local government entities running the Energy Upgrade California programs now funded by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to ensure continuity and avoid any confusion. PG&E shall also enter into a contract with CCSE no later than July 1, 2012 for an amount of no less than $500,000 for the remainder of 2012 to begin transitioning into their role as the statewide implementer beginning in 2013.
We also direct the utilities to spend a minimum of $ 5 million and a maximum of $10 million during the remainder of 2012 out of the original $60 million statewide ME&O budget for 2010-2012 on other program activities associated with the original Energy Upgrade California residential retrofit program. This could include augmenting the Energy Upgrade California program budget for the utility programs, or the continuation, supported by ratepayer funds, of the California Energy Commission/American Recovery and Reinvestment Act activities originally funded in 2010-2011, such as local government or third-party programs associated with Energy Upgrade California, including non-utility marketing and financing programs, or workforce, education, and training efforts. In allocating these funds, we require the utilities to consult with the California Energy Commission, local government entities, and Commission Staff, and to develop a set of standard criteria and make available funding only to the most successful efforts that should be continued and/or provide models that can be replicated in the future.
The remainder of the $60 million in 2010-2012 statewide ME&O funds, after subtracting Engage 360 funds already spent in 2010-2012, Energy Upgrade California marketing and web portal expenses for 2012, and any additional programmatic expenditures authorized herein, should be returned to ratepayers either by reducing balancing account balances or by utilizing funds already collected in balancing accounts toward the 2013-2014 statewide ME&O program.
Next, we turn to the question of how to handle the web portals for both Engage 360 and Energy Upgrade California. Given that this decision recommends discontinuing the Engage 360 name permanently, the web portal for Engage 360 should eventually be dismantled and removed from the internet. However, the Energy Upgrade California web portal currently utilizes the rebate finder database portion of the Engage 360 web site. Several parties recommended continuing to maintain and enhance this database. We agree. The rebate finder database is one of the most functional and critical portions of the current Energy Upgrade California web portal. Thus, this functionality should be maintained and improved as we transition toward a broader use of the Energy Upgrade California name and web portal.
A critical assessment should also be made of the other content from the Engage 360 and/or Flex Your Power web sites that should be migrated toward use under the Energy Upgrade California umbrella in the future. In their statewide ME&O applications, the utilities should propose a budget for fully transitioning all relevant material to the Energy Upgrade California web portal and shutting down the Engage 360 web site entirely by no later than the end of 2013, preferably earlier. The utilities should also propose a budget for comprehensively augmenting the Energy Upgrade California web portal to serve as a one-stop-shop for demand-side program information, as well as generalized energy education information for residential and small business consumers, while still continuing to prompt home and building owners to immediately take action and to participate in available energy efficiency programs. It should also serve as a repository of information for the utilities, practitioners, the California Energy Commission, local government programs, and third-party programs. While this proposal should be comprehensive, it should seek to minimize ratepayer costs for web portal maintenance.
Finally, consistent with our directives in the demand response and low income areas, we encourage the utilities and CCSE, in the design and delivery of the statewide marketing and outreach campaign, to utilize the existing network of community-based organizations and local and ethnic media such as newspapers, radio, and television. The utilities' ME&O applications should recognize the importance of these channels to reach and penetrate some of the harder-to-reach communities and help them identify energy saving opportunities.
Community based organizations can be especially important in outreach efforts because many have proven track records and have earned the trust of their communities. Coordination with such organizations can also yield the added benefit of job creation in particular communities. These strategies are consistent with the Legislature's and the Commission's long-standing support for encouraging greater economic opportunity for women, minority, and disabled veteran business enterprises captured in both General Order 156 and § 8281.
In summary, we direct the IOUs to include funding proposals for the Energy Upgrade California web portal in their 2013-2014 statewide ME&O program applications. These proposals shall: 1) be based on consultation with CCSE, Commission Staff, the California Energy Commission, and leading Energy Upgrade California stakeholders as identified by the energy agencies; 2) seek to maintain and expand, as appropriate, critical web portal functions and existing oversight structures; and 3) seek to minimize web portal maintenance costs while maintaining its support for driving market transformation.
In comments on the proposed decision, all utilities raised concerns about the role of local marketing relative to our discussion of statewide marketing efforts. We clarify that nothing in this section is intended to prevent utilities from continuing to conduct local and targeted marketing that is service territory and/or program-specific. However, statewide marketing and local marketing should still be coordinated and the strategies for each should be designed to complement each other. In their August 3, 2012 applications for statewide marketing and outreach, the utilities should describe their expected roles and complementary strategies for statewide and local marketing efforts.
407 April 11, 2008 Joint ACR Providing Guidance on Integrated Demand-Side Management in 2009-2011 in R.06-04-010 and R.07-01-041.
408 See D.07-10-032 for program planning, D.09-08-027 for demand response portfolios and D.09-09-047 for energy efficiency portfolios.
409 D.09-09-047 at 383, Ordering Paragraph 35.
410 D.09-09-047 at 381 and 382, Ordering Paragraph 34.
411 August 27, 2010 ALJ Ruling Providing Guidance for the 2012-2014 Demand Response Applications in R.07-01-041.
412 August 27, 2010 ALJ Ruling Providing Guidance for the 2012-2014 Demand Response Applications in R.07-01-041 at 15.
413 December 15, 2011 Proposed Decision of ALJ Hymes for Application 11-03-001 at 80.
414 December 15, 2011 Proposed Decision of ALJ Hymes for Application 11-03-001 at 81, and at 230, Ordering Paragraph 11.
415 December 15, 2011 Proposed Decision of ALJ Hymes for Application A. 11-03-001 at 82.
416 Strategic Plan, Chapter 10, at 75.
417 Engage 360 press release, "CPUC Introduces New Statewide Brand and Website to Motivate Consumers to Embrace Clean Energy Solutions as a Way of Life," October 14, 2010.
