10. Assignment of Proceeding and Other Procedural Matters
Dian M. Grueneich is the assigned Commissioner in these proceedings and Kim Malcolm is the assigned ALJ for this portion of this proceeding.
1. Californians and the goals articulated in AB 32 to reduce greenhouse gasses would be served by a more comprehensive approach to energy efficiency program planning, design and delivery.
2. Taking full advantage of the potential for energy efficiency in California will require the utilities to coordinate with other entities, leverage available resources of other programs, integrate energy efficiency program design and delivery with other demand-side customer offerings, develop longer term approaches to energy efficiency, promote market transformation and plan energy efficiency programs more strategically.
3. Utility energy efficiency programs have tended to emphasize programs targeting measures with shorter term impacts rather than those that would accomplish market transformation.
4. A comprehensive statewide strategic plan will serve the state's interest in pursuing all cost-effective short-term and long-term energy savings and is in the Commission's interest in assuring the utilities are pursuing the appropriate mix of programs to meet energy efficiency goals.
5. Having the Commission lead the initial work on the statewide strategic plan will promote a process that is inclusive, collaborative and reflects the Commission's policy objectives.
6. Successful programs targeting energy efficiency improvements in residential new construction appear to have the potential to provide substantial, permanent and cost-effective energy savings in California.
7. A reasonable goal is for all new residential dwellings, constructed in 2020 and after, to consume no net energy and to set an interim goal that 50% of new homes achieve energy savings that meet the Tier II standards based on the 2005 version of Title 24of the Energy Commission's New Solar Homes program by 2011.
8. Successful programs targeting energy efficiency improvements in commercial new construction appear to have the potential to provide substantial, permanent and cost-effective energy savings in California.
9. A reasonable long-term goal is to have all new commercial buildings constructed in 2030 or later to consume "zero net energy."
10. Successful energy efficiency programs in new residential and commercial construction markets will require coordination and collaboration with and the commitments of various governmental and business organizations, training of industry workers, access to information about design standards, best practices, cost and end-use data, and the use of a systems approach to energy efficiency installations.
11. HVAC programs could potentially lead to substantial cost-effective energy savings during peak periods.
12. HVAC program success is impeded due to poor compliance with codes and standards, poor quality installations, lacking technologies that are tailored to specific climates, and the failure to apply a systems approach to HVAC solutions.
13. Successful HVAC energy efficiency programs will require a comprehensive approach to overcoming existing problems and should involve manufacturers and distributors, consumer education, contractor training, verification of quality installation and maintenance, and compliance with codes and standards, and should be coordinated with the requirements of AB2021.
14. The utilities and stakeholders, working with the CEC, should develop short-term mid-term and year 2020 savings targets for the HVAC Programmatic Initiative.
15. Industrial facilities present opportunities for substantial cost-effective energy savings. However, the uncertainties associated with the state's future implementation of AB 32 may discourage customer investments in energy efficiency measures. It is therefore premature to undertake a major industrial energy efficiency programmatic initiative until those uncertainties are resolved.
16. Marketing, education, and outreach (ME&O) are essential components of successful efforts to reduce energy demand in California. Oversight and accountability are essential to those programs on behalf of ratepayers who fund them. The utilities can make most effective use of ME&O programs by incorporating them in their strategic plans for energy efficiency programs.
17. Because the state appears to have a shortage of well-trained energy efficiency technicians and professionals, expanded training programs are needed to assure the effective and widespread implementation of energy efficiency programs.
18. The EEGA is a useful repository for energy efficiency program information.
19. An energy efficiency web portal could be useful to the public and members of government and industry in accessing relevant energy efficiency program and technical information.
20. The utilities' best practices database and website is only useful to the extent it is current.
21. An ME&O task force could facilitate the development of elements of the strategic plan, the utilities' portfolio applications and the energy efficiency web portal.
22. The Commission's EM&V studies are structured to analyze ME&O programs and practices, among other things, and may provide useful information about whether to change those programs and practices.
23. The utilities developed reasonable criteria for the selection of third-party contractors for the 2006-2008 solicitations that could be applied to the 2009-2011 third-party solicitations.
24. This order provides policy and program guidance that obviates the need for a two-step 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolio review process, as conducted for the 2006-2008 program portfolios.
25. Utility portfolios for the period 2006-2008 appear to emphasize energy efficiency measures that have shorter term and immediate impacts rather than measures that have longer-term savings and more enduring market effects.
26. The Commission's rules require the utilities to include programs that have long-term impacts and "aggressively" increase overall capacity utilization and reduce peak load.
27. The strategic planning approach established in this order, certain rule changes, and the incentive award structure adopted in this proceeding will promote more comprehensive and diverse energy efficiency portfolios and programs that have longer term impacts and reduce peak loads, and will discourage cream skimming.
28. The utilities' existing portfolios do not appear to include programs that have long-term impacts, or aggressively increase overall capacity utilization and reduce peak load.
29. The strategic planning process adopted herein will promote the application of best practices and innovation.
30. Utility partnerships with local governments may promote cost-effective and innovative energy efficiency programs. The strategic planning process adopted herein will promote these partnerships.
31. On-bill financing may promote cost-effective energy efficiency investments that may not otherwise be made.
32. Loans to government agencies are likely to present low risk of default.
33. SDG&E, SoCalGas and SCE have pilot on-bill financing programs for small business customers.
34. Existing three-year budget cycles present problems with program delivery when funding is interrupted.
35. Permitting the utilities to spend funds from the subsequent budget cycle in the current budget period for start-up costs will mitigate problems with program delivery.
36. A continuous or "rolling" budget cycle may mitigate funding problems associated with distinct budget cycles.
37. The utilities would be more likely to promote investments in projects with long lead times if they are able to commit future budget cycle funds to such projects.
38. Counting energy savings from mid-cycle program funding augmentations in the calculation of portfolio cost-effectiveness and performance earnings basis for utility incentive awards will not compromise ratepayer interests.
39. Counting the savings from mid-cycle program augmentations toward achievement of adopted energy savings goals would permit the utilities to more easily achieve the MPS by spending additional funds, to the detriment of ratepayers.
40. Most parties agree that PAGs have not been successful in promoting innovation, best practices or improved cost-effectiveness.
41. Most parties agree that PRGs have promoted fairness in the process of contracting with third parties.
42. Some of the work of the PRGs and all of the work of the PAGs will be subsumed in the process of developing a strategic plan.
43. Improvements to EM&V processes may make EM&V products more useful and effective.
44. Modifying the adopted energy savings goals would require an elaborate technical exercise that is not justified on the basis of the record here.
45. The utilities have not made a persuasive case that the adopted energy savings goals are unreasonable for the period 2009-2011 in light of existing circumstances and expected changes in markets, technologies and consumer behavior.
46. SDG&E's energy savings goal was based on different calculators than those used for SCE, SoCalGas and PG&E, and is arguably inequitable.
47. The utilities do not have authority to enforce codes and standards.
48. Currently, 50% of verified energy savings from the utilities' pre-2006 C&S advocacy work, and 100% of post-2006 C&S advocacy work, is counted toward achievement of energy savings goals.
49. Some utility programs result in "spillover" effects where customers undertake energy efficiency measures independently, either after having participated in a utility program or where they may have been influenced by a utility program but did not participate in it.
50. Quantifying spillover from "non-participants" could be an especially difficult task.
1. The utilities should be ordered to develop a single statewide strategic plan that would serve as a roadmap for long term and nearer term activities to promote maximum energy savings in California as set forth herein. The strategic plan should emphasize energy efficiency programs with long-term energy savings, enduring market effects, the programmatic initiatives adopted herein and other elements as set forth in this order. It should provide program direction and development through 2020 and beyond and be included with each utility's application for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios.
2. The assigned Commissioner to this proceeding should lead the initial process for the utilities' development of a strategic plan in order to assure the process is inclusive, collaborative and recognizes the Commission's objectives and policies. This process should solicit the participation of a wide variety of parties and interests, and be publicly noticed, as discussed herein.
3. The utilities should solicit, seriously consider and respond to the views and analysis of a wide range of stakeholders on a strategic plan.
4. The statewide strategic plan should address ways to accomplish the goals for new commercial and residential buildings set forth herein.
5. The utilities should be ordered to conduct stakeholder meetings on new construction programs as set forth herein.
6. The utilities should be ordered to conduct stakeholder meetings on HVAC program issues as set forth herein.
7. The statewide strategic plan should address ways to overcome barriers to cost-effective and successful implementation of HVAC programs.
8. The utilities' statewide strategic plan and their 2009-2011 portfolio applications should include proposals for industrial programs.
9. ME&O programs should be more strategic and comprehensive in the way they are used to promote energy efficiency and the statewide energy efficiency strategic plan should address ME&O as set forth herein.
10. The utilities' applications for 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolio approvals should present proposed funding for EEGA as a separate budget line item.
11. The utilities should work with Commission staff to develop an energy efficiency web portal that provides an integrated point of access to energy efficiency program information.
12. The utilities should regularly update their best practices data bases with information on new programs, end use technologies and implementation strategies.
13. The Commission should lead an ME&O task force to assist in relevant aspects of the statewide strategic plan and utility portfolio applications, develop an energy efficiency web portal and consider the development of a brand for California energy efficiency products and services.
14. The statewide strategic and utility applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios should provide details about how education, marketing and outreach activities will be used to promote energy efficiency programs in an integrated and coordinated fashion, as set forth herein.
15. The statewide strategic and utility applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios should provide details about how to improve training of energy efficiency technicians and professionals as set forth herein.
16. The Commission should reconsider its approach to ME&O funding and contracting procedures if it determines that existing programs, practices and procedures are not effective or efficiently managed.
17. The utilities third-party solicitations should be complete by the time they file their respective applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios, as set forth herein.
18. The utilities should immediately begin planning for 2009-2011, using existing 2006-2008 funds, to ensure that third-party solicitations and other 2009-2011 planning activities are completed by the time the utilities file their respective applications for approval of the 2009-2011 Energy Efficiency portfolios.
19. The utilities should be permitted to count extensions of successful 2006-2008 third-party programs as part of the 20% of their respective budgets set aside for third-party contractor programs as set forth herein. These extensions should be able to be structured as bilateral contracts.
20. The utilities should include in their applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios the cumulative expected lifecycle savings of their portfolios, as set forth herein.
21. The Commission should not reconsider cost-effectiveness methodologies as they apply to energy efficiency measures at this time.
22. The utilities should be required to demonstrate that 2009-2011 portfolios comply with Policy Rule II.5.
23. The Commission should modify Policy Rule II.5 to demonstrate that proposed energy efficiency portfolios will improve system load factor as set forth herein.
24. The utilities should be ordered to convene at least one statewide meeting every year with interested local government agencies to pursue opportunities with local governments for energy efficiency programs and partnerships.
25. The utilities should be ordered to create or continue on-bill financing pilot programs for small commercial customers, propose on-bill financing programs for government agencies and to assess the opportunities for on-bill financing programs for residential customers.
26. SCE, SoCalGas and SDG&E should be ordered to present evaluations of their respective on-bill financing programs as part of the strategic planning process.
27. The utilities should be permitted to borrow funding from subsequent budget cycles for early start up program costs that occur prior to the start of the subsequent budget cycle, when the utilities have no other available energy efficiency funds (i.e., unspent, uncommitted funds from previous program years, or 2006-2008 funds that will not be needed) to devote to this purpose, as set forth herein. The amount should not exceed 15% of the current budget except as authorized by advice letter.
28. The utilities' applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios should propose a "rolling budget" cycle process as set forth herein.
29. The Commission's rules should be modified to permit the utilities to make commitments of funds from future budget cycle to projects that will not be completed within the concurrent budget cycle, consistent with the conditions set forth herein.
30. Energy savings from mid-cycle program funding augmentations should be counted in the calculation of portfolio cost-effectiveness and performance earnings basis for utility incentive awards. Savings associated with any mid-cycle funding augmentation to the LIEE program will not count towards the MPS. The savings from mid-cycle program augmentations should not count toward achievement of energy savings goals for the purpose of assessing whether performance has reached the MPS.
31. The Energy Efficiency Policy Manual and related rules should be modified to be made consistent with the provisions of this order. The assigned Commissioner should be authorized to approve those modifications, consistent with this order.
32. Section 1801 et seq., governing intervenor compensation requires the Commission to grant compensation to representing customers who can demonstrate contributions to a Commission order or decision, and which do not duplicate the work of other parties.
33. The PAG should be eliminated because its functions will be subsumed in the strategic planning and portfolio development process.
34. The PRG should be retained to oversee third-party bidding processes and related matters, as set forth herein.
35. The assigned ALJ and assigned Commissioner should be authorized to modify the PRG process as necessary for its effective, fair and efficient operation.
36. Compensation for participation in PRG meetings should be granted to parties who can demonstrate contributions to a Commission order or decision, consistent with Section 1801 et seq.
37. EM&V procedures should be modified to promote their usefulness and effectiveness as set forth herein.
38. The Commission should not entertain modifications to adopted energy savings goals at this time with the exception that it should consider modifications to SDG&E's energy savings goals if SDG&E can demonstrate that its proposal is technically sound and does not compromise an aggressive energy efficiency strategy in its territory.
39. The assigned Commissioner should determine the forum and schedule for considering modifications to SDG&E's energy savings goals.
40. The existing practice for counting C&S advocacy work should be continued for the 2009-2011 budget cycle, and similar practices should be applied to any proposed programs addressing C&S compliance.
41. The utilities should be permitted to propose ways to count work on HVAC compliance toward energy savings goals.
42. The utilities should be permitted to propose ways to count work on water conservation programs (other than the pilot programs at issue in A.07-01-024 et al.) toward energy savings goals, assuming those programs are cost-effective and have been implemented pursuant to Commission order or policy.
43. Utilities should continue to count energy savings from local government programs toward utility energy savings goals in cases where local government program savings are directly attributable to utility programs.
44. To the extent program impact studies can identify quantifiable savings, the utilities should be able to count toward 2009-2011 energy savings goals the "spillover" effects that occur where customers undertake energy efficiency measures independently and after having participated in a utility program.
45. The Commission staff should study ways to quantify both "participant" and "non-participant" spillover for purposes of counting related energy savings toward the achievement of energy savings goals.
46. The Commission should retain existing practice with regard to counting the effects of low income energy efficiency programs toward the achievement of energy savings goals.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) (herein referred to jointly as "the utilities") shall, no later than February 1, 2008, jointly submit to the Administrative Law Judge assigned to this proceeding and the Energy Division a single statewide preliminary strategic plan as set forth in this Order.
2. The utilities shall jointly serve the preliminary strategic plan on all parties to this proceeding and any member of the public who requests a copy. The utilities shall solicit written comments on the preliminary strategic plan and conduct related meetings in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco in the month of February.
3. The utilities shall establish a California Energy Efficiency Strategic Planning web portal by November 15, 2007. The utilities shall post on this website all Strategic Plan working meeting agendas and meeting summaries, key reference documents and work products, the draft Strategic Plan (once prepared), and stakeholder written comments received on the draft plan. The preliminary strategic plan and the parties' comments on it shall not be filed in this proceeding.
4. As set forth in this Order, the utilities shall file a final strategic plan as a joint application no later than May 15, 2008.
5. The preliminary strategic plan and the final proposed strategic plan shall include: An outline of the strategies underlying design and implementation of 2009-2001 energy efficiency programs, as described in this order and with specific attention to residential new construction, commercial new construction and heating/ventilation/air conditioning programs; an outline of activities and milestones for implementing energy efficiency programs and strategies through 2020, as discussed in this order, and consistent with the Energy Efficiency Policy Manual and the policies and objectives set forth in this order. The strategic plan shall include proposals for industrial energy efficiency programs as set forth herein. In addition, the final proposed strategic plan shall include a list of all major comments received on the draft plan, and the utilities' response as to the disposition of each.
6. Prior to the February 1, 2008 release of the preliminary statewide Strategic Plan, the utilities are strongly encouraged to hold a working session enabling active stakeholder participants to the strategic planning process to preview and comment on the proposed draft comments. The utilities shall incorporate useful suggestions for modifications or improvements to the plan prior to its general release on February 1, 2008.
7. The Energy Efficiency Policy Manual shall be modified by adding the following Rule 12 to Section IV (Cost-Effectiveness):
12. Costs and energy savings from mid-budget cycle funding additions for programs other than low income energy efficiency (LIEE) programs shall be counted when calculating portfolio cost-effectiveness and the performance earnings basis in applying the energy efficiency risk/return incentive mechanism. Energy savings from mid-budget cycle funding additions shall count towards the utilities' energy efficiency goals for resource planning purposes only. Such savings shall not be counted towards the energy efficiency goals for the purpose of 1) satisfying the minimum performance standard (MPS) associated with the energy efficiency risk/reward incentive mechanism, or 2) determining which "performance band" (e.g., deadband or applicable earnings tier level) should be used in calculating incentive payments or penalties. Each proposal to augment energy efficiency program funding must be carefully reviewed to ensure that such funding is not misclassified as LIEE, given the implications associated with LIEE classification that carry over to the adopted incentive mechanism. Savings associated with any mid-cycle funding augmentation to the LIEE program will not count towards the MPS.
8. The statewide strategic plan shall propose a long term, coordinated approach to marketing, education and outreach, as set forth herein, that shall emphasize ways to integrate outreach efforts on climate change and conservation, joint marketing with other energy programs, and ways to engage customers with limited skills in English.
9. The Strategic Plan shall include a section regarding specific training strategies for applicable sectors and markets. Utilities shall include specific training strategies for reaching minority, low-income, and other disadvantaged communities in their Strategic Plan.
10. Each utility shall file an application for approval of its 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolio no later than May 15, 2008.
11. SCE, SoCalGas and SDG&E shall present, as part of the strategic planning process, assessments of their respective on-bill financing pilot programs.
12. The utilities' applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios shall be informed by and complement the proposed statewide strategic plan and shall include strategies for programs targeting residential new construction, commercial new construction, and heating/ventilation/air conditioning measures, as set forth herein. The applications shall also include proposals for industrial energy efficiency programs as set forth herein. The applications shall reflect regional and local variations complementing the proposed statewide plan.
13. The utilities shall include in their applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios: (1) the cumulative expected lifecycle savings of their portfolios, as set forth herein; (2) an explanation of the efforts they have made to expand third-party and local government partnerships; (3) proposals for continuing or creating on-bill financing programs for small business customers and institutional customers, and an evaluation of the prospects for on-bill financing programs for residential customers, as set forth herein; (4) proposals for a "rolling budget" cycle process as set forth herein; (5) plans for encumbering funds from the subsequent budget cycle for long-term projects subject to the conditions set forth herein; (6) budgets and plans for their energy efficiency process evaluations and market analysis projects; (7) address how the two Zero Net Energy programmatic initiatives will be integrated into existing programs to support the development of the Energy Commission's codes and standards, as well as other types of measures; and (8) a report on the status of AB 32's implementation and proposed program changes that would complement rules and policies, if adopted, including and in particular programs targeting energy efficiency measures in the industrial sector.
14. The utilities' applications for approval of 2009-2011 portfolios and the proposed statewide strategic plan shall reflect the modifications made to the Energy Efficiency Policy Manual and related rules, as approved by the assigned Commissioner and consistent with this order.
15. The utilities' third-party solicitations shall be completed by the time they file their respective applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios, as set forth herein. The utilities are authorized to count extensions of successful 2006-2008 third-party programs as part of the 20% of their respective budgets set aside for third-party contractor programs as set forth herein. These extensions may be structured as bilateral contracts.
16. The utilities shall, within 30 days of the effective date of this order, conduct stakeholder meetings on topics relating to new residential construction as set forth herein. The utilities shall solicit the involvement of key stakeholders identified herein including home energy rating services, local government planning and building officials, Energy Commission staff, consumer groups, representatives of the Building Industry Association, and representatives of relevant trade associations, developers, buildings and labor groups.
17. The utilities' development of a plan to promote energy efficient new commercial construction shall solicit the participation of the Energy Commission staff, publicly-owned utilities, major commercial real estate developers, building construction companies, and leaders in the public and private sectors.
18. The utilities shall, within 30 days of the effective date of this order, conduct the first of a series of working sessions with key stakeholders identified herein to develop a course of action to improve heating, ventilation and air conditioning energy efficiency programs as set forth herein.
19. The utilities and Commission staff shall update and expand existing energy efficiency websites to make these tools more useful for both the energy industry and the general public. Commission staff shall work with the utilities to develop Energy Efficiency Web Portal.
20. The utilities' proposed energy efficiency portfolios for 2009-2011 shall be designed in recognition of the following evaluation criteria:
1) Are the proposed portfolios cost-effective on a prospective basis taking reasonable account of uncertainty with respect to key cost-effectiveness input parameters?
2) Are the portfolios designed such that it will be feasible for the utilities to meet or exceed the Commission's energy savings goals? If each of the annual goals cannot be met in light of the accounting and ramping up transition issues described in D.04-09-060 and D.05 04-051, will the proposed portfolio plans meet or exceed the 2011 cumulative energy savings goal?
3) Are the portfolios and associated funding levels appropriately balanced between activities that address short-term and long-term savings?
4) Do the portfolio plans provide sufficient strategies and funding to address opportunities to reduce critical peak loads and improve system load factors?
5) Do the plans reasonably allocate funds among market sectors and applications with respect to the savings potential that has been identified in the potential studies?
6) Do the plans adequately describe strategies to minimize lost opportunities, per Rule 5?
7) Do the plans provide for adequate statewide coordination of similar program offerings?
8) Do the plans reflect a long-term strategic plan that exhibits well-integrated planning along the following four dimensions?
a) Coordination across stages of technology and program developments, such as research and development, emerging technology promotion, public outreach, upstream distributor marketing, utility customer-focused programs, codes and standards advocacy, and other activities that can take advantage of statewide, regional, and national leverage?
b) Leveraging the involvement and contributions from a variety of actors and financial resources, e.g. federal government, national manufacturers and distributors, national and regional building industry organizations and professionals, contractors, and educational institutions?
c) Program designs and implementation strategies that explicitly seek to overcome identified market barriers to increased efficiency adoption? and
d) Identifying an "end game" for each technology or practice that transforms building, purchasing, and use decisions to become either "standard practice" (sometimes referred to as "market transformation"), or incorporated into minimum codes and standards?
9) Are there reasonable proposals for any fund shifting and program flexibility rules that should be adopted for these program plans?
10) Are the overall funding levels proposed for the portfolio plans reasonable?
11) Is there evidence of program continuity across types of programs, or implementers, for those programs which have proven successful and cost-effective?
12) Are there appropriate strategies and program designs proposed for the three targeted programmatic initiatives?
21. The utilities shall convene at least one statewide meeting every year with interested local government agencies to pursue opportunities with local governments for energy efficiency programs and partnerships and shall extend invitations to publicly owned utilities (POUs).
22. The utilities are authorized to borrow funding from subsequent budget cycles for start up costs associated with programs in the subsequent budget cycle when the utilities have no other available energy efficiency funds (i.e. unspent, uncommitted funds from previous program years, or 2006-2008 funds that will not be needed) to devote to this purpose, as set forth herein. The amount shall not exceed 15% of the current budget amount except as authorized by advice letter.
23. Energy savings from mid-cycle program funding augmentations shall be counted in the calculation of portfolio cost-effectiveness and performance earnings basis for utility incentive awards. The savings from mid-cycle program augmentations shall not count toward achievement of energy savings goals for the purpose of assessing whether performance has reached the minimum performance standard, as set forth herein.
24. The energy savings goals adopted in D.04-09-060 are retained for the utilities during the 2009-2011 budget period with the exception that SDG&E may propose modifications to its energy savings goals for the 2009-2013 period, as set forth herein.
25. The Commission will conduct a study to guide appropriate energy efficiency goals for 2014-2020 and beyond.
26. The existing practice for counting verified energy savings for pre-2006 codes and standards (C&S) advocacy work is continued for the 2009-2011 budget cycle. The utilities may propose ways to count work on C&S compliance toward energy savings goals.
27. To the extent program impact studies can identify quantifiable savings, the utilities may count toward 2009-2011 energy savings goals the "spillover" effects that occur where customers undertake energy efficiency measures independently and after having participated in a utility program.
28. The effects of low income energy efficiency programs shall continue to count toward the achievement of energy savings goals, although they will not be included in the calculation of incentive awards.
29. The PAG is eliminated because its functions will be subsumed in the strategic planning and portfolio development process.
30. The PRG is retained to oversee third-party bidding processes and related matters, as set forth herein.
31. The assigned Commissioner and assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) are authorized to provide clarification and direction as required with respect to the content and development of the strategic plan.
32. The assigned ALJ is authorized to direct the utilities to provide information and reports that track the implementation and application of modified fund-shifting rules.
33. The assigned Commissioner and assigned ALJ are authorized to modify the PRG process as necessary for the effective, fair and efficient conduct of this proceeding and related processes.
34. The Commission staff shall distribute (1) a list that summarizes suggestions and ideas for implementing the energy efficiency programmatic initiatives adopted in this decision, and (2) a list of exemplary programs in other states and countries that the utilities should investigate as part of developing the 2009-2011 portfolios, no later than 15 days of the effective date of this decision.
35. The Commission staff's management of Evaluation, Measurement and Verification of energy efficiency programs shall include meetings, provision of information, and procedures described herein.
a) Convene regular meetings with utilities and interested parties to develop common understandings about the types of data and information required and the processes to be used;
b) Identify key evaluation topics that may be studied early in the cycle to provide information to utilities and other program implementers;
c) Where possible, provide early feedback of EM&V findings to the utilities and program implementers;
d) Convene an annual meeting with the utilities and other interested parties to describe and discuss any EM&V findings that could lead to improvements in the program portfolio; and
e) Report findings following the process evaluation and market impact studies of the 2006-2008 program cycle on the ability of current protocols to measure such as "non-participant spillover" savings and to propose possible revisions to market effects protocols, utility savings goals, and/or performance incentive mechanisms for subsequent action by this Commission. This report will serve to initiate workshop discussion on the subject in 2009.
36. The Commission staff shall develop a proposed schedule and list of proposed information requirements relevant to the utilities' applications for approval of 2009-2011 energy efficiency portfolios, as set forth herein.
37. The Commission staff shall study ways to quantify both "participant" and "non-participant" spillover for purposes of counting related energy savings toward the achievement of energy savings goals, as set forth herein.
38. The assigned Commissioner and assigned ALJ are authorized to take all procedural steps required to promote the objectives set forth in this order, including modifications to the schedule set forth herein and as required to assure the effective, fair and efficient conduct of this proceeding.
39. The assigned Commissioner is hereby authorized to approve modifications to the Energy Efficiency Policy Manual and related rules, consistent with this decision.
40. The assigned Commissioner and assigned ALJ are authorized to determine the forum and schedule for an inquiry addressing SDG&E's adopted energy savings goals and whether they should be modified for the 2009-2013 period. SDG&E shall have the burden to demonstrate the reasonableness of modified energy savings goals.
41. As soon as practical, Commission staff shall post to the Commission website an updated version of the Energy Efficiency Policy Manual with the modifications addressed in this decision.
42. A prehearing conference and working session is scheduled in this proceeding for November 5, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. at 505 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, at which the Commission will address the scope, schedule and tasks required to prepare a statewide strategic plan, as set forth herein.
43. The Commission will convene an ME&O Task Force within 60 days of the final adoption of this Order. All interested parties are encouraged to attend the meeting session, which will address a course of action for ME&O issues as set forth herein.
44. The Executive Director may hire and manage one or more contractors to assist Energy Division staff for the purpose of advancing the energy efficiency strategic planning work as described herein.
45. This proceeding remains open for the purpose of considering issues relating to the incentive award mechanism, water conservation programs and the issues identified herein for further consideration.
This order is effective today.
Dated October 18, 2007, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
RACHELLE B. CHONG
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
Commissioners
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ACEEE American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy
ALJ Administrative Law Judge
AMI Advanced metering infrastructure
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
BBEES Big Bold Energy Efficiency Strategies
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBIA California Building Industry Association
CCGT Combined cycle gas turbine
CEC California Energy Commission
CEE Consortium for Energy Efficiency
CFL Compact fluorescent lamp
C&S Codes and standards
DEER Database for energy efficient resources
DG Distributed generation
DR Demand response (programs)
E3 Energy & Environmental Economics, Inc.
EE Energy efficiency
EEGA Energy efficiency groupware application
EM&V Evaluation, measurement and verification
EUL Expected useful life
GHG Greenhouse gas
GW Gigawatt
GWh Gigawatt hour
HVAC Heating, ventilation and air conditioning
IHACI Institute of Heating and Air Conditioning Industries
IOU Investor-owned utility
LIEE Low income energy efficiency (programs)
ME&O Marketing, education and outreach
MIDSM Market integrated demand side management
MPS Minimum performance standard
MW Megawatt
PAG Program advisory group
PEB Performance earnings basis
PIER Public interest energy research
POU Publicly-owned utility
PRG Peer review group
R&D Research and development
TRC Total resource cost
UK United Kingdom
USDOE United States Department of Energy
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USGBC U. S. Green Building Council
(END OF ATTACHMENT 1)
PARTICIPATING PARTIES
Aglet Consumer Alliance (Aglet)
Alliance to Save Energy
American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE)
Better Buildings Incorporated
California Building Industry Association (CBIA) & the California Apartment Association (CAA)
California Building Performance Contractors Association (CBPCA)
California Large Energy Consumers (CLECA)
California Manufacturers & Technology Association (CMTA)
California Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition (CNGVC)
California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE)
City of Oakland (Oakland)
City and County of San Francisco (CCSF)
Community Environmental Council (CE Council)
Conservation Services Group (CSG)
County of Los Angeles (LA)
Davis Energy Group (DEG)
Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA)
Ecology Action
Energy Coalition
EP Investments Incorporated (EPI)
Global Energy Partners LLC (GEP)
Heller Manus Architects (Heller Manus)
Ice Energy, Inc. (ICE)
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Local Government Sustainable Energy Coalition (LGSEC)
(Association of Bay Area Governments,
City and County of San Francisco,
City of Berkeley, City of Oakland, County Of Los Angeles, County of Marin,
Local Government Commission,
Local Government Sustainable Energy Coalition,
Redwood Coast Energy Authority,
South Bay Cities Council of Governments)
Marin Energy Management Team (Marin)
National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA)
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
Quantum Energy Services & Technologies, Inc. (QuEST)
Robert Mowris and Associates (RMA)
Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)
San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E)
Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG)
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas)
Schweitzer and Associates (Schweitzer)
Small Business California (SBC)
Southern California Edison (SCE)
The Utility Reform Network (TURN)
University of California, Davis Energy Efficiency Center (UC Davis)
Western Cooling Efficiency Center (WCEC)
Women's Energy Matters (WEM)
(END OF ATTACHMENT 2)
