VII. Comments on Draft Decision
The draft decision of Commissioner Wood in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Pub. Util. Code § 311(g) (1) and Rule 77.7 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed by the Standardization Project Team, PG&E, SCE and ORA. No reply comments were filed. We have carefully reviewed the comments and have made several clarifications and modifications to the draft decision in response to them, in particular, on the issue of eligibility based on heating fuel.
1. The common LIEE cost definitions and bill savings estimating procedures, as presented by the utilities in their March 12, 2001 report, are very useful because they improve the consistency in reporting and evaluating program costs and savings across utilities.
2. Attempting to verify individual income eligibility of each resident of a group home serving destitute, transient and/or homeless persons would present serious obstacles to serving this kind of customer.
3. Requiring that 80% of the residents of a group home meet the LIEE eligibility requirements is consistent with the standard we adopted for multi-family units under the LIEE program.
4. Renters who pay utility bills should be eligible for refrigerator replacements even if they do not own the equipment because reductions in utility bills represent the largest benefit of providing a high efficiency refrigerator, and would not accrue to the landlord in this instance. There is also no evidence to suggest that the rental value of low-income housing units will increase just because the refrigerator (or air conditioner) is replaced with a newer model.
5. Providing free weatherization services (e.g., ceiling insulation, weather-stripping, caulking) to customers who neither heat or air condition their homes with fuels on which the PGC is collected is an inequitable allocation of limited program funds. Therefore, these homes should not be eligible for weatherization services under the LIEE program. For similar reasons, water heating measures should not be provided to homes that do not heat water with IOU-fuels. Providing infiltration measures to homes that take air conditioning services but not space heating from the IOU, would require the IOUs to assume responsibility for implementing safety testing and repairs on a broad range of heating equipment that is not within their expertise, for which standards have not been established under the LIEE program, and for which funding has not been authorized in rates. Building on the success of the utilities' leveraging efforts with LIHEAP agencies is the most appropriate and cost-effective mechanism for weatherizing non-IOU heated homes.
6. The approach regarding the eligibility of renters for LIEE equipment adopted in D.01-05-033 effectively balances the interest of those tenants that pay their utility bills with concerns over subsidizing landlords, and should be continued beyond the rapid deployment period. The utilities should be permitted to make minor repairs and adjustments to furnaces in rental units if these actions would improve the performance of the system at a minimal cost.
7. It is unclear that master-metered tenants will receive benefits from the program to the same degree as individually-metered tenants. Imposing a maximum on the treatment of master-metered units is necessary to obtain a reasonable level of overall participant benefits from program budgets.
8. Establishing long-term targets for the mix of housing types, based on units treated, can offset the incentives for contractors to treat a disproportionately large percentage of multifamily dwellings under the LIEE program. Caps based on dwelling units are easier to track and enforce than caps based on expenditures, due to accounting delays. The utilities proposal to establish caps on the treatment of master-metered units that reflect the predominance of these dwellings in the service territory, up to a maximum limit of 15 %, is reasonable and should be adopted. As discussed in this decision, the utilities should begin treating master metered units without delay. The utilities' long-term targets for multi-family dwellings are reasonable and should be adopted. The utilities should specify a timeframe for meeting these targets and describe how they intend to track their progress towards them.
9. The utilities' proposed language for limits on prior program participation does not provide for instances when the natural gas appliance test could not be administered. The requirement that the customer must have received other non-infiltration measures in the past, to be eligible for a return visit, does not recognize that before 1999 only infiltration measures were generally installed under the program. As discussed in this decision, the language regarding limits on prior participation on LIEE programs should be further clarified to reflect the intent of D.01-03-028.
10. A five-year timeframe for the automatic qualification of multifamily/mobile home units facilitates the qualification of these units without undue paperwork and delays and recognizes that overall income levels in mobile home parts or multifamily complexes may change significantly over longer time periods.
11. Current policies authorize the recovery of all minor home repairs, including those related to carbon monoxide testing, from the LIEE program budget. Without such repairs, certain infiltration-reducing measures would not be considered feasible under current program guidelines. Utilities should continue their current practice of funding all minor home repairs provided under the LIEE program out of the LIEE budget, including those related to natural gas appliance testing. We may revisit this funding issue during Phase 4, as we consider the standardization and timing of natural gas appliance testing procedures.
12. Consistent with prior Commission directives, natural gas appliance testing should not be billed to the LIEE program or any other public purpose funds.
13. Larger sample sizes may be needed for contractors working in multiple counties in order to estimate the failure rate for individual crews with reasonable precision.
14. If a post inspection is not justified by other causes to ascertain contractor quality, it can represent a cross-subsidy to carbon monoxide testing. Requiring the utilities to net out the full amount of natural gas appliance testing from the costs of post-installation inspections or pre-approval inspections will remove the potential for cross-subsidization from a decision to increase the sample size.
15. The Phase 4 Standardization Report should describe the specific actions that weatherization contractors can take to respond to carbon monoxide problems.
16. A CO action level of 10 ppm is reasonable because it is consistent with the most common CO action level utilized by DCSD and local jurisdictions for indoor air, based on the record in this proceeding.
17. The utilities' revised recommendations for ceiling insulation levels are consistent with the retrofit provisions of Title 24.
18. Nothing in the language of Title 24 precludes the Commission from defining the term "area" in terms of the 16 CEC climate zones, which is consistent with the manner in which the CEC's new construction insulation standards have been developed.
19. All but three of the 36 cities or towns in California with heating degree days greater than 5,000 are in the CEC's Climate Zones 1 and 16, the zones that would be designated for R-38 under the utilities' recommended approach. The three that are not included appear to be weather stations and do not represent significant populations.
20. The added benefit of revisiting homes that have already been treated with ceiling insulation under the LIEE program in order to bring those levels up to the new R-30 or R-38 standards adopted today would be far smaller than the associated costs.
21. Some degree of reduced accuracy is inevitable when aggregation or generic assumptions are utilized to simplify procedures for determining appropriate ceiling insulation levels.
22. The DCSD procedures for establishing ceiling insulation levels are undergoing departmental review at this time. The record in this proceeding has raised questions about the DCSD procedures, including their consistency with Title 24, that would need to be carefully reviewed before considering their adoption for the LIEE program.
23. The utilities' revised recommendation on ceiling threshold levels recognizes a reasonable dividing line for threshold values, based on economics, the realities of the market and the practicality of implementation.
24. Disputes between utility inspectors and LIEE service providers cannot be arbitrated in a neutral fashion if utility personnel are evaluating the judgment or actions of their colleagues.
25. It is common practice in many industries to have a procedure whereby a neutral third party arbitrates disputes. There are numerous professional arbitration and mediation services available, and even some specializing in contractor issues. Binding arbitration provisions in contracts can address concerns about challenges to the determinations reached by a third party arbitrator.
26. Current differences in pre-installation inspection practices across utilities reflect, at least in part, differences in natural gas appliance testing procedures. Standardization of those testing procedures will be considered in Phase 4.
27. Requiring the utility to net out the full cost of a stand-alone natural gas appliance test when pre-approval inspections are conducted in combination with natural gas appliance testing will prevent subsidization of natural gas appliance testing with LIEE program funds.
28. RHA had invested a considerable amount in the development of graphs and pictures for weatherization manuals before entering into a contract with utilities for the Standardization Project. The pre-existing graphs and pictures were subject to RHA copyrights, and the negotiated contract budget captures for the utilities the benefits of giving RHA the right to reasonable use and reproduction of the material. Some eligible LIEE customers cannot currently obtain replacement refrigerators because the wall outlets in their homes are not properly grounded per current building codes. This issue should be addressed in Phase 4 so that it is feasible to install replacement refrigerators in low-income homes as expeditiously as possible. However, such standards should be developed in a manner that will most effectively coordinate with DCSD's efforts and leverage limited program funds.
29. Using the LIPPT test as a single metric for evaluating the LIEE program or measures would fail to consider a major goal of the program, namely, reducing the electric and gas bills of the low-income customer and doesn't examine the LIEE program or program measures from the perspective of the low-income customers served by the program, or the non-participating ratepayers who subsidize the program costs.
30. The PC test, when expanded to include non-energy benefits (e.g., increase in comfort) to the customer, best captures the net reduction in hardship provided to low-income customers by the LIEE program or individual measures.
31. The UC test, when expanded to include non-energy benefits (e.g., fewer collections costs and lower bad debt write offs), best quantifies the cost-efficiency of the LIEE program or measure from the perspective of ratepayers who subsidize the program.
32. The record in this proceeding does not provide an explicit method for addressing the gross versus incremental approach to savings and costs in the evaluation of LIEE programs or measures.
1. Because no parties were prejudiced by the late filing of comments by ICA, SESCO, SPC, and QCS/Winegard in this proceeding, their requests for late acceptance of these comments is reasonable and should be granted.
2. The proposed definitions and reporting format for LIEE program costs presented by the utilities in their March 12, 2001 report are reasonable and
should be adopted. As discussed in this decision, the utilities should continue to report standardized data on program lifecycle bill savings and bill savings to cost ratios as part of their Annual Report on LIEE activities, due on May 1 of each year.
3. The plain language of Pub. Util. Code § 2790 very broadly describes the mission of the program and leaves key implementation terms, such as "feasible" and "eligible" undefined. These issues are properly considered by the Commission in implementing the low-income assistance program.
4. The language of Senate Bill SBX15 specifically recognizes that customers of municipal utilities should be served via low-income assistance programs that are funded separately from those serving IOU customers.
5. The utilities' July 2, 2001 proposed P&P Manual, including the WIS manual sections appended to the report, should be adopted with the modifications described in this decision.
6. As discussed in this decision, utility personnel should not be the final arbitrators of unresolved disputes between utility inspectors and LIEE service providers.
7. LIEE contractors are required to comply with all applicable state, federal and local laws and regulations regarding lead-safe practices, even if those laws, regulations or required procedures are not spelled out in the P&P or WIS Manuals.
8. Given the specific circumstances described in this decision, the WIS manual copyright provisions in the contract between RHA and the utilities are reasonable.
9. The Project Team's responses to SESCO's comments regarding Chapter 7 of the P&P Manual, as presented in Attachment 3, are reasonable and should be adopted.
10. Evaluating LIEE programs and measures using both the PC and UC tests, enhanced to include non-energy benefits, is consistent with the Commission's policy determinations concerning the goals of the program. Determining how each of these tests should be considered in selecting specific measures to include in the program, or in evaluating overall program effectiveness, should be referred to the RRM Working Group and Standardization Project Team for further consideration.
11. The non-energy benefits developed by the Working Group and presented in Attachment 4 are reasonable and should be adopted.
12. The Working Group recommendations for reporting the participation of community-based organizations in the LIEE program and installation costs are reasonable and should be adopted. As discussed in this decision, further work on standardizing training costs should be deferred.
13. In order to proceed with standardization of program policies and procedures as expeditiously as possible, this decision should be effective today.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The motions for acceptance of late-filed comments in this proceeding by Insulation Contractors Association, SESCO, Inc., Service Provider's Coalition, Quality Conservation Services and Winegard Energy are granted.
2. Within 30 days from the effective date of this decision, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company and Southern California Gas Company, collectively referred to as "the utilities", shall jointly file a report describing how they each coordinate
the delivery of Low Income Energy Efficiency (LIEE) and non-LIEE energy efficiency programs targeted to hard-to-reach customers so that the interests of low-income customers are best served.
3. The definitions for LIEE program costs and reporting format presented in Attachment 2 are adopted. They shall be used by the utilities in developing all future filings on LIEE program costs until further Commission order. In addition, the Reporting Requirements Manual (RRM) Working Group recommendations on reporting access by community-based providers and information from Exhibits 35 and 36 are adopted.
4. As discussed in this decision, the utilities shall file and serve standardized data on program lifecycle bill savings and bill savings to cost ratios as part of their Annual Report on LIEE activities, due on May 1 of each year. In addition to the formats presented in the April 9, 2001 RRM Working Group Report (Tables TA 7.7 and TA 7.8), the utilities shall present the information contained in Exhibits 4.2 and 4.3 of the March 12, 2001 Revised Joint Utility Report on Standardized Methods for Producing Data on Bill Savings and Expenditures. The report due on May 1 2002 shall include this information for the following full program years: 1999, 2000 and 2001. Similarly, each subsequent Annual Report shall report this information for the prior three program years. Updates to the variables and calculations used to derive these data shall be considered and explained in each annual report, after obtaining public input. The report shall also discuss how these variables and calculations continue to be consistent with the measurement studies and other assumptions used to calculate program and measure savings in the Annual Earnings Assessment Proceeding. In addition, the report shall explain variations across utilities. The utilities shall jointly conduct this effort and confer with Energy Division with regard to the format and content of the report, prior to filing.
5. The utilities' proposed Policy and Procedures (P&P) Manual and Weatherization Installation Standards (WIS) manual sections submitted on July 2, 2001 are adopted, with the following modifications:
a. References to the requirement that 100% of the residents of the facility meet the CARE 175% income guideline shall be removed from Section 2.5 (Housing on Non-Residential Rates) of the P&P Manual, and the following language shall be added:
"For the purpose of these facilities, income qualification shall be considered satisfied upon completion of an affidavit by the facility owners or operators that, to the best of their knowledge, 80% of all non-staff residents of the facility meet the LIEE income qualification guidelines. These facilities represent a unique situation and this income verification procedure shall not be considered precedential for other circumstances."
b. The eligibility requirements presented in Section 2.3.1 (General Service Eligibility Conditions) of the P&P Manual shall be modified to reflect the following:
· HVAC measures. Infiltration-reduction measures will not be provided to homes heated with a non-IOU fuel. The utilities will not offer furnace repairs/replacements to these homes because they are not equipped to repair or replace propane or kerosene fueled appliances. However, the utilities will offer other HVAC measures to these homes, including ceiling insulation, high-efficiency replacement air conditioners, evaporative coolers, evaporative cooler repairs, and whole house fans. Homes heated with a non-IOU fuel where the home also takes air-conditioning service from an IOU are also eligible for HVAC measures such as ceiling insulation, high-efficiency replacement air conditioners, evaporative coolers, evaporative cooler repairs and whole house fans.
· Electric Measures. The utilities will continue to offer all other feasible LIEE electric measures to homes with non-IOU space heating and/or water heating fuels, such as high efficiency refrigerators and compact fluorescent lamps.
· Water Heating Measures. The utilities will not replace water heaters or offer other water heating measures to homes that heat water with non-IOU fuels.
· Referrals. The utilities will continue to refer all homes with non-IOU space heating and/or water heating to the California Department of Community Services and Development (DCSD) for Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) eligible measures not installed under the LIEE Program.
· Minor Home Repairs. The utilities are authorized to perform non-infiltration related minor home repairs associated with LIEE measures for which homes without IOU space heating are eligible.
c. The second subsection of Section 2.8 (Previous Weatherization) of the P&P Manual shall be modified to read:
"In general, homes that have been weatherized under the LIEE Program within the past 10 years are not eligible for weatherization in the current program. However, a home that has been treated under the LIEE program during the past 10 years will be considered eligible for participation if the home needs ceiling insulation, and if ceiling insulation was previously deemed non-feasible as a result of a structural inadequacy (e.g., knob and tube wiring) that has since been resolved or is no longer considered to result in non-feasibility. Moreover, any unit that previously failed to pass a combustion appliance safety pre-test, and therefore did not receive infiltration-related measures shall be considered eligible for the measures it did not receive if the test is subsequently passed during the 10-year window. Other exceptions may be granted with the written approval of the utility Administrator's Program Manager."
d. The following language shall be added to Section 2.2.6 (Qualifying Multifamily Complexes and Mobile Home Parks) of the P&P Manual:
"For the purpose of this section, any dwelling that was previously treated under LIEE during the five years prior shall be counted as being occupied by an income qualified household."
e. The language of Section 8.4.3 (Post-Installation Inspection Frequency) of the P&P Manual shall be modified as follows:
· Subsection 1. shall be modified to read:
"If the utility's program or the amount of additional post-inspections undertaken is small enough so that the additional post inspections can be conducted without substantially increasing overall program expenditures."
· Subsection 8. shall be modified to read:
"If larger sample sizes are necessary to resolve disputes with contractors over estimated billing fail rates."
f. The language of Section 2.7.2 (Eligibility of Rental Units for Certain Measures) of the P&P Manual shall be replaced with the following:
"Assuming that the permission of the property owner has been approved and that other eligibility criteria are met, rental units may be treated under the Program. However, the following policies relating to specific measures will be applied:
· Rental units are eligible for evaporative coolers, air conditioners, water heaters, refrigerators and hard-wired fixtures, to the extent that these measures continue to be provided under the LIEE program.
· Rental units are not eligible for furnace replacements or major furnace repairs. However, the utilities are permitted to make minor repairs and adjustments to furnaces in rental units if these actions would improve the performance of the system at a minimal cost.
· Evaporative coolers and hard-wired fixtures will be provided without charge to either the tenant or the
landlord. Refrigerator and air conditioner replacements will also be provided without charge to either the tenant or the landlord, except in the instance where the landlord owns the refrigerator or air-conditioning unit that is replaced with a high efficiency model and also pays the utility bill. In these instances, the utilities may make payments to installation contractors that cover only part of the cost of replacement."
g. Section 7.3.4 (Ceiling Insulation) of the P&P Manual shall be modified as follows:
· Table 7-1 shall be replaced with the following:
Climate Zone |
Existing Insulation Level |
Action |
All CEC Climate Zones with less than 5,000 heating degree days |
R-11 or less |
Raise R-Value to R-30 |
More than R-11 |
Do not install additional insulation | |
All CEC Climate Zones with 5,000 or more heating degree days |
R-19 or less |
Raise R-Value to R-38 |
More than R-19 |
Do not install additional insulation |
· The last paragraph on page 7-7 shall be replaced with the following:
"The actions listed in the third column of Table 7-1 refer to the final level of insulation, including any pre-existing values as well as insulation added under the program. These levels apply on a forward-looking basis; homes previously receiving lower levels of ceiling insulation under the LIEE program will not be revisited to bring insulation up to the new higher level.
Figure 1 depicts the sixteen CEC Climate Zones. Appendix C contains a list of the locations contained in each CEC Climate Zone, and indicates which zones have heating degree days that equal or exceed 5,000."
· Appendix C shall be modified to cross-reference locations with CEC Climate Zones, and indicate which zones have heating degree days that equal or exceed 5,000.
h. Section 8.4.5 (Failed Inspection Dispute Resolution) of the P&P Manual shall be replaced with the following:
"Dispute resolution practices of the utilities require the use of a neutral third party arbitrator in instances where utility personnel are used to perform the inspections. Utilities who use utility personnel for the inspection function are required to either: 1) have available at least two professional arbitration services to hear and determine appropriate action on any unresolved dispute between LIEE service providers and the utility or 2) provide language in their contracts with LIEE service providers that the selection of an arbitrator must be mutually acceptable to both parties. The costs of such service shall be paid by the party which "loses" the arbitration. Utility personnel may, however, attempt to mediate or facilitate resolution of issues between utility inspectors and contractors, as long as a third party arbitrator is available for the final resolution of any unresolved disputes, as described above.
Utilities that do not use utility personnel for either the inspection function or LIEE contracting work may, but are not required to, employ the dispute resolution procedures described above. Instead, in those instances where a dispute arises between outside inspectors and contractors, the utility may utilize in-house personnel to hear and determine appropriate action on any unresolved dispute between LIEE service providers and inspectors."
i. The new WIS Manual section on Lead-Safe Practices (Appendix C of Appendix F) shall be removed.
j. The last bullet of Section 7.3.17 (Evaporative Cooler Installation) shall be revised to read:
"Evaporative coolers are available only in CEC climate zones 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16."
k. The carbon monoxide (CO) action level for Table 10-1 of the P&P Manual should be changed to 10 ppm.
l. The third bullet under "Other Policies and Procedures" in Section 7.3.19 (Refrigerator Replacements) of the P&P Manual shall be replaced with the following:
"The replacement refrigerator shall be equal to or larger than the existing unit, not to exceed 19 cubic feet. However, when two refrigerators and/or freezers are exchanged for a single unit, the replacement unit may be larger than the larger of the two existing units, provided that the new unit is no larger than 23 cubic feet. The utilities are permitted to exhaust their current inventories of refrigerators before the second provision takes effect."
6. As discussed in this decision, the utilities shall provide infiltration-reducing measures and related minor home repairs to customers who take air conditioning service from the investor-owned utility (IOU), even if they do not use an IOU heating fuel. Senate Bill (SB) X1 5 funds may be used at this time to fund these measures. However, the provision of these measures shall continue as part of the LIEE program plans and budget proposals even when SBX1 5 funds are depleted. Until the standardization of natural gas appliance safety testing procedures is addressed in Phase 4, the utilities may continue to apply their current testing approaches to these homes. The IOU shall make arrangements for natural gas appliance testing through inter-utility agreements if it does not have the expertise or trained crew to do the testing itself. The minimum testing procedures we adopted in D.01-03-028 shall apply to these homes.
7. The utilities shall begin treating master-metered units as part of the rapid deployment effort, consistent with the policies adopted today, without delay. The utilities shall include a description of their plans and accomplishments in this area in the rapid deployment status reports ordered by Decision (D.) 01-05-033. The utilities shall also specify a timeframe for meeting their multifamily unit targets and a description of how they intend to track progress towards them. Within sixty (60) days from the effective date of this decision, the reports shall present a breakdown of multifamily and single-family units treated under the program, and include information on the number of units treated relative to each utility's long-term targets. In preparing this material, the utilities shall discuss reporting options and formats with Energy Division.
8. As discussed in this decision, amounts charged to the LIEE budget for pre-approval inspections or post-installation inspections conducted in combination with natural gas appliance testing shall be the net cost of the visit after the full cost of the stand-alone test is subtracted.
9. As discussed in this decision, utilities shall evaluate the LIEE program and individual measures by calculating both the participant cost test and utility cost test, including in that calculation the non-energy related benefits developed by the RRM Working Group. (See Attachment 4.) The RRM Working Group and Standardization Project Team shall jointly develop recommendations, after obtaining public input, on:
· how each of these tests should be considered in making final measure selections, or in evaluating the overall effectiveness of LIEE programs from year-to-year or across utilities, and
· an explicit method for addressing the "gross" versus "net" costs and savings issue in measure and program evaluation.
The joint report shall include a discussion of the pros and cons of the various options considered. It shall be filed and served within 120 days from the effective date of this decision. Comments on the report are due 30 days after the date of filing, and replies are due 20 days thereafter. After the Commission's consideration and resolution of these issues, the Standardization Project Team shall assess all current (including pilot) LIEE program measures, using the approved cost-effectiveness testing procedures. The Assigned Commissioner shall establish the budget, schedule and scope of work for this effort.
10. As discussed in today's decision, the scope of Phase 4 of the Standardization Project shall include the following issues:
· Specific actions that the weatherization contractors or utility personnel can take to respond to carbon monoxide problems. This evaluation should include a description of the actions they are currently authorized/required to take when these problems are identified.
· The utilities' pre-installation inspection procedures (e.g., pre-approvals)
· The development of installation standards for refrigerator outlet grounding. This aspect of Phase 4 shall be filed as soon as it is completed. The filing shall include a description of how refrigerator outlet grounding efforts under LIEE will be coordinated with those initiated under the Department of Community Services and Development, and how limited program funds will be leveraged by the joint effort. Comments will be due 15 days from the date of filing, and replies 10 days thereafter.
11. Within 30 days of the effective date of this decision, the RRM Working Group shall file a revised RRM reflecting the Working Group's recommendations, as modified in today's decision. The Working Group shall serve a notice of the report's availability to all appearances and the state service list in this proceeding. The reporting requirements presented in the revised RRM shall be used by the utilities in reporting the results of their PY 2001 LIEE and CARE programs in May, 2002 and beyond, unless further modified by Commission decision.
12. As stated in D.01-05-033, the new measures approved on a pilot basis during rapid deployment are subject to review and evaluation before they will be considered for permanent addition to the LIEE program.
13. Today's determinations regarding Phase 3 standardization issues, and those made during earlier phases of the standardization process, shall govern program implementation in program year 2002 and beyond until further notice. The utilities shall incorporate all Commission directives adopted in this decision and D. 01-03-028 related to Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the Standardization Project into the statewide P&P Manual and WIS manuals, and those policies and procedures shall govern LIEE program activities effective January 1, 2001, or 30 days from the date of this decision, whichever comes later.
14. The due dates for filings discussed in this decision may be modified by the Assigned Commissioner, for good cause.
15. All filings required by today's decision shall be filed at the Commission's Docket Office and served electronically on all appearances and the state service list in this proceeding. U.S. mail service of the filings is optional, except that one hard copy of the filing shall be mailed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge.
In addition, if there is no electronic mail address available, the electronic mail is returned to the sender, or the recipient informs the sender of an inability to open the document, the sender shall immediately arrange for alternate service (regular
U.S. mail shall be the default, unless another means-such as overnight delivery-is mutually agreed upon.) The current service list for this proceeding is available on the Commission's web page, www.cpuc.ca.gov.
This order is effective today.
Dated December 11, 2001, at San Francisco, California.
LORETTA M. LYNCH
President
HENRY M. DUQUE
RICHARD A. BILAS
CARL W. WOOD
GEOFFREY F. BROWN
Commissioners
Attachment 1
(Page 1)
Acronym/Abbreviation
AB 1393 - Assembly Bill
AEAP - Annual Earnings Assessment Proceeding
ALJ - Administrative Law Judge
CARE - California Alternate Rates for Energy
CEC - California Energy Commission
CO - carbon monoxide
CSLB - California State Licensing Board
D. - Decision
DCSD - California Department of Community Services Development
HVAC - heating, ventilation and air-conditioning
ICA - Insulation Contractors Association
IOU - investor-owned utility
LIEE - Low Income Energy Efficiency
LIEE and CARE - Customer Bill of Rights
LIHEAP - Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program
LIPPT - Low Income Public Purpose Test
ORA - Office of Ratepayer Advocates
P&P Manual - policy and procedures manual
PC - Participant Test
PG&E - Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Attachment 1
(Page 2)
Acronym/Abbreviation
PGC - public goods charge
PPM-parts per million
Project Team- Standardization Project Team
Pub. Util. Code - Public Utilities Code
PY - program year
QCS/Winegard - Quality Conservation Services and Winegard Energy
RHA - Richard Heath & Associates
RRM - Reporting Requirements Manual
SB - Senate Bill
SCE - Southern California Edison Company
SDG&E - San Diego Gas & Electric Company
SESCO - SESCO, Inc.
SoCal - Southern California Gas Company
SPC - Service Provider's Coalition
Title 24 - California Code of Regulations, title 24, Building standards
TRC - Total Resource Cost
UC - Utility Cost Test
WIS - Weatherization Installation Standards
Working Group - RRM Working Group
(END OF ATTACHMENT 1)
