11. Comments on Proposed Decision

The Proposed Decision of ALJ Gamson was mailed to the parties on November 16, 2010, in accordance with Section 311 of the Public Utilities Code.

Comments were filed by DRA/TURN, SCE, PG&E, County of Los Angeles, EnerNOC, the National Association of Energy Service Companies (NAESCO), and the California Building Performance Contractors Association. We make several changes in response to comments.

Several parties (including NAESCO, which had not previously participated in this part of the proceeding) commented on the Proposed Decision's treatment of non-DEER ex ante values, for both custom and non-custom projects. Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of the Proposed Decision are modified to allow further consideration of these matters. Certain Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and OPs of the Proposed Decision are deleted.

In Section 5 we discuss the Joint Utilities' request in their Petition to allow a phased-in timing for co-branding, and approve this request by adding a new Finding of Fact, Conclusion of Law and OPs.

Section 6 and associated Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and OPs of the Proposed Decision are modified to clarify that a 10% annual energy savings goal per home for the PWRHP and a 20% annual energy savings goal per home for the WHPP are reasonable and consistent with
D.09-09-047, and are understood to signify average savings expected per home, not minimum thresholds.