8. Assignment of Proceeding
Rachelle B. Chong is the assigned Commissioner and David Fukutome is the assigned ALJ in this proceeding.
1. The MCRA, residential rate design, streetlight rate design, SL&P rate design, MLLP rate design, and agricultural rate design settlements are uncontested all-party settlements.
2. The MCRA, residential rate design, streetlight rate design, SL&P rate design, MLLP rate design, and agricultural rate design settlement agreements are each reasonable in light of the record, consistent with law and in the public interest.
3. PG&E has provided a substantial amount of information on distribution marginal costs, which describes the location of distribution projects undertaken during the year, the cost of each project and the portion(s) of its territory the project is intended to serve, in its workpapers and will have the same type of information available in its next GRC proceeding. It is not necessary for PG&E to file annual reports to provide this information.
4. The MM settlement is not an all party settlement and is contested.
5. It is important for commercial building tenants to receive appropriate price signals and to have the opportunity to effectively use dynamic pricing options and participate in energy conservation programs.
6. Under the MM settlement, commercial tenants would be appropriately billed for the usage under their direct control, and common usage will be metered separately and continue to be billed and paid in proportion to the square footage tenants occupy.
7. Under the MM settlement, in commercial buildings where some tenants agree to submetering and others either refuse or are under leases that have not yet expired, metered tenants would be billed in accordance with the master meter tariff for their controlled usage, common usage would be metered and allocated across all customers in accordance with leases (generally square footage) and recovered through rent as is done today, and the balance of the building metered usage would be allocated to the non-metered customers as specified in their leases.
8. Under the MM settlement, bills from commercial building owners for submetered tenants would have the same level of detail as the master meter bill from PG&E.
9. The MM settlement provision that leaves the resolution of any disputes concerning the billing and measuring of electricity to the submetered tenant and the commercial building owner is comparable to that for other landlord provisioned and measured utility services for telecommunications, water, and residential gas and electricity.
10. While BOMA indicates that its members have incentives to keep building owner charges for electricity low, that it is in the public interest that building owners participate in dynamic pricing and energy conservation programs, and that BOMA will encourage its members to so, there is little on the record that quantifies the effect of building owner charges for meters, meter reading and billing services or quantifies the potential dynamic pricing and energy conservation effects and savings that might accrue under the MM settlement.
11. Rather than dismissing or delaying commercial building master metering because of concerns related to building owner charges and implementation of energy efficiency measures, which may or may not evolve into actual problems, it is reasonable to monitor the program as it develops and then address any actual problems as needed.
12. Commercial tenants should be provided with certain information currently provided to residential submetered tenants pursuant to D.04-11-033 and D.05-05-026 including the following:
(a) Building owners installing submeters should provide all tenants with the following information: (1) the PG&E rate schedule serving the master meter; (2) the contact information for PG&E; (3) the contact information for the California Department of Food and Agriculture meter complaint process; and (4) notification that tenant controlled energy charges will be removed from rent when submetering commences.
(b) PG&E should respond to inquiries from submetered commercial tenants and at least provide information about the rate schedule applied to the master meter and explain how it calculates its bills on that rate schedule.
13. Consistent with BOMA's stated intention to make available as much information as possible that can assist tenants in understanding and managing their energy costs, it is reasonable for building owners to provide the following information to submetered tenants:
(a) Sufficient information and guidance for their submetered customers to be able to replicate and verify their total bills.
(b) Information on dynamic pricing options and all energy efficiency programs that are relevant to its submetered customers, including those programs that require landlord assistance for participation.
14. Based on consideration of the intent of PG&E in requesting modification to Rule 18 in 1962 and the reasons for requesting the modification, reinstitution of submetering for commercial customers is not inconsistent with D.63562 because concerns regarding rates and conditions of service have been addressed and alleviated by the terms of the MM settlement, as conditioned by our decision today.
15. D.92109 bases much of its reasoning for rejecting commercial submetering on D.63562.
16. State statutes and regulations sufficiently address the testing and installation of non-utility electric meters.
17. While the Commission expressed concerns related to submetering in D.99-10-065, the particular concerns identified by TURN have been satisfactorily reconciled with the terms of the MM settlement, as conditioned by our decision today.
18. This issue of commercial submetering can be addressed in either a generic rulemaking proceeding or in a utility specific proceeding.
19. The public interest of commercial master metering is broad and lies in providing commercial tenants with the opportunity to better manage their loads and reduce costs.
20. Overall reduction of system demand and flattening load curves are in the interest of ratepayers at large.
21. The MM settlement, as conditioned by our decision today, is reasonable in light of the record, consistent with law and in the public interest.
1. The MCRA, residential rate design, streetlight rate design, SL&P, MLLP, and agricultural rate design settlement agreements should be approved.
2. The MM settlement should be approved once PG&E and BOMA agree to the following:
(a) In PG&E's next Phase 2 GRC, BOMA and PG&E will provide sufficient information, based on actual commercial building master metering experience to date, to answer the questions specified in Section 6.2.3 of this decision
(b) PG&E and building owners will be required to provide the information summarized above in Findings of Fact 12 and 13 to commercial submetered tenants.
3. This order should be effective immediately so that PG&E may prepare the necessary advice letter, parties may review and comment on that advice letter, and rates may be timely adjusted.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The motions dated February 9, March 16, and May 4, 2007 which request adoption of the marginal cost and revenue allocation settlement agreement, the residential rate design settlement agreement, the streetlight rate design settlement agreement, the medium and large light & power rate design settlement agreement, and the agricultural rate design settlement agreement are granted. The settlement agreements in Appendices B, C, D, E and F are adopted.
2. Regarding the motion dated April 27, 2007, which requests adoption of the small light & power rate design settlement agreement, the small light & power rate design settlement agreement, as detailed in Appendix G, is adopted. Also, since Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and the Building Owners and Managers Associations of San Francisco, Greater Los Angeles, Orange County, and California agree to the conditions specified in Conclusion of Law 2, the commercial building master meter settlement agreement, as detailed in Appendix H, is adopted.
3. Within 45 days of the date this order is mailed, PG&E shall file an advice letter in compliance with General Order 96-B. The advice letter shall include revised tariff sheets to implement the revenue allocations and rate designs adopted in this order. The tariff sheets shall become effective on or after November 1, 2007, subject to Energy Division determining that they are in compliance with this order. No additional customer notice need be provided pursuant to General Rule 4.2 of General Order 96-B for this advice letter filing.
4. This proceeding remains open to consider future dynamic pricing tariffs and options for PG&E.
This order is effective today.
Dated September 6, 2007, at San Francisco, California.
MICHAEL R. PEEVEY
President
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
RACHELLE B. CHONG
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
Commissioners
APPENDIX A
List of Appearances
Applicant: Ann H. Kim, Daniel Cooley, Deborah S. Shefler and Shirley A. Woo, Attorneys at Law, and Rene Thomas, for Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
Interested Parties: R. Thomas Beach for Crossborder Energy; Law Offices of William H. Booth, by William H. Booth, Attorney at Law, for California Large Energy Consumers Association; McCracken, Byers & Haesloop, by David J. Byers, Attorney at Law, for California City-County Street Light Association; Sean Casey, for San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; Goodin, MacBride, Squeri, Ritchie & Day, LLP, by Michael B. Day and Joseph F. Wiedman, Attorneys at Law, for PV Now, by Thomas J. MacBride, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Building Owners and Managers Associations of San Francisco and California, and by James D. Squeri, Attorney at Law, for California Retailers Association; Douglass & Liddell, by Daniel W. Douglass, Attorney at Law, for Direct Access Customer Coalition, and by Gregory S. G. Klatt, Attorney at Law, for Wal-Mart/JC Penney; Kelly M. Ford, Attorney at Law, for San Diego Gas & Electric Company; Matthew Freedman and Haley Goodson, Attorneys at Law, for The Utility Reform Network; Department of the Navy, by Norman J. Furuta, Attorney at Law, for Federal Executive Agencies; Morrison & Foerster, LLP, by Peter Hanschen, Attorney at Law, for Agricultural Energy Consumers Association; Ellison, Schneider & Harris, LLP, by Lynn Haug, Attorney at Law, for California Department of General Services/Energy Policy Advisory Committee and East Bay Municipal Utility District, and by Greggory L. Wheatland, Attorney at Law, for Vote Solar Initiative; Gregory Heiden, Attorney at Law, for the Division of Ratepayer Advocates; Alcantar & Kahl, by Evelyn Kahl, Attorney at Law, for Energy Producers and Users Coalition, and by Seema Srinivasan, Attorney at Law, for Cogeneration Association of California; Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, by Randall W. Keen, Attorney at Law, for Indicated Commercial Parties; Carolyn Kehrein, of Energy Management Services, for Energy Users Forum; Paul Kerkorian, of Utility Cost Management, LLC, for California Rice Millers, ADM Rice, Inc.; Ronald Liebert, Attorney at Law, for California Farm Bureau Federation; Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, LLP, by Keith R. McCrea, Attorney at Law, for California Manufacturers & Technology Association; Frank A. McNulty and Maricruz Prado, Attorneys at Law, for Southern California Edison Company; Gail A. McNulty, for Native American Heritage Commission, Stephen A. S. Morrison, Attorney at Law, for City and County of San Francisco; Rob Neenan, for California League of Food Processors; Les Nelson, for Western Renewables Group; Andersen & Poole, by Edward G. Poole, Attorney at Law, for Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association; Bill F. Roberts, of Economic Sciences Corporation, for Building Owners and Managers Associations; J. P. Ross, for Vote Solar Initiative; James Ross, of RCS, Inc., for Cogeneration Association of California; Charmin Roundtree-Baaqee, for East Bay Municipal Utility District; Reed V. Schmidt, of Bartle Wells Associates, for California City-County Street Light Association; Day, Carter and Murphy, LLP, by Ann L. Trowbridge, Attorney at Law, for Modesto Irrigation District and Merced Irrigation District; and Joy A. Warren, Attorney at Law, for Modesto Irrigation District.
State Service: Dexter E. Khoury and Cherie Chan, for the Division of Ratepayer Advocates; Donald J. LaFrenz, Robert Benjamin, Bruce Kaneshiro, Felix Robles, and Maryam Ghadessi, for the Energy Division; Christopher R. Villarreal, for the Division of Strategic Planning; and Ron Wetherall, for the California Energy Commission.
(END OF APPENDIX A)
