6. Renter Access to LIEE Programs

This rulemaking identified as an important issue whether renters are able to receive the benefits of LIEE programs and, if not, how to remedy related barriers to their participation.

To explore ways to improve access to LIEE programs, the Commission conducted a workshop on April 17, 2007. The workshop was helpful in clarifying issues that might require investigation. The assigned ALJ issued a ruling on May 22, 2002 soliciting parties' comments. The Commission received comments from ACCES, DisabRA, PG&E, SDG&E/SoCalGas, Sierra Pacific, SCE, SW Gas, and A WISH.⁵⁶ The ruling sought responses to the following questions:

· How many houses, apartments, and mobile homes have not yet received LIEE measures? These figures should be broken down between rented units and those that are owned by customers who qualify for LIEE benefits.

· Are there barriers to renter participation in LIEE programs that are more critical than the limits of utility LIEE budgets? If so, what are they and what can or should the Commission do to remove those barriers?

· How detrimental is a landlord's refusal to permit LIEE installations to broaden LIEE participation by renters? Would legislation be needed or useful to overcome barriers caused by landlords? What if anything should the Commission do to promote landlord interest and cooperation?

· Would increased focus on marketing LIEE installations in public housing or housing owned by non-profit organizations improve renter participation? If so, does the Commission need to take any actions to promote this?

· Are there ways to improve access to LIHEAP funds or other funding sources that would complement the LIEE program? What should the Commission do to promote their availability?

· Are there other ways to improve the LIEE program to increase renter participation or make the program more fair or accessible to renters?

The following section addresses these questions.

6.1. Background on Renters who Qualify for
LIEE

The utilities estimate the percentage of eligible renters who have not yet received LIEE measures as follows:

LIEE Measures Received: Renters versus HomeOwners57
Utility	Total Qualifying Untreated Homes	Untreated Rented Homes Percentage / Number	Untreated Owned Homes Percentage / Number
SCE	768,784	45% / 344,233	55% / 424,551
PG&E	876,156	56% / 490,647	44% / 385,509
SDG&E	218,283	70% / 152,798	30% / 65,485
SoCalGas	1,661,193	43% / 714,313	57% / 946,880

The table suggests that renters in each utility territory are receiving a substantial share of LIEE benefits. In the case of SoCalGas and SCE, renters have received significantly more than homeowners as a group. Although in percentage terms, SDG&E and PG&E are behind SCE and SoCalGas, they have treated many more rental properties than properties owned by eligible customers.

6.2. Barriers to LIEE Participation by Renters

All responding parties, except ACCES, generally agree that renters currently face no significant barriers to participation in LIEE programs. SCE comments that the Commission lifted two key barriers by allowing renters to be eligible for air conditioning and heat pumps in eligible climate zones, and by confirming that no owner waiver is needed to replace a renter-owned refrigerator.

Landlord Approvals. Parties agree that requiring landlord approval of all renter LIEE improvements is not a significant barrier to the installation of LIEE measures because landlords rarely refuse LIEE improvements. PG&E notes that the policy of requiring landlord consent is needed to assure landlords do not object to participating in energy efficiency programs. Some parties suggested that, in some cases, landlords are difficult to reach, often because tenants do not have contact information.⁵⁸ SCE notes that the need to contact landlords causes occasional delays in providing LIEE measures, but has not presented a barrier to participation.

Tenants of Public Housing. The parties addressed whether to modify program elements for tenants of public housing.

The utilities and ACCES agree that there is no need for increased focus on marketing LIEE in public housing or housing owned by non-profit organizations. PG&E and ACCES note that the number of people living in such housing is small and that resources would probably be used more cost-effectively in other types of housing. SDG&E/SoCalGas claim that they already heavily target these housing units, and that no additional action or Commission intervention is necessary. Only SCE disagrees, claiming that the Commission should sponsor a dialogue between public housing authorities and the utilities to clear up misconceptions about LIEE eligibility. SCE suggests that tenants of public housing should be automatically qualified for LIEE and CARE because they have documented their status as low-income residents to local authorities in a process that is probably more rigorous than that of the utilities.

Marketing and Program Measures. A WISH suggests that utilities should pursue more aggressive marketing campaigns and create landlord/tenant benefit sharing pilot projects. ACCES recommends that all utilities follow SCE's practice of making program measures available to non-renters available to renters.

Discussion. Contrary to our expectation, renters are receiving a fair portion of LIEE program benefits. This circumstance is fortunate from the standpoint of distributional equity because the customers with the greatest need are more likely to be renters than homeowners.⁵⁹ We expect that more renters will be served to the extent larger LIEE budgets are justifiable on the basis of cost-effective energy savings.

We agree with SCE that tenants of public housing ⁶⁰ should automatically qualify for LIEE programs, which will reduce stigma and program costs. We also support the idea of better coordination with public housing authorities to maximize opportunities at such properties. We direct utilities to address improved marketing and outreach to renters, and other renter-associated recommendations discussed here, as part of their statewide marketing efforts, the statewide strategic plan, and their 2009-2011 applications.

⁵⁶ Unless otherwise noted, the text refers to the parties' comments filed in response to the May 22, 3007 ALJ ruling issued in this proceeding.

⁵⁷ Information on this table is derived from the Reply Comments regarding AB 2140 and Renter Access to LIEE Programs of SCE, PG&E, SDG&E and SoCalGas.

⁵⁸ PG&E's Comments in response to ALJ's Ruling Addressing Renter Access to Low Income Energy Efficiency Programs, AB 2140 Implementation Regarding Tenants of Master-Meter Customers and Consideration of LIEE Furnace Programs and Natural Gas Appliance Testing, p. 4.

⁵⁹ A competing equity concern is that landlords receive many of the benefits of these programs because tenants move away and landlords retain installed energy efficiency measures, which improves property values. Tenants nevertheless receive the more immediate benefits associated with lower energy bills and improved quality of life.

⁶⁰ In its comments on the proposed decision, PG&E raises concerns that some tenants of Section 8 housing may have incomes that substantially exceed the income levels that would qualify customers for LIEE programs. It recommends the Commission consider ways to implement this idea in ways that promote consistent application of existing eligibility rules. We agree.