7. Case Management Statement

The Case Management Statement (Exh. 1) identifies the many issues raised by the parties to the proceeding, and provides a brief description of parties' positions on each issue. In general, the areas of dispute fall into five broad categories. First, parties disagree on what the role of the utility should be in implementing LIEE programs, i.e., what functions should be outsourced versus retained in-house. Second, parties disagree on how outsourcing should be accomplished. Some parties argue that all outsourcing should be accomplished via a competitive bid, for all utilities. Others oppose mandatory competitive bidding and recommend that the utilities retain discretion over how to outsource LIEE activities.

Third, parties present differing views on whether there needs to be more standardization of programs across utilities, including measure installation criteria, services, CARE penetration goals, reporting and income verification methods, RFP language and contract terms. Fourth, there are disputes over proposed bid evaluation criteria and minimum qualification requirements that appear in the utility RFPs. Finally, there are questions raised as to whether SESCO bid for and operated the PY1998 PG&E low-income energy efficiency program under applicable law.

We briefly discuss the positions of the parties as we address the issues in the following sections. Before turning to the issues, however, we summarize the policies of this Commission and the Legislature with respect to low-income assistance programs.