2. Procedural Background

As directed in Ordering Paragraph 9 of D.01-05-033, Energy Division held workshops on May 29 and 30, 2001. Energy Division provided teleconferencing capabilities for both days of the workshops, and a toll-free number for teleconferencing was provided in the workshop notice and Energy Division's workshop letter. Representatives from the following organizations attended the workshops: AARP (formerly known as American Association of Retired Persons), Charo Community Development Corporation (via teleconferencing), Community Action Agency of San Mateo County, Community Resources Project, Department of Community Services and Development (DCSD), Insulation Contractor's Association, Latino Issues Forum/Greenlining Institute, Office of Ratepayer Advocates, PG&E, Residential Energy Efficiency Clearing House, Inc. (REECH), Richard Heath and Associates, SDG&E, SESCO, Inc., Sierra Pacific, SCE, SoCal, Southwest Gas, The East Los Angeles Community Union (via teleconferencing) and Winegard Energy.

Energy Division's draft workshop report was circulated for comment on June 11, 2001. Comments on the report were submitted by AARP, PG&E, REECH, Bear Valley Cooperative Association, SCE and jointly by SDG&E and SoCal Gas. Energy Division issued its final workshop report on July 2, 2001, and submitted a supplement with updated data for Table 1 of the draft report showing CARE collection shortfalls for PG&E, SDG&E, SCE and SoCal on July 23, 2001.

Before turning to the issues, we commend Energy Division staff for its diligence in working with the SMJU to develop and refine program proposals for our consideration. Without such efforts, the low-income customers served by these utilities would not have available to them the expanded low-income assistance programs we adopt today.

We also reiterate that the purpose of the workshops was to respond to the funding allocation issues that we left open for further consideration by D.01-05-033, as discussed above. In its comments on the draft workshop report, AARP complains that the scope of the workshops was not clear. Energy Division's May 9, 2001 letter to the utilities may have contributed to some of AARP's confusion because it requested the information in Ordering Paragraph 10 from all of the utilities, not just the SMJU as intended by the decision. Nonetheless, Energy Division correctly clarified the intent and scope of the workshops at the workshops themselves and in the workshop report. In any event, D.01-05-033 clearly stated that the focus of the workshops was to obtain program information from the SMJU in order to develop funding allocation recommendations for Commission consideration. (See D.01-05-033, pp. 59-61, Conclusion of Law 39.) Accordingly, we address those funding allocation issues in today's decision.