9. Assignment of Proceeding
Loretta M. Lynch is the Assigned Commissioner and Meg Gottstein is the assigned ALJ in this proceeding.
Findings of Fact
1. The LIEE earnings claims presented in this proceeding are the result of three different incentive mechanisms, applied to different program years.
2. ORA has reviewed the accuracy of the mathematical calculations required by each incentive mechanism, as described in this decision.
3. The utilities have completed the PY1998, PY2000 and PY2001 load impact studies in compliance with the requirements of the Measurement and Evaluation Protocols.
4. ORA's approach to verifying installations is well-suited to addressing claims under the PY1998, PY1999 and PY2001 earnings mechanisms because it focuses resources on determining whether the MPS has been reached (i.e., whether any incentives will be earned). That is the only impact that the type and number of installations can have on the PY1998, PY1999 and PY2001 incentive mechanisms. However, ORA's approach to verifying installations is not sufficient for claims made under the PY2000 incentive mechanism because there is no MPS threshold and, under that mechanism, the number and type of installations drives the calculation of PY2000 earnings for the savings measures. Therefore, the record does not confirm the accuracy of the PY2000 earnings claims with respect to actual, verified installations.
5. No independent verification has been conducted to confirm that all four utilities' expenditure data for their first-year claims in this proceeding is actual data, rather than estimated or budgeted.
6. At this time, the record also lacks independent findings concerning the reasonableness of the utilities' other earnings claims in the 2000, 2001 and 2002 AEAP. In addition, the record lacks independent findings regarding the reasonableness of utility administrative costs associated with interruptible tariffs and rotating outages, an issue that was included in the 2002 AEAP per Commission direction.
7. At this time, the second-year claims for PY1998 are the only LIEE earnings claims supported by the record. Adopting the same ratemaking treatment for these LIEE incentives as those currently in effect for the energy efficiency programs that serve non low-income customers is consistent with our determinations in D.01-06-082.
8. As discussed in this decision, WEM's comments on the utilities' LIEE earnings claims do not address issues within the scope of this proceeding.
9. This proceeding does not require that hearings be held with respect to the utilities' requests for LIEE earnings.
Conclusions of Law
1. The utilities' second earnings claims for PY1998 LIEE programs are reasonable and should be authorized. Rate recovery should be consistent with the ratemaking treatment currently in effect for energy efficiency programs that serve non low-income customers.
2. As discussed in this decision, the utilities should track the earnings claims for PY1999, PY2000 and PY2001 in a memorandum account until Energy Division verifies the installations for PY2000 and expenditure data for PY1999, PY2000 and PY2001.
3. As discussed in this decision, Energy Division should audit the administrative costs booked in memorandum accounts by the utilities for their interruptible load programs.
4. In order to move forward as expeditiously as possible with the next steps in this proceeding, this decision should be effective immediately.
INTERIM ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison Company (SCE), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCal), collectively referred to as "the utilities" are authorized recovery of their second-year earnings claims for program year (PY) 1998 Low-Income Energy Efficiency (LIEE) activities as follows:
PG&E: $109,430
SCE: 122,000
SDG&E: 42,500
SoCal: 108,151
Total: $382,081
The utilities shall fund the PY1998 second-year claims associated with electric LIEE program expenditures out of their annual public goods charge LIEE budget. Those incentives associated with gas measures shall come out of gas rate increases, e.g., rate adjustments in the biennial Cost Adjustment Proceeding.
2. As discussed in this decision, the utilities shall track the LIEE earnings claims for PY1999, PY2000 and PY2001 in a memorandum account until Energy Division completes a verification of the installations for PY2000 and of expenditure data for each of those program years. Energy Division may conduct these efforts itself, or hire consultants for this purpose. The costs of these verification activities shall be funded with LIEE program funds, and allocated to each utility in proportion to its relative share of authorized LIEE budgets for the program year.
3. As discussed in this decision, Energy Division shall conduct an audit of the administrative costs booked in memorandum accounts by the utilities for their interruptible load programs. Energy Division may perform the audit itself or hire a consultant for this purpose. The costs of the audit shall be added to the utilities' memorandum accounts for recovery in rates, and allocated to each utility in proportion to the relative size of its interruptible load program administrative costs.
4. The Executive Director shall establish the scope, schedule and budget for the tasks assigned to Energy Division today, taking into consideration the availability of Commission staff resources and contracting funds.
5. This proceeding shall remain open to consider the results of Energy Division's verification of earnings claims, as directed by this decision and by D.03-04-055. It shall also remain open to consider the results of Energy Division's audit of the administrative costs associated with interruptible load programs.
This order is effective today.
Dated: _________, at San Francisco, California.
PHASE I |
FF&U |
Interest |
PHASE I WORKPAPERS |
Index | ||
2000 AEAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PY99 LIEE First Claim |
PG&E |
$383,000 |
$4,000 |
$54,000 |
2000 AEAP, Vol III, pp. VII-10 & VII-11 |
Table 5 |
PY99 LIEE First Claim |
SCE |
$170,212 |
$1,978 |
$4,337 |
A.00-05-005, Testimony, Appendix C, |
Table 1 |
PY99 LIEE First Claim |
SDG&E |
$39,000 |
$1,079 |
$8,270 |
A.00-05-003, Appendix C |
Table 7 |
PY99 LIEE First Claim |
SCG |
$103,000 |
$2,411 |
$17,940 |
May 2000 Energy Efficiency Programs |
Table 11 |
Subtotal - PY99 LIEE First Claim |
$695,212 |
$9,467 |
$84,548 |
| ||
PY98 LIEE Second Claim |
PG&E |
$109,432 |
$1,000 |
$22,000 |
2000 AEAP, Vol I, pp. 2-12 to 2-14 |
Tables 13 and 14 |
PY98 LIEE Second Claim |
SCE |
$121,500 |
$1,505 |
$11,133 |
A.00-05-005, Testimony, Appendix D, |
Table 2 |
PY98 LIEE Second Claim |
SDG&E |
$43,000 |
$1,161 |
$8,958 |
A.00-05-003, Appendix B |
Table 8 |
PY98 LIEE Second Claim |
SCG |
$108,000 |
$2,651 |
$24,334 |
May 1999 Energy Efficiency Programs Annual |
Tables 19 and 20 |
Subtotal - PY98 LIEE Second Claim |
$381,932 |
$6,317 |
$66,425 |
| ||
Subtotal - 2000 AEAP |
|
$1,077,143 |
$15,784 |
$150,973 |
|
|
2001 AEAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PY00 LIEE First Claim |
PG&E |
$410,229 |
$4,000 |
$29,000 |
2001 AEAP Update July 20, 2001, Vol. III, |
Tables 15, 16, and 17 |
PY00 LIEE First Claim |
SCE |
$171,940 |
$1,970 |
$1,653 |
A.01-05-009, Testimony, Appendix C. |
Table 3 |
PY00 LIEE First Claim |
SDG&E |
$45,000 |
$1,202 |
$5,341 |
A.01-05-018, Appendix C |
Table 9 |
PY00 LIEE First Claim |
SCG |
$106,000 |
$2,275 |
$7,931 |
A.01-05-017, Appendix B |
Table 12 |
Subtotal - PY00 LIEE First Claim |
$733,169 |
$9,447 |
$43,925 |
| ||
PY99 LIEE Second Claim |
PG&E |
$341,000 |
$4,000 |
$48,000 |
$0.362 2001 AEAP Update July 20, 2001, |
Table 6 |
PY99 LIEE Second Claim |
SCE |
$169,789 |
$2,026 |
$8,605 |
A.01-05-009, Testimony, Appendix C, |
Table 1 |
PY99 LIEE Second Claim |
SDG&E |
$39,000 |
$1,079 |
$8,270 |
A.01-05-018, Appendix B |
Table 7 |
PY99 LIEE Second Claim |
SCG |
$103,000 |
$2,411 |
$17,940 |
May 2000 Energy Efficiency Programs Annual |
Table 11 |
Subtotal - PY99 LIEE Second Claim |
$652,789 |
$9,515 |
$82,816 |
| ||
Subtotal - 2001 AEAP |
|
$1,385,958 |
$18,962 |
$126,741 |
|
|
2002 AEAP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PY01 LIEE First Claim* |
PG&E |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
2002 AEAP Update July 2002, Vol. IV, p. 2-11 |
NA |
PY01 LIEE First Claim |
SCE |
$190,516 |
$2,182 |
$1,303 |
A.02-05-007, Testimony, Appendix C. |
Table 4 |
PY01 LIEE First Claim |
SDG&E |
$107,000 |
$1,465 |
$2,649 |
A.02-05-005,Appendix C |
Table 10 |
PY01 LIEE First Claim |
SCG |
$220,000 |
$4,607 |
$10,450 |
A.02-05-002, Appendix B |
Table 18 |
Subtotal - PY01 LIEE First Claim |
$517,516 |
$8,255 |
$14,403 |
| ||
PY00 LIEE Second Claim |
PG&E |
$410,229 |
$4,000 |
$29,000 |
2002 AEAP Update July 2002, Vol. IV, p.2-12 |
Tables 15, 16, and 17 |
PY00 LIEE Second Claim |
SCE |
$171,940 |
$1,999 |
$4,187 |
A.02-05-007, Testimony, Appendix D. |
Table 3 |
PY00 LIEE Second Claim |
SDG&E |
$45,000 |
$1,202 |
$5,341 |
A.02-05-005,Appendix B |
Table 9 |
PY00 LIEE Second Claim |
SCG |
$106,000 |
$2,275 |
$7,931 |
A.01-05-002, Appendix B |
Table 12 |
$733,169 |
$9,476 |
$46,459 |
| |||
Subtotal - 2002 AEAP |
|
$1,250,686 |
$17,731 |
$60,862 |
|
|
PHASE TOTAL |
|
$3,713,786 |
$60,732 |
$352,979 |
|
|
* PG&E did not achieve the Minimum Performance Standard and therefore makes no claim
ATTACHMENT 1
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
