Background
Current energy efficiency program funding is authorized as a separate component of utility rates and is administered by the utilities under the Commission's direction. Public Utilities Code §381(a)1 provides for the collection of a separate rate component as a nonbypassable element of local electric distribution service, to fund, in part, energy efficiency programs. The utilities are directed to collect and spend these funds on "cost effective energy efficiency and conservation activities" at minimum funding levels, which for PY 2001 are: for SDG&E-$32 million; Edison-$50 million;2 PG&E-$106 million. (§381(c)(1).) PG&E's, SDG&E's and SoCalGas' natural gas energy efficiency programs are funded through rates set in the utilities' general rate cases.
Southern California Edison Company (Edison), Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E), and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) (collectively, the utilities) filed their Program Year (PY) 2001 applications on November 15, 2000, as required by Decision (D.) 00-07-017 (Ordering Paragraph (OP) 93) and in accordance with the Administrative Law Judge's Ruling of August 15, 2000 in A.99-09-049 et. al.3 Following an extensive public input process, the utilities' presented their PY 2001 program plans during the week of October 23, 2000.
By ruling issued on November 20, 2000, the Chief Administrative Law Judge shortened the time for protests and comments and scheduled a prehearing conference (PHC). The ruling required the parties to file PHC statements. A PHC was held on December 5, 2000. On December 18, 2000, parties filed formal protests to the PY 2001 applications.
PY 2001 Applications
The utilities seek approval of a statewide estimated budget of $321.825 million for PY 2001. The utilities' proposed budgets include $259.207 million in electric funds and $62.618 million in gas Demand Side Management (DSM) funds. Of the $259.207 million proposed electric budget, $188 million comes from 2001 Public Goods Charge (PGC) funding pursuant to §381(a). The remainder ($71.207 million) represents projected carry-over of previously unspent funds and balancing account interest.4
Decision D.00-07-017 and D.99-08-021 provided the utilities with programmatic and budgetary direction for their PY 2001 proposals. In addition, the Assigned Commissioners' Ruling issued on August 21, 2000 provided further direction for PY 2001 programs. In the ACR, we established our objective of achieving peak demand savings, through energy efficiency programs. We stated:
1 All statutory references are to the Public Utilities Code unless otherwise stated. 2 Edison's minimum funding level is reduced, by statute, from $90 million for PY 2001 only. 3 A.99-09-049 et al. is the docket in which the utilities filed PY 2000 and 2001 energy efficiency applications. As described further below, we decided in D.00-07-017 to conduct the planning process for PY 2001 applications under this docket. 4 This amount comes primarily from projected unspent funds from PY 2000 programs plus balancing account interest since the carry-over funds from PY 1998 and 1999 were expended on the Summer 2000 Energy Efficiency Initiative (Summer Initiative) authorized in D.00-07-017. (OP 86.)"while we do not set any target percentages for programs that target peak load reduction, we expect that the programs will balance peak and energy demand reductions, equity and targeting of underserved markets, and sustainable long-term energy savings, which is consistent with and furthers the objectives set forth in § 399.15." (Id.)
