Word Document PDF Document |
COM/SK1/cvm ALTERNATE DRAFT Agenda ID# 4496
Alternate to Agenda ID# 4494
Ratesetting
Decision ALTERNATE DRAFT DECISION OF COMMISSIONER KENNEDY
(Mailed April 8, 2005)
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Application of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E) for Approval of Incremental Energy Efficiency Program Activities for Summer 2005. |
Application 05-02-029 (Filed February 25, 2005) |
OPINION ON THE UTILITY'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INCREMENTAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY ACTIVITIES FOR SUMMER 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
OPINION ON THE UTILITY'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INCREMENTAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY ACTIVITIES FOR SUMMER 2005 22
A. Concerns Related to the Summer of 2005 66
B. The Use of Existing Funds 77
C. Allocation of Benefits among Ratepayer Classes 99
IV. Categorization and Need for Hearings 3838
V. Comments on Draft Decision 3838
VI. Assignment of Proceeding 3838
Findings of Fact................................................................................... 3939
Conclusions of Law.............................................................................. 4141
ORDER.............................................................................................. 4242
OPINION ON THE UTILITY'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INCREMENTAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY ACTIVITIES FOR SUMMER 2005
There have been growing concerns about the sufficiency of supplies this summer in southern California. In response to these concerns, Southern California Edison Company (SCE) on February 25, 2005, and revised on March 28, 2005, filed a proposal to augment energy efficiency programs designed to reduce peak demand for the summer 2005. In this decision we approve the incremental funding for which SCE originally sought approval. SCE's initial proposal was $57 million in incremental funding above currently authorized levels. While we approve revised programs of this magnitude, we order SCE to redirect $18.7 million in uncommitted energy efficiency funds from prior years for the purposes approved in this decision, and fund only the remaining amounts with new revenues.
We are encouraged by SCE's proposal to meet a potentially tight supply situation with energy efficiency measures. This is not only consistent with our view that energy efficiency is a reliable resource that can effectively meet the energy needs of the state, but it is also consistent with the loading order as discussed in the state's Energy Action Plan.1
1 http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/REPORT/28715.htm