ATTACHMENT 2
PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS
145496
2003 IOU STATEWIDE PROGRAMS
1. Single-Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Single-Family Energy Efficiency Rebate (Single-Family Rebate) program targets all market actors in the residential energy efficiency retrofit and renovation product supply chain to increase market penetration of related products. The program includes (1) customer rebates, (2) customer information and education, and (3) marketing and outreach to manufacturers, retailers, and distributors.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Hard-to-Reach Targets | |
PG&E |
$20,469,328 |
16,248,597 |
22,217 |
3,250,342 |
35% of Payments and Savings |
SCE |
$6,000,000 |
17,025,886 |
11,803 |
NA |
34% of Applications |
SDG&E |
$3,979,000 |
8,332,654 |
4,038 |
476,998 |
60% of Applications |
SCG* |
$2,880,965 |
2,675,121 |
758 |
952,328 |
23% of Applications |
TOTAL |
$33,329,293 |
44,282,258 |
38,816 |
4,679,668 |
NA |
*SCG's budget excludes $61, 035 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
New Measure - High Efficiency Electric Water Storage Heaters
Customers receive incentives when they replace old electric water heaters with electric water heaters with energy factors of at least 0.91. Customers using gas water heaters are not eligible for this incentive. The IOUs proposed incorporating this measure into their residential rebate program in order to accommodate customers with all electric homes.
Increased Measure Option - Thermostatic Expansion Valve (TXV)
Customers will be entitled to apply for a $25 rebate for installing thermostatic expansion valves (TXV) when they install new Energy Star qualified central air conditioners or heat pumps at the Tier One level. This option was not previously available for purchase of Tier One products. The modification recognizes that TXVs sustain product efficiency after installation.
Increased Rebates - Whole House Fans and Pool Pumps/Motors
IOUs will increase rebates for whole house fans and single-speed pool pump & motor replacements by $25.00 and for dual-speed pool pump & motor replacements by $50.00. The IOUs proposed the increase to stimulate demand for these products because applications for them fell in PY2002.
Consistent Installation Standards - Pool Pumps/Motors
SDG&E proposes to reduce the requirements for pool pumps and motors to achieve statewide consistency. Specifically, SDG&E proposes to eliminate the requirements of (1) peak shifting and (2) reduction of filtering time.
While statewide consistency is one program objective, it should not take precedence over goals relating to energy savings and cost-effectiveness. For that reason, we will deny SDG&E's proposal to eliminate its peak shifting and filtering time standards and instead require the other IOUs to adopt the standards used by SDG&E in 2002.
All IOUs shall maintain the unit goals proposed for PY2003. Their future quarterly reports should include kW and kWh projections corrected for the increased standard. The entries for those measures should be accompanied by an explanation of how the numbers were changed from the filed implementation plans.
Retracted Measures
Energy Star® 80% AFUE furnaces will be removed from the list of measures eligible for incentives due to low customer demand for the measure.
Reductions to PG&E's Administrative Budget
PG&E has allocated a significantly smaller proportion of its proposed total program budget to financial incentives than the other three IOUs. PG&E's energy and demand savings goals are correspondingly lower.
Financial Incentives ($) |
Total Program Budget* ($) |
Incentive Percentage of Budget | |
Edison |
3,817,000 |
6,257,774* |
0.61 |
PG&E |
8,611,000 |
21,386,000 |
0.40 |
SDG&E |
2,832,657 |
4,079,683* |
0.69 |
SoCalGas |
2,000,560 |
3,207,548* |
0.62 |
*Includes budgeted funding from non-PGC sources generally for administrative costs such as pensions and benefits.
Thus, we believe PG&E should increase their energy savings targets considerably commensurate with the other utilities and require them to do so. In essence, PG&E is required to augment the portion of its budget spent on financial incentives by approximately $6 million and should therefore revise its savings targets correspondingly upward.
2. Multi-Family Energy Efficiency Rebate Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Multi-Family Rebate program combines information, education, and energy management services that include targeted marketing and customer incentives to
encourage property owners/managers to select energy efficient measures. The Multifamily Rebate program offers rebates for the following types of measures: apartment improvements, common area improvements, mechanical improvements and high-efficiency heating and cooling equipment.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Hard-to-Reach Targets | |
PG&E |
$ 3,200,000 |
3,092,358 |
845 |
281,696 |
30% of Applications |
SCE |
$2,000,000 |
3,989,157 |
314 |
NA |
36% of Applications |
SDG&E |
$1,867,000 |
2,687,523 |
353 |
368,153 |
93% of Applications |
SCG* |
$1,657,310 |
1,695,044 |
1,863 |
755,503 |
29% of Applications |
TOTAL |
$8,724,310 |
11,464,082 |
3,375 |
1,405,352 |
*SCG's budget excludes $40,690 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
New Measures/Rebates
· Electric Water Heaters, R30 and R40 Reflector Lighting will be added to the list of measures eligible for incentives.
· Incentives for Energy Star® porch lights will be expanded to include all exterior fluorescent lighting applications.
· Two levels of clothes washer rebates will be offered, one for machines installed in tenant units and the other for coin-operated units in common areas.
· Two levels of incentives will be available for central system natural gas equipment controllers. The incentives for this measure will be based upon specific display features of the equipment and the number of tenant units served.
Retracted Measures
· Energy Star® 80% AFUE furnaces will be removed from the list of measures eligible for incentives due to low customer demand for the measure.
Increased Rebates
· Energy Star® programmable thermostats will be increased to $50.00 (fifty dollars) per unit [from $20.00 (twenty dollars) in PY2002.]
· High performance window rebates will be paid at twice the level in PY2002, $1.00 (one dollar) per square foot.
· Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) rebates will now be tiered to encourage the installation of higher savings CFLs.
Decreased Rebates
· Rebates for natural gas storage water heaters will be reduced to $40.00 from their PY2002 level of $50.00.
Addition of Reservation System
The IOUs propose a reservation system for PY2003 so that property owners and managers have assurance that money will be available by the time they have installed energy efficiency products. We agree that a reservation system will improve participant confidence that funds will be available when they finally submit completed incentive applications. We have two concerns about such a system: (1) no program participant should be able to reserve a large percentage of the available funding and (2) funds should not be tied up awaiting projects that are not completed, or take a very long time to complete. Accordingly, the IOUs shall limit reservations for a single program participant (including installing contractors and property management companies) to no more than 5% of the available statewide incentive budget. In addition, reservations of funding should expire within 45 days if installations are not complete and final claims for incentives submitted. Participants may be provided with an extension to the 45-day period, at the discretion of the IOU.
Reductions to PG&E's Administrative Budget
PG&E has allocated a significantly smaller proportion of its proposed total program budget to financial incentives than the other three IOUs. PG&E's energy and demand savings goals are correspondingly lower.
Proposed Budget Comparison
Multi-family Rebates |
|||||
Financial Incentives ($) |
Total ProgramBudget* ($) |
Incentive Percentage of Budget |
Approved Budget |
Incentive Percentage of Budget | |
Edison |
1,474,000 | 2,069,948 |
0.71 |
||
PG&E |
2,165,800 |
4,201,000 |
0.52 |
3,200,000 |
0.68 |
SDG&E |
1,474,259 |
1,911,522 |
0.77 |
||
SoCalGas |
1,137,660 | 1,804,658 |
0.63 |
||
*Includes budgeted funding from non-PGC sources generally for administrative costs such as pensions and benefits.
We do not have information to determine whether PG&E could have spent additional dollars on direct incentives and therefore will not impose higher energy savings goals on the utility. We will, however, reduce PG&E's Multi-Family Rebate budget to $3,200,000. By retaining the proposed energy, demand savings, and measure unit goals, this reduction will effectively make PG&E's administrative costs comparable to those of the other IOUs since, in effect, PG&E will be required to reduce its administrative expenses.
3. Residential Appliance Recycling Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Statewide Residential Appliance Recycling Program (RARP) targets older, energy inefficient refrigerators and freezers for recycling and offers rebate ($35 or a five-pack CFL) to customers in exchange for appliances that are in working condition at the time of pick up. The program will operate until the funds are spent, or until the end of the calendar year 2003, whichever comes first. Edison is statewide program administrator and conducts marketing in its service territory.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets (# of refrigerators/ # of freezers recycled) | |
PG&E |
$ 2,090,000 |
12,880,360 |
2,010 |
N/A |
8,954/2,238 |
SCE |
$ 6,000,000 |
38,618,794 |
5,987 |
N/A |
26,888/6,722 |
SDG&E |
$1,000,000 |
6,044,371 |
920 |
N/A |
4,180/1,045 |
TOTAL |
$9,090,000 |
57,543,525 |
8,917 |
N/A |
40,022/10,005 |
The adjustments to the NTGR for the 2003 program reduce energy savings targets. No changes are ordered to the budget.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
The IOUs did not propose any changes to the program for 2003, although others did. We adopt the following program modifications:
· The program administrator (SCE) will issue a competitive RFP for the recycling services associated with the 2003 RARP.
· The Net to Gross Ratios (NTGR) used in the 2002 RARP (0.80) are to be restored to previously used NTGR derived in CALMAC study #537 (0.53 for refrigerators and 0.57 for freezers). These lower ratios take into account the expansion of the program to allow recycling of primary refrigerators, which can be expected to be replaced rather than retired, thereby reducing program energy savings. Recent measurement and verification efforts also indicate that actual kWh savings are lower than claimed savings using the current NTGR values; hence, a lower NTGR would be a step to realign claimed and actual energy savings.
· The lower threshold of admissible refrigerators and freezers should be raised from 10 to 14 cubic feet. This change recognizes that refrigerators in the size range from 10-13 cf are predominantly very old, single-door refrigerators that consume too little energy to warrant inclusion in the program. They are not inefficient by any standard, and as such should not be collected or recycled using PGC funds. Recycling them under the program could increase energy consumption if they are replaced.
4. Residential Retrofit Home Energy Efficiency Survey Program.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
Each IOU proposes to conduct mail and online surveys to assist consumers in improving energy use in their homes. At least 50% of the utilities' mail-in survey target will be sent to hard-to-reach customers.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets | |
PG&E |
$1,458,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
29,000 mail-in surveys; 14,500 HTR mailing |
SCE |
$1,295,654 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
18,000 mail-in surveys; 9,000 HTR mailing |
SDG&E |
$250,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
8,000 mail-in surveys; 4,000 HTR mailing |
SCG* |
$145,803 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
6,000 mail-in surveys; 3,000 HTR mailing |
TOTAL |
$ 3,149,457 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
61,000 mail-in surveys; 30,500 HTR mailing |
*SCG's budget excludes $24,197 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
We support the utilities' efforts to assist customers in determining how they might improve the energy efficiency of their homes. We require each to provide mailed and online surveys in Spanish. The IOUs should continue to send 50% of mail-in surveys to hard to reach customers.
5. California Energy Star® New Homes Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The program is comprised of incentives, technical support, design assistance, marketing and promotion, and building energy labeling to promote energy efficient construction of new homes. Beginning in 2002, the IOUs implemented separate program components for the multi-family and single-family new home sectors.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets (# of courses; minimum # of students) | |
|
PG&E |
$10,009,000 |
1,811,520 |
1,958 |
997,920 |
9,600 |
Multi-family |
$3,035,400 |
498,240 |
547 |
328,320 |
3,600 (design assistance & incentives) |
Single-family |
$ 6,973,600 |
1,313,280 |
1,411 |
669,600 |
6,000 |
|
SCE |
$ 5,000,000 |
4,493,600 |
4,789 |
6,000 | |
Multi-family |
$750,000 |
497,600 |
561 |
1,000 | |
Single-family |
$4,250,000 |
3,996,000 |
4,228 |
5,000 | |
SDG&E |
$ 2,562,000 |
1,709,204 |
1,835 |
98,320 |
4,700 |
Multi-family |
$950,000 |
631,200 |
677 |
88,800 |
3000 |
Single-family |
$1,612,000 |
1,078,004 |
1,158 |
9,520 |
1,700 |
SCG* |
$ 1,615,311 |
1,036,682 |
1,112 |
145,845 |
4,927/multi-family focus |
TOTAL |
$19,186,311 |
9,051,006 |
9,693 |
1,242,085 |
25,227 (single- & multi-family |
*SCG's budget excludes $64,689 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS
The utilities propose to add a multi-family builder design assistance option and to provide verification assistance to builders through the CHEERS program. This appears a reasonable way to increase participation by multi-family builders and we approve this program design change.
The utilities also propose to eliminate the two-tiered incentive system in favor of a single incentive paid to builders who construct buildings that are 15% more efficient than Title 24 standards. By eliminating the higher 20% performance threshold, the utilities hope to increase builder participation and conform the program to the EPA's Energy Star program.
Proposed modifications to this program are designed to improve program participation and recognize that the higher incentives may have led to early subscription of the program in some cases. However, the proposed change creates the potential for "lost opportunities" associated with elimination of the second tier option. In order to encourage wider-scale participation at the 15% level and retain the reward for yet higher energy savings at the 20% level, we eliminate the 20% participation level in the coastal climates (due to the lower energy savings potential) and reduce the 20% incentive in the non-coastal climate to $700. This modification will retain a 20% performance level while allowing program funds to stretch further than was possible in 2002. It will also allow the Commission to evaluate whether or not the higher incentive is driving the builder to a 20% performance standard. The utilities should recalculate program energy savings and demand reduction targets to conform to this program modification, and file revised program implementation plans including such recalculations as directed in this decision.
6. Standard Performance Contract (SPC) Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The SPC program is designed to achieve energy savings in commercial, industrial and agricultural facilities with demand exceeding 500 kW through custom-designed energy savings retrofits. Small businesses may also participate if their energy efficiency measures do not qualify for the Express Efficiency program. Utilities provide information services, financial incentives, technical support and networking as part of this program. The Commission requires that at least 70% of SPC funds be used for incentives for more difficult to reach installations of non-lighting measures.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
||
|
PG&E |
$19,701,000 |
64,160,286 |
7,694 |
2,685,333 |
|
SCE |
$13,700,000 |
71,656,875 |
14,724 |
||
SDG&E |
$ 5,760,000 |
15,831,723 |
1,972 |
257,876 |
|
SCG |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
TOTAL |
$39,161,000 |
151,648,884 |
24,390 |
2,943,209 |
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
· D.01-11-066 emphasized the need for IOUs to promote not only lighting, but non-lighting measures in SPC especially for large and medium size customers who often have the financing and incentive to implement cost-effective lighting projects on their own. In line with this, in D.02-03-056 the Commission adopted SCE's approach of limiting participation in the SPC program to projects with no more than 20% (referred to as the "80-20 rule") of lighting measures. In their 2003 SPC program submissions, the IOUs propose to modify the 80-20 rule to include all fluorescent lamps except for the installation of "leading edge" T-5 and PL lamps. The IOUs point out that they will nevertheless offer no more than 30% of incentives for lighting projects, consistent with current rules.
Even "leading edge" lighting projects are often cost-effective and able to be financed by large and medium sized customers. Yet, in some cases, the relaxing of the rule may result in significant savings for business and institutions that do not currently qualify for other programs ( e.g., large high-schools and middle-schools with loads over 500 kW), and for some harder to reach customers. We authorize the proposed modification but expect the utilities to aggressively market non-lighting measures.
· The utilities propose to increase gas incentives from $.45/therm to $.60/therm to increase program participation. We grant this request, consistent with our overall goal to increase participation in cost-effective energy efficiency programs.
7. Express Efficiency Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Express Efficiency program pays small- to medium-sized nonresidential customers to equip facilities with selected energy efficiency measures. The program applies to customers with monthly loads of less than 500 kW, and whose annual gas usage does not exceed 250,000 therms. Among the technologies to which incentives apply are T8 and/or T5 lamps, electronic ballasts, lighting controls such as photocell controllers and occupancy sensors, air conditioning equipment and controls, compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), high-efficiency motors, efficient refrigeration equipment, HVAC upgrades, and other measures.
The program is designed to provide useful information, promote the installation of best technologies, provide financing, and overcome barriers such as split incentives between building owners and renters.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets HTR Targets | |
PG&E |
$ 9,655,500 |
137,000,000 |
25,000 |
1,600,000 |
41 percent |
SCE |
$ 7,000,000 |
71,869,000 |
15,000 |
N/A |
47 percent |
SDG&E |
$ 3,364,000 |
51,363,655 |
9,722 |
608,596 |
59 percent |
SCG* |
$ 3,182,410 |
17,086 |
N/A |
2,162,482 |
42 percent |
|
TOTAL |
$23,201,910 |
260,249,741 |
4,371,078 |
*SCG's budget excludes $72,590 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
Because many of the customers to whom this program is offered are hard-to-reach, the program is limited to customers with a total aggregate account load (by a single owner) of less than 500 kW. This "Account Aggregation Rule" was imposed to ensure that funds are targeted to smaller, harder to reach small businesses that most often do not have the technical or financial resources available to larger, single-owner chain store customers whose load per building may be less than 500 kW, but whose overall aggregate account load exceeds the 500 kW limit.
In 2003 the utilities propose to replace the "Account Aggregation Rule" with a program eligibility limit of 500 kW per service account. They argue that the account aggregation rule was difficult for customers to understand in 2002, and "created a significant barrier for eligible and non-eligible customers alike." SCE, SDG&E and SCG would address the possibility that hard-to-reach small business may be disadvantaged by participation by large chain stores by limiting incentives to any single corporation or chain account customer to $25,000.
For whatever reasons, some utilities have not met Express Efficiency program goals in 2002. SCE, SDG&E, and SCG's proposed modification is designed to improve energy savings while balancing our concerns that this program target smaller customers. We adopt the utility proposal to permit incentives of up to $25,000 per corporation or chain account customer for work done on service accounts with loads not exceeding 500 kW. This proposal would apply to all utilities.
8. Nonresidential Energy Audit Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Nonresidential Energy Audits program offers free energy audits to nonresidential customers. The energy audit describes specific ways to reduce utility bills considering the customer's billing history and other customer-specific information on equipment and building characteristics.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Targeted Number of Audits |
||
PG&E |
$ 4,390,500 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
6500 {including 3500 HTR} |
|
SCE |
$2,200,000 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
7100 {including 2840 HTR} |
|
SDG&E |
$871,000 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
5000 {including 800 HTR} |
|
SCG* |
$2,665,150 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
4000 {including 400 HTR} |
|
TOTAL |
$10,126,650 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
*SCG budget excludes $51,850 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
There were no program changes proposed by the IOUs for PY2003. However, we will require that in exchange for approving the number of audits as proposed, the IOUs shall include in their revised program implementation plans and quarterly reports the numbers of the types of audits that are planned and conducted.
9. Building Operator Certification and Training Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
Building operator certification and training programs educate operators of large and medium sized commercial buildings, including public buildings, on short- and long-term peak demand and energy savings strategies for their buildings. After participating in training activities, individual building operators become certified as efficient building service providers. This credential contributes to the employee's value to the company and provides a professional benefit to the employee.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets (# of courses; minimum # of students) | |
|
PG&E |
$ 263,500 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
3c/60 stud. |
SCE |
$ 500,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
5c/100 stud. |
SDG&E |
$ 150,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
1c/20 stud. |
SCG* |
$ 142,099 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
1 c/20 stud. |
|
TOTAL |
$1,055,599 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
10c/200 stud. |
*SCG budget excludes$7,901 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
The utilities offered Level I of the program in 2002. For 2003, the utilities propose to work with the program contractor to develop Level II, which would focus on enhanced energy savings strategies for building operators. The Commission fully supports this effort and encourages the utilities to explore other ways that the program might be enhanced to facilitate increase energy savings.
10. Savings By Design Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
Savings By Design (SBD) encourages nonresidential building owners, tenants and design teams to exceed current Title 24 energy efficiency standards (or established standards for industrial and specialty processes) by 10% or more for their new construction or renovation/remodeling projects.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Hard-to-Reach Targets for Participation of non-Chain Accounts | |
|
PG&E |
$13,997,000 |
48,000,000 |
17,278 |
380,000 |
30% |
SCE |
$8,900,000 |
42,812,895 |
7,818 |
NA |
7.8% |
SDG&E |
$ 3,912,000 |
14,980,303 |
2,891 |
196,083 |
6% |
SCG* |
$2,156,966 |
8,554,703 |
1,651 |
111,976 |
30% |
|
TOTAL |
$28,965,966 |
114,347,901 |
29,638 |
688,059 |
NA |
*SCG budget excludes $74,034 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
The State of California Energy Policy Advisory Committee, the American Institute of Architects and other program participants recommended that the IOUs increase the time allowed for completion of a project from 36 months to 48 months to recognize the time needed to complete a construction project. We accept this program modification.
11. Upstream Residential Lighting Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
This program provides incentives to retailers and manufacturers for offering utility customers point-of-sale discounts on qualified lighting products from participating retailers. The program also offers funding for manufacturers to discount wholesale prices to retailers for products not included in the utilities' point-of-sale rebates.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Hard-to-Reach Targets | |
|
PG&E |
$9,633,000 |
210,309,440 |
26,078 |
15% of program incentive budgets to retailers in hard-to-reach areas; 10% of program incentive budgets to grocery and drug stores |
SCE |
$2,000,000 |
34,985,185 |
4,913 | |
SDG&E |
$1,920,000 |
28,149,611 |
3,981 | |
TOTAL |
$13,553,000 |
273,444,236 |
34,972 |
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
For 2003, the IOUs propose to offer tiered incentives for Energy Star CFLs and fixtures as follows:
2002 |
2003 | |
Energy Star® CFL 19 watts or less |
$2 |
$1 |
Energy Star® CFL 20 watts or greater |
$2 |
$2 |
Energy Star® Int./ or Ext. fixture19 watts or less |
$10 |
$5 |
Energy Star® Int./ or Ext. fixture20 watts or greater |
$10 |
$10 |
Energy Star® Torchiere < 65 watts |
$10 |
$5 |
Energy Star® Torchiere > 65 watts |
$10 |
$10 |
Energy Star® Ceiling fan with Energy Star® Light kit |
$20 |
$20 |
The utilities propose reducing the incentives for lower wattage units because wholesale pricing for the lower wattage units has become more competitive. The utilities expect that tiered rebates will improve program participation and energy savings. We find the IOUs' proposed tiered rebates reasonable and approve them. As in 2002, the utilities must increase the quantity of products provided to non-traditional delivery channels such as grocery stores, drug stores, and outlets in remote locations. We will again require that at least 15% of the rebate budget be reserved for customers in rural areas, and at least 10% of the rebate funds be reserved for redemption through purchases from new delivery channels of grocery and drug stores.
12. Education and Training Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Statewide Energy Efficiency Education and Training program is offered by PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, and SCG. This program educates contractors, architects and designers, residential developers and builders, manufacturers, commercial users, environmental organizations, agricultural users, and others on ways to improve energy efficiency.
The program promotes energy efficiency to a variety of customer segments through energy centers and other informational forums.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets | |
PG&E |
$ 1,402,966 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SCE |
$ 5,700,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SDG&E |
$ 1,369,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
|
SCG* |
$1,884,310 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
|
TOTAL |
$10,356,276 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
*SCG budget excludes $24,690 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
There are no modifications to this program. SCE's budget proposal for 2003 is not justified in light of its low expenditures in 2002. The Commission will authorize SCE's budget for 2003 based on its annualized 2002 reported expenditures.
13. Crosscutting Codes and Standards Advocacy Program
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
The Statewide Codes and Standards Advocacy Program advocate upgrades and enhancements in energy efficiency standards and codes in the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6, and the Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards, Title 20.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets | |
PG&E |
$1,346,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SCE |
$1,150,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SDG&E |
$ 100,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SCG* |
$ 137,061 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
TOTAL |
$2,733,061 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
*SCG budget excludes $12,939 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
There are no program changes proposed or adopted for 2003.
14. Emerging Technologies - Nos. 409-03
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:
Emerging Technologies program provides information to accelerate the introduction of energy efficiency technologies, applications, and analytical tools that are not widely adopted in California. Large commercial players (architects and designers, builders and contractors) do not typically install new energy efficient technology without external promotional efforts and training. Funding goes mainly to the Emerging Technologies Coordinating Council, comprised of the four large utilities and the California Energy Commission.
PROGRAM BUDGETS AND TARGETS:
Program Budget |
Energy Reduction Targets (kWh) |
Demand Reduction Targets (kW) |
Energy Reduction Targets (Therms) |
Other Targets | |
PG&E |
$1,043,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SCE |
$850,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SDG&E |
$200,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
SCG* |
$769,124 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
See Plan |
TOTAL |
$2,862,124 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
*SCG budget excludes $9,876 in MA&E costs, which SCG mistakenly included in its budget proposal.
APPROVED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS:
The 2003 program is approved as proposed.
