STATE OF MAINE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Docket No. 2002-162
September
26, 2002
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Procedures for Conservation
Program Planning
REQUEST
FOR INPUT
ON
EXISTING UTILITY
PROGRAMS
We
are soliciting comments from Maine T&D utilities on whether, and to what
extent, they wish to continue offering energy efficiency programs to their
electric customers, as part of the portfolio of on-going energy efficiency
programs implemented by the Commission pursuant to PL 2001, ch. 624. We also invite other interested persons to
comment on this topic.
PL
2001, ch. 624 (The Conservation Act or the Act),[1]
enacted during the second session of the 120th Legislature,
establishes the terms that govern an electric energy conservation program in
Maine. Section 4 of ch. 624, which
enacts 35-A M.R.S.A. § 3211-A, directs the Maine Public Utilities Commission
(Commission) to “…develop and, to the extent of available funds, implement
conservation programs….” The Act
contains a wide range of goals and criteria that govern the selection of
conservation programs and requires the Commission to establish definitions,
procedures, and criteria before implementing programs.
On April 8, 2002 the Commission issued an Order
Extending Utility Energy Efficiency Programs, wherein the Commission directed
that T&D utilities continue to operate their existing energy conservation
programs in a manner that is consistent with recent program operations until
such time as they are directed to do otherwise by the Commission. This was clarified in an Advisory Opinion
Regarding CMP’s Existing Conservation Programs, issued on July 8, 2002.
On June 13, 2002, the Commission issued an
Order Establishing Interim Conservation Programs. By this Order, the Commission decided to implement a number of
interim conservation programs. Pursuant
to Section 7 of ch. 624, to avoid delay in implementing conservation programs,
the Commission may implement interim programs that do not satisfy the requirements
of 35-A § 3211-A. Interim programs must
terminate no later than December 31, 2003.
We have implemented some interim programs and will implement the
remaining programs during 2002 and 2003. The Order also stated that the
Commission would consider which of the utility programs to continue funding
through the Conservation Program Fund, after the Tier-1, Tier-2 and Tier-3
interim programs were implemented.
On July 23, 2002, the Commission issued an
Order Establishing Procedure and Schedule for Conservation Programs Implemented
Pursuant to P.L. 2001, ch. 624. In the
Order, the Commission stated that it will decide funding and economic potential
issues, and then decide upon a program plan, and would do so after concluding
the rulemaking to define cost effectiveness.
The Commission directed any interested person to file economic potential
studies by September 10[2]. In an August 22 Procedural Order, the
Commission scheduled a technical conference on October 2 to discuss all
economic potential studies submitted by interested persons.
On August 20, 2002, the Commission opened a
rulemaking to revise Chapter 380 of the Commission’s Rules to define
“low-income residential consumers” and “small business consumers” for
conservation program purposes, as required by 35-A M.R.S.A. § 3211-A (1)(B)(1)
and (2). The revision will also
establish the cost effectiveness criteria that will govern the Commission’s
selection of conservation programs, as required by 35-A M.R.S.A. § 3211-A
(2). We have received comments and have
conducted a public hearing in this rulemaking proceeding. The Commission expects to issue a final Rule
during October.
On September 24, 2002, the Commission issued
an Order Establishing Goals, Objectives, and Strategies for Conservation
Programs Implemented Pursuant to P.L. 2001, ch. 624. In that order, the Commission established goals, objectives, and
strategies as required by 35-A M.R.S.A. (2).
These goals, objectives, and strategies will govern the selection of
on-going energy efficiency programs.
III. REQUEST FOR UTILITY INPUT
We
will be considering programs to include in the 2003 Energy Efficiency Program
Plan during October and November. As part of the planning process, we invite
Maine T&D utilities to submit written comments on the continuation of their
current interim programs by October 21, 2002. Each utility should provide a
list of the energy efficiency programs it currently offers, and indicate
whether it wishes to discontinue the program, continue the program as is, or
continue the program with modifications.
We
have scheduled a technical conference for November 6, 2002 to discuss existing
utility programs. Persons wishing to
make a presentation[3] at this
conference should notify the Presiding Officer, in writing or by e-mail, not
later than October 21, so that adequate provision can be made for all
interested parties.
To
assist in plan development, and to allow the Commission to compare program
suggestions in a consistent manner, each utility should provide in its written
comments and/or presentations, as much of the following information as possible
for each program the utility proposes to continue.
Ø
A brief summary of the
program, including:
o
What is the target
market, including any specific targeted segments?
o
What are the program
objectives, and what is the overall program strategy?
o
What are the barriers
to implementation of energy efficiency by the target market and how will they
be overcome?
o
What are the major
activities of the proposed program?
o
What are the key
measures of success?
o
What is the estimated
cost of the program?
Ø
A summary of program
activity to date, including number of participants, energy saved (annual and
lifetime), and program cost (utility and participant), for the current year and
since program inception.
Ø
An estimate of the cost
effectiveness of the proposed program.[4]
This analysis should be based on actual program data to the extent possible.
With this estimate, provide as much supporting information as possible,
including:
o
A list of the energy
efficiency measures (EEMs) included in the proposed program
o
The cost of each EEM,
as compared to an equivalent standard measure
o
The estimated annual
electric savings for each EEM, in kWh and kW.
o
Any operation and
maintenance costs or savings
o
Any cost or savings in
other resources
o
Any
non-resource-related costs or benefits
Ø
A discussion of the
program’s effectiveness in meeting the overall goals, objectives, and
strategies for energy efficiency programs, established in our September 24,
2002 Order in Docket 2002-162.
Ø
A discussion of why the
program should be offered for customers in a particular utility service
territory, rather than on a statewide basis.
Ø
A discussion of why the
utility should operate the program, rather than include it in the statewide
program portfolio and select a provider through competitive bid.
Ø
A discussion of how the
utility will coordinate program design and implementation with statewide
programs, to avoid duplication of services or conflicting operation.
Ø
References to similar
programs operated elsewhere.
Persons who propose programs
should indicate where the Commission could obtain additional information if
needed.
Dated at Augusta, Maine,
this 26th day of September, 2002.
BY ORDER OF THE PRESIDING
OFFICER
_______________________________
James A. Buckley
[1]The Conservation Act, and the Commission Orders
referenced here may be found on the Electric Conservation Activities section of
the Commission’s web page (http://www.state.me.us/mpuc).
[2]The Public Advocate subsequently requested, and was
granted, filing extensions to September 26, 2002. No other party filed a
technical or economic potential study by September 10th.
[3]The Commission will supply a TV/VCR, an overhead
projector, and a screen. Parties that wish to use other presentation media
should plan on providing their own equipment, and should notify the Presiding
Officer of their plans.
[4]In Docket 2002-473, the Commission is currently revising Chapter 380,
including cost effectiveness tests. Until a final rule is issued, parties may
estimate cost effectiveness using either the modified societal test, as
described in the Notice of Rulemaking dated August 20, 2002, or the all
ratepayers test, as described in the Order Establishing interim Conservation
Programs issued June 13, 2002 in Docket 2002-161. Parties should clearly
indicate which test they used.