In its Replies to Exceptions, the OCA asserts that the ALJs correctly denied waiver request. OCA R. Exc. at 37. The OCA argues that PGW failed to provide PGW’s sufficient reasons for a waiver of this regulation, especially, since there is a possibility that such coordination could potentially be beneficial to low-income customers. PGW’s at 37-38. The OCA further asserts that there is also a possibility of CSPs to Id. PGW’s coordinate efforts to address potentially dangerous instances where customers are using space heating. at 38-39. de facto Id. In its Replies to Exceptions, CAUSE-PA, also in support of the ALJs’ recommendation, highlights that inter-utility coordination is an integral part of the overall energy efficiency program. CAUSE-PA argues that granting request to waive PGW’s this requirement sends the wrong message to other utilities and undermines the need for coordination between and among utilities. CAUSE-PA R. Exc. at 22. CAUSE-PA asserts that waiver request should be rejected whether or not the Commission PGW’s decides to provide specific directive on coordination efforts. CAUSE-PA R. Exc. PGW’s at 22-23. d. Disposition Upon consideration of the evidence of record and the arguments provided by the Parties on this issue, we will deny Exceptions. We are in agreement with PGW’s the explanation that just because PGW is not addressing or identifying the issue of ALJs’ inter-utility coordination in its current DSM plan does not mean 52 Pa. Code Section 58.14(c) should be waived. We note that 52 Pa. Code § 58.14(c)(1), involving inter-utility coordination, requires a gas utility to address electricity usage through the provision of education, efficient light bulbs, installation of electric water heaters and hot water pipe insulation and devices to reduce the flow of hot water. 52 Pa. Code § 58.14(c)(1). As indicated by both the OCA and CAUSE-PA, inter-utility coordination
In its Replies to Exceptions, the OCA asserts that the ALJs correctly denied PGW’s waiver request. OCA R. Exc. at 37. The OCA argues that PGW failed to provide sufficient reasons for a waiver of this regulation, especially, since there is a possibility that such coordination could potentially be beneficial to PGW’s low-income customers. Id. at 37-38. The OCA further asserts that there is also a possibility of PGW’s CSPs to coordinate efforts to address potentially dangerous instances where customers are using de facto space heating. Id. at 38-39. In its Replies to Exceptions, CAUSE-PA, also in support of the ALJs’ recommendation, highlights that inter-utility coordination is an integral part of the overall energy efficiency program. CAUSE-PA argues that granting PGW’s request to waive this requirement sends the wrong message to other utilities and undermines the need for coordination between and among utilities. CAUSE-PA R. Exc. at 22. CAUSE-PA asserts that PGW’s waiver request should be rejected whether or not the Commission decides to provide specific directive on PGW’s coordination efforts. CAUSE-PA R. Exc. at 22-23. d. Disposition Upon consideration of the evidence of record and the arguments provided by the Parties on this issue, we will deny PGW’s Exceptions. We are in agreement with the ALJs’ explanation that just because PGW is not addressing or identifying the issue of inter-utility coordination in its current DSM plan does not mean 52 Pa. Code Section 58.14(c) should be waived. We note that 52 Pa. Code § 58.14(c)(1), involving inter-utility coordination, requires a gas utility to address electricity usage through the provision of education, efficient light bulbs, installation of electric water heaters and hot water pipe insulation and devices to reduce the flow of hot water. 52 Pa. Code § 58.14(c)(1). As indicated by both the OCA and CAUSE-PA, inter-utility coordination