EDF participated in 2017 modifying the post-hearing Verified evidentiary hearings, acting briefing schedule. Opening Briefs as counsel for Siemens and were filed on November 21, 2017 NRDC, and preparing Defense Fund by…Environmental questions. (D.18-05-040 at 4.) (EDF)…” EDF filed timely opening reply briefs were filed “Concurrent and reply briefs after the on December 21, 2017 Verified hearings with respect to (D.18-05-040 at 4.) by…EDF....” standard review projects. 3.1.2 Ownership Structure the Commission to “EDF urges maintain ownership SDG&E’s option, despite arguments that this may cause anti-competitive concerns. EDF contends even if Verified SDG&E owned all the EVSE in the proposed RCP, the 90,000 figure only represents a fraction of the EDF was a consistent needed EVs in service SDG&E’s proponent of utility territory, diminishing ownership, arguing that concerns.” concerns about competition at 21.) were overblown, and 3.4 Impact on Disadvantaged encouraging the Communities Commission to recognize one of the most “EDF contends the benefits of ownership, important deliverables of SDG&E’s as well as the fact that a RCP is delivery of air quality and majority of EVSE providers other benefits to DACs, those participating in the communities hit the hardest by proceeding favored testing emissions from the transportation out an ownership business sector. EDF is encouraged by the model. dedication of the individual utilities to setting minimum targets in DACs, and encourages the Commission to accept SDG&E’s minimum deployment goal of 25 EDF was among a number (D.18-05-040 at 50.) percent.” of parties pushing the 5.2 Impact on Disadvantaged utilities, including PG&E to Communities set a more stringent target the exception of TURN, who “With for deployment in DACs. recommends reducing the proposed rebate available for fast charging stations to Fast Charge site hosts located in DACs, all other parties support proposal for PG&E’s rebate site hosts in DACs to encourage greater deployment of EVs in
EDF participated in evidentiary hearings, acting as counsel for Siemens and NRDC, and preparing questions. EDF filed timely opening and reply briefs after the hearings with respect to standard review projects. EDF was a consistent proponent of utility ownership, arguing that concerns about competition were overblown, and encouraging the Commission to recognize the benefits of ownership, as well as the fact that a majority of EVSE providers participating in the proceeding favored testing out an ownership business model. EDF was among a number of parties pushing the utilities, including PG&E to set a more stringent target for deployment in DACs. 2017 modifying the post-hearing briefing schedule. Opening Briefs were filed on November 21, 2017 by…Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)…” (D.18-05-040 at 4.) “Concurrent reply briefs were filed on December 21, 2017 by…EDF....” (D.18-05-040 at 4.) 3.1.2 Ownership Structure “EDF urges the Commission to maintain SDG&E’s ownership option, despite arguments that this may cause anti-competitive concerns. EDF contends even if SDG&E owned all the EVSE in the proposed RCP, the 90,000 figure only represents a fraction of the needed EVs in SDG&E’s service territory, diminishing concerns.” at 21.) 3.4 Impact on Disadvantaged Communities “EDF contends one of the most important deliverables of SDG&E’s RCP is delivery of air quality and other benefits to DACs, those communities hit the hardest by emissions from the transportation sector. EDF is encouraged by the dedication of the individual utilities to setting minimum targets in DACs, and encourages the Commission to accept SDG&E’s minimum deployment goal of 25 percent.” (D.18-05-040 at 50.) 5.2 Impact on Disadvantaged Communities “With the exception of TURN, who recommends reducing the proposed rebate available for fast charging stations to Fast Charge site hosts located in DACs, all other parties support PG&E’s rebate proposal for site hosts in DACs to encourage greater deployment of EVs in Verified Verified Verified