Task 4. Community Storage Verified Decision The GPI provided detailed Participation in the third application is information about the hurdles hindered by the lack of program rules, to the development of but the current record does not provide a community energy-storage basis to adopt rules at this time. systems. Decision pg. 59.] declines to enact reforms Pleadings at this point in time in the rules governing community storage In terms of hurdles to community systems, on the basis that the energy, we discuss in some detail the current record is not interconnection issues facing sufficiently developed to community energy and DER more support the adoption of new generally and suggest some ways in rules. The GPI made a which the Commission could improve substantial contribution on this matters. [GPI Comments, 2/5/16, pg. 2, issue by enriching the record and see following.] on this issue, and we look forward to continuing to provide information on community storage systems as the proceeding proceeds, so that rules can be adopted in the not too distant future. Duplication of Effort (§ 1801.3(f) and § 1802.5): CPUC Intervenor’s Assertion Discussion Yes Verified a. Was the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) a party to the proceeding? Yes Verified b. Were there other parties to the proceeding with positions similar to yours? Verified c. If so, provide name of other parties: Cal. Energy Storage Alliance, Marin Clean Energy, Sierra Club, TURN, EDF, Clean Coalition, AREM, CLECA, NRDC, Charge Point. d. claim of non-duplication: This proceeding covers a wide Verified Intervenor’s variety of topics related to energy storage issues. The Green Power Institute coordinated its efforts in this proceeding with other parties in order to avoid duplication of effort, and added significantly to the outcome of the deliberations. Some amount of duplication Commission’s has occurred in this proceeding on all sides of contentious issues, but Green Power provided our own unique perspective on issues, avoided
Task 4. Community Storage The GPI provided detailed information about the hurdles to the development of community energy-storage systems. Decision declines to enact reforms at this point in time in the rules governing community storage systems, on the basis that the current record is not sufficiently developed to support the adoption of new rules. The GPI made a substantial contribution on this issue by enriching the record on this issue, and we look forward to continuing to provide information on community storage systems as the proceeding proceeds, so that rules can be adopted in the not too distant future. Decision Participation in the third application is hindered by the lack of program rules, but the current record does not provide a basis to adopt rules at this time. pg. 59.] Pleadings In terms of hurdles to community energy, we discuss in some detail the interconnection issues facing community energy and DER more generally and suggest some ways in which the Commission could improve matters. [GPI Comments, 2/5/16, pg. 2, and see following.] Verified Duplication of Effort (§ 1801.3(f) and § 1802.5): Intervenor’s Assertion CPUC Discussion a. Was the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) a party to the proceeding? Yes Verified b. Were there other parties to the proceeding with positions similar to yours? Yes Verified c. If so, provide name of other parties: Cal. Energy Storage Alliance, Marin Clean Energy, Sierra Club, TURN, EDF, Clean Coalition, AREM, CLECA, NRDC, Charge Point. Verified d. Intervenor’s claim of non-duplication: This proceeding covers a wide variety of topics related to energy storage issues. The Green Power Institute coordinated its efforts in this proceeding with other parties in order to avoid duplication of effort, and added significantly to the outcome of the Commission’s deliberations. Some amount of duplication has occurred in this proceeding on all sides of contentious issues, but Green Power provided our own unique perspective on issues, avoided Verified
195750990.docx