KGRKJGETMRETU895U-589TY5MIGM5JGB5SDFESFREWTGR54TY
Server : Apache/2.4.62
System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64
User : www ( 80)
PHP Version : 8.3.8
Disable Function : NONE
Directory :  /domains/enrgy/statelin/

Upload File :
current_dir [ Writeable ] document_root [ Writeable ]

 

Current File : /domains/enrgy/statelin/0003olsn.htm
<html>

<head>
<title>March 2000: NJBPU Considers Two Energy Efficiency/Renewable Plans</title>
</head>

<body style="font-family: Arial" vlink="#808080">
<div align="center"><center>

<table border="0" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" width="98%" bgcolor="#000000">
  <tr>
    <td width="100%" valign="middle"><a name="top"></a><img src="../images/pmamagsm.gif" alt="PMA Online Magazine" border="0" align="right" WIDTH="229" HEIGHT="100"></td>
  </tr>
</table>
</center></div><div align="center"><center>

<table border="0" cellpadding="8" width="98%">
  <tr>
    <td width="15%" valign="top" align="center">
    <!--webbot bot="Include" U-Include="sl_sidebar.htm" TAG="BODY" startspan -->

<table border="2" cellpadding="8" width="15%" id="table1" bordercolor="#FFFF00" bgcolor="#C0C0C0">
  <tr>
    <td width="100%" valign="top" align="center"><map name="FPMap0_I1">
      <area href="http://www.powermarketers.com/adrates.html" shape="rect" coords="14, 297, 97, 322">
      <area href="http://www.powermarketers.com/pmajobs.htm" shape="rect" coords="11, 230, 95, 257">
      <area href="http://www.powermarketers.com/main.htm" target="_parent" shape="rect" coords="12, 163, 96, 189">
      <area href="http://www.powermarketers.com/power2.htm" target="_blank" shape="rect" coords="12, 95, 96, 121">
      <area href="../pmamag.htm" shape="rect" coords="11, 29, 96, 54"></map><img rectangle="(12,163) (96,189) http://www.powermarketers.com/main.htm##_parent" rectangle="(12,95) (96,121) http://www.powermarketers.com/power2.htm##_blank" rectangle="(11,29) (96,54) ../pmamag.htm" src="../images/magmenu.gif" alt="PMA OnLine Magazine Menu" border="0" align="center" usemap="#FPMap0_I1" width="110" height="350"><p><a href="../searchpma.htm"><img src="../images/archives.gif" alt="Archives Search" border="0" align="center" WIDTH="70" HEIGHT="40"></a></p>
    <p align="left"><strong><small><font face="Arial">About The Author:</font></small></strong></p>
    <p align="left"><font face="Arial" style="font-size: 9pt">Robert A. Olson is a partner in the law firm of
    Brown, Olson &amp; Gould, P.C. which maintains a nationwide practice in energy law,
    public utility law and related commercial transactions.</font></p>
    <p><small><font face="Arial"><font style="font-size: 9pt">He can be reached at:</font><br>
    <br>
    <b><font color="#0000FF">Brown, Olson & Gould, PC</font></b><br>
2 Delta Drive<br>
    Suite 301<br>
Concord, NH 03301<br>
&nbsp;<a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a><br>
    (603) 225-9716<br>
<a href="mailto:[email protected]"></a></font></small></p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p><a href="#top"><img src="../images/b-t-top.gif" alt="Back To Top" border="0" width="71" height="35"></a></td>
  </tr>
</table>

<!--webbot bot="Include" i-checksum="45188" endspan --><p>&nbsp;</td>
    <td width="70%" valign="top"><img src="../images/statelin.gif" alt="STATELINE by Robert Olson" border="0" WIDTH="375" HEIGHT="75"><p><b><u><br>
      March 2000<br>
    </u><font face="Arial"><big><big><big>NJBPU Considers Two Energy Efficiency/ 
    Renewable Plans&nbsp;&nbsp;</big></big></big></font></b><strong><br>
    by Robert Olson&nbsp; -- &nbsp; Brown, Olson and Wilson, P.C.<br>
    </strong><font face="Arial" size="2">(<em>originally published by PMA OnLine Magazine:
    2000/04</em>)</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">Under New Jersey&#8217;s restructuring
      law (the Act), the Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) must undertake a
      &quot;comprehensive resource analysis&quot; to determine a funding plan
      for energy efficiency (EE) and renewable energy (RE) programs. The plan
      will determine program cost recovery, performance incentives, and which
      programs are funded by the &quot;societal benefits charge&quot; (SBC)
      passed on to ratepayers. Two groups have filed plans with the NJBPU for
      review, one headed by the BPU&#8217;s Division of Ratepayer Advocate (the DRA
      Plan), the other headed by the investor-owned utility Public Service
      Electric &amp; Gas (PSE&amp;G Plan).</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">The Act, which became effective on
      February 9, 1999, states that the plan&#8217;s funding must be at a minimum
      level of at least 40% of the total funds collected in electric and gas
      utility rates on the effective date of the act for demand-side management
      programs for a four-year period. The law further provides that twenty-five
      percent of the funding must be used for RE programs.</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">The DRA Plan proposes to create,
      subject to NJBPU oversight, an Independent Statewide Administrator (ISA)
      to administer the EE and RE programs. The DRA Plan also creates an
      Advisory Committee, to address items such as energy savings targets,
      technology market penetration targets, program design, bidding procedures,
      program incentive levels, performance standards, program measurement and
      verification protocols, and policy guidelines for renegotiating standard
      offer contracts. The proposed Advisory Committee would consist of
      representatives from entities such as the DRA, the Department of
      Environmental Protection, suppliers of renewable technologies and energy
      efficiency measures, academic institutions, public interest groups, and
      utilities.</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">Under the DRA Plan, funding for the
      programs would amount to $128 million annually for each of the initial
      four years. Of this amount, $96 million would be used for EE programs and
      $32 million for RE programs. The funding for RE programs would be
      collected exclusively from electric rates; the EE funding would be divided
      between gas and electric rates in proportion to the total sales revenues
      for each, resulting in 77% of funds being collected from electric rates,
      and 23% from gas rates.</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">All EE programs receiving SBC
      funding under the DRA Plan are required to function on a competitive bid
      basis, and negotiated contracts would not be permitted. The DRA Plan would
      place 45% of SBC EE funds toward &quot;Pay-for-Savings&quot; programs,
      which pay vendors on the basis of energy savings provided to their
      customers. Rules would be established to encourage multiple vendor
      participation by limiting the winning bidder funding to 50% of the funds.
      Another 45% of SBC EE funds would be directed toward
      &quot;Pay-for-Technology&quot; programs, which include items such as new
      construction funding. Another EE program the DRA Plan endorses is a
      &quot;Pay-for-Infrastructure&quot; program. This program funds research
      and development.</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">The DRA Plan also addresses SBC
      funding of RE programs. Under the plan, funding would not be used to
      support technologies already receiving market support. The DRA Plan
      includes within this category: projects used to meet the Act&#8217;s
      renewables portfolio standard, methane from landfills, and other
      technologies as identified by the Advisory Committee to meet this
      requirement. The plan further provides that renewable-fueled fuel cells
      should receive SBC funding, but that technologies relying on fossil fuels
      should have less incentives. Forty percent of RE program funds would be
      devoted to a project incentive program and to customer credits. In the
      project incentive program, project developers would respond to requests
      for proposals to receive funding. Eligible technologies for this program
      include wind turbine installations and renewable-fueled fuel cells larger
      than 100 kilowatts, photovoltaic projects larger than 500 kilowatts, and
      biomass and geothermal technologies. The customer credit program would
      provide customers credits for the purchase of renewable energy. Another
      40% of RE program funding would be used to encourage small scale
      technologies. Eligible technologies include photovoltaics, solar thermal
      electric generation, wind turbine installations smaller than 100
      kilowatts, and renewable-fueled fuel cells smaller than 100 kilowatts.
      Funds would be awarded on a &quot;first come, first serve&quot; basis,
      with a cap of 60% of total project costs. Fifty percent of the funding
      would be applied for systems of 10 kilowatts or less, 25% to systems of
      ten to 100 kilowatts, and 25% to systems of 100 to 500 kilowatts. The
      remaining 20% of RE program funds would be used for infrastructure
      programs, such as research and development, community education, and
      economic development.</font></p>
      <p ALIGN="JUSTIFY"><font face="Arial">The PSE&amp;G Plan establishes a
      statewide funding level of $423 million over a four-year period, beginning
      with $70 million in 2000, $108 million in 2001, $120 million in 2002, and
      $125 million in 2003. During the period 2000 through 2008, 25% of all new
      program funds would be allocated to RE programs. Each utility is assigned
      a share of the funding under the PSE&amp;G Plan. The PSE&amp;G Plan
      further provides that existing programs, as well as lost revenues related
      to EE programs, would be recoverable in each utility&#8217;s SBC. For the
      period 2000 through 2003, on average each utility will allocate 17% of its
      total new program budget to RE programs, although this allocation may
      increase to 25% over the four year period. Funding also would be directed
      to projects such as natural gas-fired fuel cells. Electric funding would
      be split evenly between utility-administered programs and programs
      administered by an ISA. Utility-administered plans are to be implemented
      consistently with respect to program structure, incentive levels,
      marketing, quality assurance, and service. The Plan would establish
      collaborative consultants to evaluate the programs. The PSE&amp;G Plan
      proposes that no one technology would receive more than 50% of a program&#8217;s
      funding and that no more than 50% of any block of funding would support
      systems greater than 10 kilowatts without NJBPU approval.</font></p>
    <!--webbot bot="Include" U-Include="sl_bottom.htm" TAG="BODY" startspan -->

    <hr color="#FFFF00">
    <blockquote>
      <p align="left"><font face="Arial">
      <small>Robert A. Olson is a partner in the law firm of Brown, Olson &amp; 
		Gould P.C.
      which maintains a nationwide practice in energy law, public utility law and related
      commercial transactions. He can be reached at:</small></font><p align="center">
      <font face="Arial"><small><font color="#0000FF"><b>Brown, Olson & Gould, PC</b></font><br>
2 Delta Drive, Suite 301<br>
Concord, NH 03301 <br>
      <br>
      <a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a> | (603) 225-9716<a href="mailto:[email protected]"></a></small></font>
    
<!--webbot bot="Include" i-checksum="27861" endspan --></tr>
</table>
</center></div>

<p align="center"><a href="#top"><img src="../images/b-t-top.gif" alt="Back To Top" border="0" width="71" height="35"></a></p>
</body>
</html>

Anon7 - 2021