Chapter 304. Rules Governing Cost/Benefit Measures Required for Demand-Side Management Programs
20VAC5-304-10. Purpose.
The purpose of these rules is to establish the cost/benefit measures which utilities operating in Virginia must conduct to determine whether a proposed demand-side management ("DSM") program is cost effective and in the public interest.
Statutory Authority
§§ 56-234, 56-235.1, 56-235.2, 56-247 and 56-249 of the Code of Virginia.
Historical Notes
Derived from Case No. PUE900070 § 1, eff. June 28, 1993.
20VAC5-304-20. Cost/benefit measures.
A. Through 2028, utility applicants shall analyze a proposed program from a multi-perspective approach using, at a minimum, the Participants Test, the Utility Cost Test, the Ratepayer Impact Measure Test, and the Total Resource Cost Test. Utilities may file for approval of programs individually or as a package. However, any application that includes a package of DSM programs shall also provide an analysis of the cost/benefit of each program individually.
B. Beginning with efficiency plans for 2029 and any subsequent years, investor-owned electric utilities shall analyze cost-effectiveness using a Virginia jurisdiction specific test (JST) and the total resource cost test. The JST shall be conducted on a program and portfolio level. The JST includes all utility system impacts as shown in subsection C of this section. The JST includes the non-utility system impacts shown in subsection D of this section. All estimates of costs or benefits may be used on Virginia-specific studies when available, studies from other jurisdictions when applicable to Virginia or adapted to address differences between Virginia and other states, or proxy adders to avoided costs , as determined by the commission in the course of a DSM proceeding.
C. Table 1: JST utility system impacts.
1. Energy impacts:
a. Energy generation;
b. Capacity;
c. Renewable portfolio standard or clean energy compliance (for energy efficiency only); and
d. Market price effects using PJM Interconnection LLC base residual auction market clearing prices to evaluate avoided demand benefits.
2. Transmission impacts:
a. Transmission capacity; and
b. Transmission system losses.
3. Distribution impacts:
a. Distribution capacity;
b. Distribution system losses; and
c. Distribution operation and maintenance.
4. General impacts:
a. Financial incentives;
b. Program administration; and
c. Risk, accomplished by running cost-benefit sensitivities for (i) high load sensitivity, (ii) low load sensitivity, (iii) high fuel sensitivity, (iv) low fuel sensitivity, (v) high transmission and distribution sensitivity, and (vi) low transmission and distribution sensitivity.
D. Table 2: JST non-utility system impacts.
1. Other fuels impacts:
a. Fuel and related operation and maintenance costs of other fuels; and
b. Delivery costs, including other fuel transmission and distribution, for energy efficiency only.
2. Societal impacts:
a. Greenhouse gas emissions; and
b. Other environmental impacts.
Statutory Authority
§§ 12.1-13, 56-235.2, 56-247, and 56-249 of the Code of Virginia.
Historical Notes
Derived from Case No. PUE900070 § 2, eff. June 28, 1993; amended, Virginia Register Volume 42, Issue 4, eff. September 30, 2025.
20VAC5-304-30. Minimum guidelines for data input and modeling assumptions.
Minimum guidelines to provide direction to electric and natural gas utilities in developing applications for approval of DSM programs are as follows:
1. That the assumptions used in developing projected input data and the models used in the integrated resource planning process should be identified and well-documented. Utility-specific data should be used whenever possible (e.g., unit performance data, end-use load research data, market research data, etc.). In cases where utility-specific data are not available, the assumptions must be clearly defined;
2. That historic data, if available, should be assessed in developing projected data. Significant departures from historic trends should be explained;
3. That each projected data series should represent the Company's most current forecast;
4. That computer modeling techniques should be used in the development of an integrated resource plan;
5. That estimates of the capital and O&M (operation and maintenance) costs of supply-side options should include realistic projections of the costs of compliance with all promulgated environmental regulations or enacted legislation from which environmental regulations will be promulgated;
6. That each assumption and/or projected data series should be consistent with all other assumptions and/or projections. Consistency of data should be maintained between all models used within the integrated resource planning process; and
7. That alternative projections to determine sensitivity to input assumptions should be developed. These alternative projections should be used to perform cost/benefit analysis.
Waiver of strict adherence to these guidelines for small utilities or those in unusual circumstances may be granted by order of the Commission.
Statutory Authority
§§ 56-234, 56-235.1, 56-235.2, 56-247 and 56-249 of the Code of Virginia.
Historical Notes
Derived from Case No. PUE900070 § 3, eff. June 28, 1993.
20VAC5-304-40. Pilot or experimental programs.
Utilities must seek commission approval of pilot or experimental programs that involve rates or promotional allowances, but other limited pilot or experimental programs may be conducted without prior commission approval. Utilities shall file reports with the commission's Division of Energy Regulation that identify any pilot or experimental program at least 30 days prior to its implementation. Periodic reports shall also be filed at least semi-annually with the commission's Division of Energy Regulation identifying all DSM pilot or experimental programs and the status of such programs.
Statutory Authority
§ 12.1-13 of the Code of Virginia.
Historical Notes
Derived from Case No. PUE900070 § 4, eff. June 28, 1993; amended, Virginia Register Volume 29, Issue 23, eff. July 1, 2013.