|
TECHNICAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE |
||||
|
|
||||
|
2. |
DISCUSS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REBATE
PROGRAM TO REQUIRE REPAYMENT OF REBATE FUNDS WHEN APPLYING A WATER CREDIT
FROM A DEVICE THAT RECEIVED A REBATE TO A WATER PERMIT FOR INCREASED WATER
USE |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Meeting
Date: |
April 7, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
From: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
General
Manager |
|
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
Prepared
By: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
General Counsel Approval: Approved by Counsel |
||||
Committee Recommendation: The Rules and Regulations Committee reviewed this ordinance on March 20, 2009 and recommended approval. |
||||
|
CEQA Compliance:
N/A |
||||
SUMMARY: The joint MPWMD/California American Water (CAW) rebate program is funded by CAW ratepayers through approval of the California Public Utility Commission’s (CPUC) Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA). The CPUC is currently considering increasing the amount of funding available to the rebate program in its consideration of the conservation filing (A07.12.010). Prior to agreeing on the proposed conservation budget, the CPUC’s DRA raised concerns about funding the rebate program with ratepayer dollars when an applicant could potentially receive both a rebate and a water credit that could be used to offset additional demand.
Staff is proposing two amendments to address DRA’s concerns. The first amendment relates to Rule 25.5, whereby an applicant would not qualify for a rebate if a water credit had previously been used for the Qualifying Device[1]. The second amendment would require repayment of the rebate as a fee on a Water Permit. A draft ordinance incorporating these amendments (Exhibit 2-A) has been prepared for the MPWMD Board’s consideration.
Staff will be recommending that the Board take action to address DRA’s concerns at this time. Staff has concerns regarding accounting for rebate program savings when there is the potential to use the same savings to offset a Water Permit. Requiring a pay back of rebate funds (and an adjustment of the rebate program water savings) will improve the accuracy of water savings calculations related to the rebate program and will ensure more accurate calculation of water uses on a property.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Technical Advisory Committee support staff’s recommendation to amend Rules 25.5 and 141 to require repayment of rebate funds under certain conditions.
This ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
BACKGROUND: In the January 15, 2009 settlement agreement for the conservation budget for CAW’s Monterey District, MPWMD agreed to track and report on the amount of rebate savings reinvested as Water Credits during years 2009-2011. If in any year the savings exceed 0.5 acre-feet, MPWMD agreed to revise its Regulation so that Water Users utilizing a Water Credit would refund the money received through the rebate program before a Water Permit was issued. This agreement was made as a condition to future CPUC authorization for funding for the rebate program. District staff routinely tracks the amount of water savings anticipated through the rebate program.
Prior to making this agreement, staff reviewed the number of Water Permits that had been issued between June 1 and December 31, 2008 that both received a rebate and a water credit for the same fixture. Between June and December 2008, 162 Water Permits were issued that involved a water credit, and 16 permits also received a rebate for the same fixture(s). Although these rebates amounted to less than two percent of the total rebates issued during that time, 0.247 acre-feet per year of savings were reused during those six months. If this trend continues, MPWMD would be required to take action within the first year of the pending conservation budget.
2-A Draft Ordinance No. XXX
U:\staff\word\committees\Tac\2009\20090407\02\item2.doc
[1] A Qualifying Device is a fixture or appliance that meets the criteria to receive a rebate. This term is defined in Rule 11.