Topic:"Commercial Industrial Programs" in M07151

Table 1 (PCR) (2016) Unnamed: 0 Unnamed: 1 Unnamed: 2 Unnamed: 3 Unnamed: 4 Unnamed: 5 Unnamed: 6 Unnamed: 7 Unnamed: 8 Unnamed: 9 Unnamed: 10 1 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN 2 NaN COLUMN A B C D D E F G H I 3 NaN NaN NaN...

AI summary Table 1 from the 2016 PCR document outlines various energy efficiency programs and their distribution across different rate classes, including Residential, Small General, General Demand, and Industrial categories. The table provides percentages for each program type, highlighting participation and allocation across different sectors.

ation based on a 2014 study becomes further and further out of date. For these reasons, the Industrial Group does not believe the Cost-of-Service approach for 2016 (or going forward) is desirable. - & lt;sup>17 December 18, 2015, letter, p...

AI summary The Industrial Group opposes the Cost-of-Service approach for 2016, arguing it is outdated. NSPI explains the 'No Allocation' approach, which absorbs DSM expenses without rate increases, potentially creating inequities. The approach may favor Industrials but lacks principled justification. Variance issues from 2014 highlight material impacts on customer classes.