Electric Vehicles: Cal EVIP
The Public Advocates Office's Proposal for Statewide Charging Station Deployment

 

Background

In November 2013, the CPUC opened a new Rulemaking to support the Governor’s goals to build infrastructure to support the adoption of up to 1.5 million electric vehicles in California by 2025. The Rulemaking also included a CPUC Staff White Paper, “Vehicle-Grid Integration: A Vision for Zero-Emission Transportation Interconnected throughout California’s Electricity System” that proposed a framework to understand the regulatory barriers to the adoption of electrified transportation as grid resources.  This framework examines Vehicle-Grid Integration (VGI), or connection of electric vehicles to the electric grid. This proceeding will consider policies that are consistent with the Governor’s Zero-Emission Vehicle Action Plan to promote EV adoption:

  • Evaluate the ability of VGI to allow customers to store energy in EV batteries (energy storage) and use the stored electricity to avoid using electricity from the grid (Demand Response).
  • Develop EV rates for customers in each utility service territory. 
  • Explore how financing opportunities can reduce EV costs, accelerate EV adoption, and increase EV charger deployment.

Since then, SDG&E, Edison, and PG&E have each filed unique program proposals to launch EV Charging Station pilots in their service territories.

 

Public Advocates Office (the Office) Policy Position

The Office supports the state’s goals to mitigate Greenhouse Gas emissions by increasing the adoption of Electric Vehicles. The Office urges the CPUC to develop a consistent statewide EV strategy for deployment of EV Charging Stations that will achieve this goal in the most effective and cost-efficient manner, and to ensure accountability for customer funding.

In response to the utilities' applications, the Office has filed a Motion on April 13, 2015 recommending that the CPUC implement the Office’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Pilot (Cal EVIP) in order to expedite statewide EV charger deployment throughout California. The Office’s pilot proposal would allow the CPUC to move forward with foundational infrastructure planning while concurrently addressing fundamental policy issues in its EV Rulemaking proceeding. The Office’s Cal EVIP pilot would require the utilities to provide minimal ratepayer funding, but not own charging stations. The  Cal EVIP pilot would:

  • Provide EV charger rebates to test strategies and alleviate barriers for siting EV charging stations.
  • Promote increased adoption of EVs and maximize Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) miles driven. 
  • Deploy EV charging stations consistently statewide for a period of 12-18 months.  
    • PG&E:  1700 Stations
    • Edison: 1500 Stations
    • SDG&E: 500 Stations

To implement the statewide pilot, the Office recommends a stakeholder process to develop a consistent framework for the deployment of all utility Electric Vehicle infrastructure pilots. The CPUC should coordinate workshops and/or other collaborative efforts to develop pilot guidelines that include these key criteria:  

  • Assess EV market demand.
  • Identify prime locations for EV infrastructure based on findings from prior pilot studies, demographics, economic data, and transportation assessments.
  • Assess and alleviate EV adoption barriers by working with property owners and EV drivers. 
  • Define metrics and study methodologies to evaluate what strategies best promote EV adoption.
  • Report findings to the CPUC in order to inform future deployment of EV infrastructure.

The CPUC should broadly engage EV market stakeholders including regulatory agencies, electric vehicle service providers, utilities, automobile manufacturers, property managers, and other EV thought leaders. 

See the Office’s April 13, 2015 Rebuttal Testimony, which includes the Office’s Cal EVIP Proposal for a statewide Charging Station pilot.

See the Office’s March 16, 2015 Testimony in response to SDG&E’s proposal, which includes the Office’s alternate pilot proposal for a statewide approach. [Chapter 6]