Application of NSPM – In States

Below are examples of state application of the NSPM benefit cost analysis (BCA) framework in various states, whether for single or multiple DERs. Additional information on state use and referencing is available HERE.

Maryland (2020-24)

Maryland BCA efforts have been guided by the NSPM in several applications, starting first with developing an electric vehicle BCA methodology, then for energy efficiency, and ultimately to develop a consistent (or unified) BCA to apply to all DERs.

Unified BCA (UBCA) Docket (2023-24)
NSPM Maryland Case Study 2024 authored by NESP (Oct. 2024)
Cover Letter – UBCA Work Group Final Report
Maryland UBCA Work Group Final Report

BCA for EV and EE (2020-2022)
This NSPM – Maryland Case Study authored by NESP (June 2022) summarizes the development of the EV BCA methodology and, separately, the EMPOWER EE BCA process, both of which led to the commission opening a new docket for the state to develop a unified BCA test for all DERs.

Relevant documents include:
EV BCA Methodology Report (Nov. 2021)
PSC Letter Approving EV BCA Framework (Dec. 2021)
Future Programming Work Group Final Report (April 2022)
PSC Order No. 90261 (June 2022)

Michigan (2021-23)

Starting in 2021, the Michigan Public Service Commission (MSPC) addressed cost-effectiveness testing for distributed energy resources in Case U-20898 as part of the MI Power Grid New Technologies and Business Models workgroup. This culminated in an October 2023 Order adopting a jurisdiction specific test (JST) developed by the state’s utilities—DTE Electric Company and Consumers Energy—followed by extensive stakeholder input. Using the NSPM framework and guidance, the development of the new cost-effectiveness test for Michigan applies to all DERs including energy efficiency, demand response, distributed generation, distributed storage, EVs, and building electrification. With application of the NSPM, Michigan’s jurisdiction specific test (JST) accounts for benefits and costs that align with state’s energy policies, including safety, reliability, affordability, resiliency, environmental justice and equity, and decarbonization of the electricity system.

Minnesota (2022-23)

The Minnesota Department of Commerce (DOC) applied the NSPM BCA framework to develop a new cost-effectiveness test for evaluating the state’s energy efficiency programs (referred to Conservation Improvement Programs or CIPs).  A comprehensive report and proposed decision were prepared by the DOC staff and its consultants –including a description of the NSPM process, stakeholder comments/positions, and staff recommendations, and submitted to the DOC commissioners for review in early 2023. A final decision issued in March 2023 requiring use of the new Minnesota Cost Test (MCT) to be applied to the utilities’ 2024-2026 Conservation Improvement Program (CIP) Triennial Plans.

NSPM – MN Case Study authored by NESP (June 2023)

Commission Order filed March 31, 2023: MN Dept of Commerce Final Decision Deputy Commissioner’s Decision in the Matter of the 2024-2026 CIP Cost-Effectiveness Methodologies for Electric and Gas Investor-Owned Utilities  (Docket Number 23-46)

Washington DC (2021-23)

The Clean Energy DC Omnibus Amendment of 2018 charges the DC Public Service Commission with evaluating the effects of utility proposals on global climate change and achievement of the District’s commitments to reduce GHGs. In undertaking its charge, the Commission initiated the proceeding Case No. GD-2019-04-M and directed that a “Clean Energy Act Implementation Working Group” (CEIWG) be convened to seek guidance on a range of issues including the development of a Benefit-Cost Analytical (BCA) Framework. The PSC Staff convened and facilitated the CEIWG from fall of 2020 through October 2021, where technical advisor Karl Rábago (Rábago Energy) and NESP project coordinator Julie Michals provided technical assistance to the PSC Staff team throughout the CEIWG process to develop a report with a recommended BCA Framework to the Commission. After a series of stakeholder meetings and extensive CEIWG input to develop a BCA test for the District using the NSPM guidance, the commission staff filed a 325-page majority consensus report with the Commission for review and a decision. The Commission issued a final decision in December 2023 adopting the consensus recommendations in the report, and opened a Phase II process to develop methodologies for quantifying certain impacts (in process).

2018-2020

Note: the cases below apply to EE resources where states used the 2017 NSPM for EE.

New Hampshire
NSPM – NH Case Study authored by NESP (January 2019: NSPM for EE)
NH PUC Order 26,322 (December 31, 2019)
Synapse Report for the NH EM&V Working Group (October, 2019)

Arkansas
NSPM – AR Case Study authored by NESP (May 2019: NSPM for EE)
PWC Case Study Report to Arkansas PSC, Appendix A, and Appendix B
Presentation
Arkansas PSC decision on adopting PWC recommendations (May, 2019)

Rhode Island
NSPM – RI Case Study authored by NESP (December 2018: NSPM for EE)
2020 Rhode Island Test (October, 2019)
Synapse Report on Methodologies for Developing Inputs for DERs (October, 2018)

Minnesota
NSPM – MN Case Study authored by NESP (December 2018, NSPM for EE)
Synapse Report to MN Dept. of Commerce (September, 2018) 
Presentation