Status Update

Pacific Gas & Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Edison Company held a series of stakeholder workshops during Summer 2021 to help shape the development of a Microgrid Incentive Program (MIP) approved in early 2021 by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The program is intended to fund clean energy microgrids to support the critical needs of vulnerable populations impacted by grid outages.

Incorporating feedback from the workshops, the Utilities filed the Proposed Microgrid Incentive Program Implementation Plan of San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Pacific Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Edison Company on December 3, 2021. Parties filed Opening Comments on the plan on January 14, 2022, and Reply Comments on January 28, 2022. An ALJ Ruling Requesting Comment on the MIP Staff Proposal was issued on July 7, 2022. Comments and Reply Comments by parties were submitted in August 2022. The next step is for the CPUC to issue a Proposed Decision.


On January 21, 2021, the CPUC issued Decision D.21-01-018, which among other items, approved $200 million statewide for a new Microgrid Incentive Program intended to fund clean energy microgrids to support the critical needs of vulnerable populations impacted by a grid outage.

The Microgrid Incentive Program is intended to provide funding for community, local and tribal government-driven, reliability and resilience projects with benefits including:

  • Increased electricity reliability and resiliency in communities that may be at higher risk of electrical outages.
  • Increased reliability for critical infrastructure facilities such as fire stations, schools, and nursing homes that keep communities safe.
  • Reduced impacts of power outages and minimized disruptions for low-income households, individuals who rely on un-interrupted power, utilize assistive and/or medical equipment, or experience other access and functional needs.
  • Reduced Greenhouse Gas emissions by deploying clean generation technologies and expanding the market for resiliency solutions that do not rely upon diesel generation.

While the program concept is approved, the program design and implementation details still need to be approved.

For more information on this proceeding, visit

Stakeholder workshop purpose

The purpose of the 2021 workshop series was to solicit input on the program design and implementation details of the MIP. The utilities seek to collaborate with interested stakeholders in designing a program that meets the CPUC’s intent, while supporting the deployment of multi-property/multi-customer microgrids to meet critical needs of vulnerable populations most likely to be impacted by grid outages.

Workshop sessions

Session NameAgenda Items and DescriptionDate and Time

Meeting 1: Laying the Foundation

What should guide the development of the MIP? How do we most effectively engage communities and target the MIP?

Objectives and Goals

  • Identify the overarching objectives established in the Staff Proposal and Track 2 Decision.

Guiding Principles

  • Review Guiding Principles as set forth in the Staff Proposal.
  • These principles should inform and motivate subsequent discussions.

Community Benefit

  • What public good requirements should be placed upon projects?
  • What data regarding project costs, performance, etc. should be required to be made available to the CPUC, the Joint IOUs or the general public?

July 7, 2021, 1 p.m. – 5 p.m. PT*

Workshop 1 - Laying the Foundation (PDF, 264 KB)

Meeting 2: Program Design

How can the program be structured to optimally meet goals and objectives?

Program Structure

  • What DER ownership/contracting models are appropriate for the MIP?
  • How do the Joint IOUs best, and most cost-effectively, incentivize microgrids that are aligned with the program objectives?
  • What should the incentive dollars pay for? Should a project have to be cost-effective to be funded?
  • How are incentives to be calculated?
  • What form should the incentive take (e.g. upfront grant or loan, ongoing PPA, etc.)?

Program Timing

  • Should there be an opportunity window like other grant programs, where applications must be transmitted by a deadline, or should it be a rolling application period until the funding is exhausted?
  • When and how should program funding be dispersed?

July 14, 2021, 1 p.m. – 5 p.m. PT*

Workshop 2 - Program Design (PDF, 260 KB)

Meeting 3: Eligibility Criteria

How is eligibility for the program determined?

Eligibility Criteria

  • What types of projects and communities should be eligible to participate?
  • What are the requirements to become a “sponsor” of a project, and how will community support/buy-in be demonstrated?
  • What technical criteria are appropriate?
  • How should viable projects be identified?
  • How do we strike a balance between leveraging communities with the resources and funding to build microgrids, while ensuring that disadvantaged communities have a fair opportunity?

Community Engagement

  • How should the utility share information about where the resiliency needs presently exist, which areas in California are most prone to outages, what grid projects are already planned in those areas (if any), and where investments in microgrids could be advantageous?
  • What role does the utility play?

Meeting 4: Project Evaluation and Selection

How can project selection maximize program benefits? How should the program and individual projects be evaluated?

Project Cost-Effectiveness

  • How do we determine cost-effectiveness?
  • How should cost-effectiveness be scored?
  • How should match funding factor into cost effectiveness calculations?

Project Prioritization Criteria and Scoring Methodology

  • Which of the eligibility criteria should also serve as prioritization criteria? Are there additional attributes that should be considered for prioritization?
  • How should projects be scored? Who should perform the scoring? How should results be validated?

Meeting 5: Application and Review Process

  • How to balance ensuring sufficient information through the application process while not placing undue burden on applicants?
  • What steps can be taken to ensure the application process and incentive reservation triggers are equitable?
  • How do we ensure that resources are directed towards projects with a realistic probability of completion?
  • What are some of the standard milestones and timelines in the application process? These include initial assessment and verification of eligibility requirements, scoring and prioritization, cost-effectiveness calculation, and additional technical studies (interconnection and/or microgrid).
  • What is the appropriate process for MIP to incorporate the above steps, and where in the process does the formal application submission occur?
  • What contracts may be necessary?

Meeting 6: Program Evaluation

Project Performance and Evaluation Requirements

  • What performance requirements should be placed on projects?
  • What are the metrics for determining project success? Who should be responsible for evaluating the performance?
  • What reporting requirements should there be for overall program performance?