Jump to main content.


Measuring Progress at the State Level - Advancing the Vision for 2025 Implementation Goals and Policy Steps

Progress for Electricity Services

The information below summarizes the status of several state-level policies and programs for electricity services. Each policy or program step is considered to be either “complete” or “partial” (some elements of policy in place). These two categories have been developed from more detailed information, based on the format used for the Regional Implementation Meetings. If information was not readily available at the state level it is not included. If additional information on these policies is available based on a review of the current information on measuring progress, please send it to Stacy Angel (angel.stacy@epa.gov) and it will be included as the information is updated in the future. Please note that the information below is as of the national baseline, December 2009. Activity in 2010 will be reflected in the next measuring progress update.

A more detailed explanation of the assessment for each of the implementation goals and the key policies or program steps is provided in Appendix D of the Vision for 2025 (PDF) (112 pp., 719K, About PDF).

Implementation Goal and
Key Steps
States Having Adopted Policy Step as of December 2009
Completely Partially
Goal One: Establishing Cost-Effective Energy Efficiency as a High-Priority Resource
1 Process in place, such as a state and/or regional collaborative, to pursue energy efficiency as a high-priority resource. AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MT, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OR, PA, RI, TX, UT, VT, WA, WI, WV 0
2 Policy established to recognize energy efficiency as high-priority resource. AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI AK, DC, GA, WV, WY
3 Potential identified for cost-effective, achievable energy efficiency over the long term. AK, AL, AR, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI 0
4 Energy efficiency savings goals or expected energy savings targets established consistent with cost-effective potential. AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, HI, IA, IL, IN, MA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NE, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI AZ, SD
5 Energy efficiency savings goals and targets integrated into state energy resource plan, with provisions for regular updates. 0 AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KY, MN, MO, MT, NC, NH, NJ, NM, NV, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI
6 Energy efficiency savings goals and targets integrated into a regional energy resource plan. Not currently measured
Goal Two: Developing Processes to Align Utility and Other Program Administrator Incentives Such That Efficiency and Supply Resources Are on a Level Playing Field
7 Utility and other program administrator disincentives are removed. CA, CT, DC, DE, GA, HI, ID, IN, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MT, NC, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, SC, VT, WI, WY AL, AR, AZ, NH, TN, UT
8 Utility and other program administrator incentives for energy efficiency savings reviewed and established as necessary. AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, GA, HI, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MI, MN, NC, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, RI, SC, SD, TX, VT, WA, WI AL, ME, MO, NM, UT
9 Timely cost recovery in place. Not currently measured
Goal Three: Establishing Cost-Effectiveness Tests
10 Cost-effectiveness tests adopted which reflect the long-term resource value of energy efficiency. AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MT, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WY LA, ND
Goal Four: Establishing Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification Mechanisms
11 Robust, transparent EM&V procedures established. CA, CT, FL, HI, IA, IL, IN, MA, MD, ME, MN, MT, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OK, OR, PA, RI, TX, VT, WI AR, AZ, CO, DC, DE, KS, MI, NC, ND, OH, SC, UT
Goal Five: Establishing Effective Energy Efficiency Delivery Mechanisms
12 Administrator(s) for energy efficiency programs clearly established. AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI 0
13 Stable (multi-year) and sufficient funding in place consistent with energy efficiency goals. CA, CT, MA, MO, NM, RI, VT, WA AR, CO, DC, DE, FL, IA, ID, IN, KY, ME, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OR, VA, WI
14 Programs established to deliver energy efficiency to key customer classes and meet energy efficiency goals and targets. AR, CA, CO, CT, DC, FL, HI, IA, ID, IL, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WI IN
15 Strong public education programs on energy efficiency in place. AR, CA, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MT, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OK, OR, RI, SC, SD, TX, UT, VT, WA, WI, WY 0
16 Energy efficiency program administrator engaged in developing and sharing program best practices at the regional and/or national level. AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WY 0
Goal Six: Developing State Policies to Ensure Robust Energy Efficiency Practices
17 State policies require routine review and updating of building codes. CA, CO, CT, DC, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MT, NC, NJ, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI AR, DE, HI, IN, KS, ME, MN, NE, NH, NV, NY, OH, SC, TX, WV
18 Building codes effectively enforced. Not currently measured
19 State appliance standards in place. AZ, CA, CT, DC, MA, MD, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OR, RI, VT, WA 0
20 Strong state and local government lead-by example programs in place. CA, CO, DE, HI, NH, UT AK, AL, AR, AZ, CT, DC, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, VT, WA, WI
Goal Seven: Aligning Customer Pricing and Incentives to Encourage Investment in Energy Efficiency
21 Rates examined and modified considering impact on customer incentives to pursue energy efficiency. AZ, CA, IA, ID, ME, NY, OR, UT, WA, WI CT, DC, DE, FL, MD, MN, MO, NM, OK, PA, VT, WY
22 Mechanisms in place to reduce consumer disincentives for energy efficiency (e.g., including financing mechanisms). AL, CA, CT, MA, MI, MN, NE, NH, OR, VA, WI IL
Goal Eight: Establishing State of the Art Billing Systems
23 Consistent information to customers on energy use, costs of energy use, and options for reducing costs. Not currently measured
Goal Nine: Implementing State of the Art Efficiency Information Sharing and Delivery Systems
24 Investments in advanced metering, smart grid infrastructure, data analysis, and two-way communication to enhance energy efficiency. Not currently measured
25 Coordinated energy efficiency and demand response programs established by customer class to target energy efficiency for enhanced value to customers. Not currently measured
26 Residential programs established to use trained and certified professionals as part of energy efficiency program delivery. MA, MD, NH, NJ, NY, OR, RI, VT, WI 0
Goal Ten: Implementing Advanced Technologies
27 Policies in place to remove barriers to combined heat and power. CA, CT, GA, HI, IA, IN, KY, MA, NE, NM, NV, NY, OH, OR, VA, WA, WI AR, CO, DC, FL, IL, KS, LA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MT, NC, NH, NJ, PA, SC, SD, TX, UT, VT, WY
28 Timelines developed for the integration of advanced technologies. Not currently measured

Local Navigation


Jump to main content.