BILL ANALYSIS AB 51 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 20, 2009 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Kevin De Leon, Chair AB 51 (Blakeslee) - As Amended: May 5, 2009 Policy Committee: UtilitiesVote:13-0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No SUMMARY This bill requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to limit to 10% the administrative costs of energy efficiency programs funded and operated by the investor-owned utilities (IOUs). For this purpose, administrative costs include personnel and overhead, but not marketing, outreach, and program evaluation. FISCAL EFFECT The PUC will incur one-time costs of $200,000 for a database consultant and ongoing costs of $180,000 for two positions. The energy efficiency programs are adopted by the PUC in three-year cycles, and funding for the current 2009-11 cycle was approved in a 2008 decision. The commission indicates that this bill, which would become effective January 1, 2010, would require reopening this proceeding, and that the utilities would likely have to renegotiate many of the 250 contracts with third party implementers and local governments. In addition, an IT consultant would be needed to update the database used to track program results and expenditures and one staff position would be required to audit for compliance with the administrative cost cap. [Public Utilities Reimbursement Account] COMMENTS Background and Purpose . AB 1890 (Brulte)/Chapter 854 of 1996, required electric utility ratepayers to fund a variety of system reliability and low-income customer programs at specified levels from 1998 through 2001 through a public goods charge (PGC). AB 51 Page 2 Subsequent legislation extended the PGC until 2012. IOUs are required to use PGC revenues to fund energy efficiency, renewable energy, research, and low-income customer assistance. In 2005 and 2006, the PUC issued decisions requiring the three major IOUs to make additional investments in energy efficiency beyond the PGC programs-$2.7 billion over three years. According to the PUC, from 2006 through 2008, the IOUs on average spent 12.4% of the program funds on the categories the PUC defined as administrative costs, 12% on marketing and outreach, and 75.6% on actual energy efficiency incentives and rebates. This bill would cap administrative costs going forward to 10% of program expenditures, which is similar to administrative cost limitations placed on many state agency programs. Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081