BILL ANALYSIS 1
1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
ALEX PADILLA, CHAIR
AB 1351 - Blakeslee Hearing
Date: July 7, 2009 A
As Amended: May 6, 2009 FISCAL B
1
3
5
1
DESCRIPTION
Current law requires retail sellers of electricity to meet 20
percent of sales from eligible renewable resources by December
31, 2010, the definition of which includes hydroelectric
generation less than 30 megawatts (MW), conduit hydroelectric
and incremental generation from efficiency improvements in any
hydroelectric facility.
This bill would count as RPS eligible incremental generation
from efficiency improvements in hydroelectric facilities that
are located out of state but serve customers in state by out of
state investor-owned utilities (IOUs).
BACKGROUND
With exceptions for eligible efficiency improvements, an
RPS-eligible small hydroelectric facility or conduit
hydroelectric facility must not exceed 30 MW. However, the law
allows such a facility to retain its RPS eligibility if
efficiency improvements cause the facility to exceed 30 MW. The
Energy Commission interprets the 30 MW size limit such that if a
30 MW small hydroelectric or conduit hydroelectric facility had
an eligible 5 MW energy efficiency increase, energy from the 35
MW capacity would be RPS eligible. Energy efficiency
improvements in large hydroelectric facilities are also eligible
even though the original large hydroelectric generation is not.
For example, a 300 MW facility would not be RPS eligible but if
efficiency improvements were made to the facility to bring the
capacity up to 320 MW then the 20 MW difference would be RPS
eligible. All facilities are required to get certification from
the State Water Resources Control Board.
COMMENTS
1. Problem Addressed - Legislation adopted in prior years
which counted as RPS eligible efficiency improvements in
small, small conduit or large hydroelectric facilities did
not address the case of facilities located out of state
which serve California customers by an out of state IOU.
Current law requires certification by the California State
Water Resources Control Board which has no jurisdiction
over an out of state hydroelectric facility. This bill
would allow that certification to be accomplished by the
state agency or board of the state in which the facility is
located or the agency designated by the federal Clean Water
Act.
2. Accounting Could be Tricky - This bill potentially
creates practical accounting problems. Consider the case
of a large dam generating electricity that is not
considered renewable. An efficiency project is implemented
(e.g. more efficient turbines are installed). Under this
bill the incremental electricity is considered renewable.
Because the power output of a dam varies greatly depending
on season and water storage, can the amount of incremental
electricity be reliably determined? And because this bill
now includes out of state dams, the accounting and
verification will be more difficult.
3. Double Referral - This bill has also been referred to
the Senate Committee on Environmental Quality. Due to time
constraints, if amendments are proposed in Committee these
amendments must be taken in the second Committee.
ASSEMBLY VOTES
Assembly Floor (76-0)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (15-0)
Assembly Natural Resources Committee
(8-0)
Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee
(13-0)
POSITIONS
Sponsor:
Author
Support:
Pacific Power
Sierra Pacific Power Company
Oppose:
None on file
Kellie Smith
AB 1351 Analysis
Hearing Date: July 7, 2009