BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                           Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

                                           14 (Simitian)
          
          Hearing Date:  3/23/2009        Amended: 3/12/2009
                                          As proposed to be amended
          Consultant:  Bob Franzoia       Policy Vote: Energy 6-3
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
          BILL SUMMARY: SB 14 would revise the California Renewables  
          Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, as follows:
          - Require investor owned utilities (IOUs) to increase total  
          procurement of electricity generated by eligible renewable  
          energy resources by at least an additional one percent of retail  
          sales annually so that 33 percent of its retail sales are  
          procured from eligible renewable energy resources no later than  
          December 31, 2020, if the PUC determines that achieving these  
          targets will result in just and reasonable rates.
          - Make certain requirements of the RPS program applicable to  
          publicly owned utilities (POUs), thereby imposing a state  
          mandated local program.
          - Require the California Energy Commission (CEC) to implement an  
          accounting system to verify compliance with the RPS program  
          requirements by POUs, adopt regulations, and to undertake  
          measures in order to substantially increase the amounts of  
          eligible renewable energy resources connected to transmission  
          grids.
          - Require the PUC to enforce existing requirements until an IOU  
          procures 20 percent of its retail sales from eligible renewable  
          energy resources and then requires that an IOUs procurement plan  
          contain a showing that eligible renewable energy resources will  
          be procured in an amount sufficient to meet RPS program  
          requirements.
          - Require the PUC to approve an application for a certificate of  
          public convenience within one year of the filing of a completed  
          application, allow recovery of transmission costs incurred by an  
          IOU, approve reasonable and cost effective transmission  
          investments that are necessary to deliver electricity generated  
          by eligible renewable energy resources, and to approve  
          transmission investments necessary to transmit electricity  
          generated by eligible renewable energy resources to IOUs and  
          POUs.
          - Require the California Independent System Operator (Cal ISO)  
          to adjust its market structure to achieve, in the most cost  
          effective manner, the 33 percent RPS threshold by 2020, develop  










          annual statewide transmission plans, seek proposals from and  
          propose transmission projects to POUs that can be jointly owned,  
          and eliminate barriers over transmission lines in its control  
          area.
          - Require the PUC, the CEC, and the Cal ISO to consider  
          recommendations of the Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative  
          (RETI) relative to the siting of transmission and eligible  
          renewable energy resources.
          - Require the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to establish an  
          internal division for the purpose of performing planning and  
          streamlined environmental compliance services with a priority  
          given to the building of eligible renewable energy resources.
          - Require the CEC to develop a review process with the DFG with  
          the goal of reducing the time required to comply with the  
          California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for eligible  
          renewable energy resources.
          - State the intent to appropriate $3,700,000 from the Public  
          Interest Research, Development, and Demonstration Fund to the  
          CEC for the purposes of facilitating the development of solar  
          energy in the Mojave Desert.

          Page 2
          SB 14 (Simitian)
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____
                            Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions         2009-10      2010-11       2011-12     Fund
           PUC administration                   
             RPS program                   $110              $220     $220  
                        Special*   
                                                                            
              
             Transmission                             $170              
          $340               $340 
                                                        
          CEC administration                   $520          $1,040         
              $1,040            Special** 

             Contracts                     $350              $700           
               $700                           

          DFG planning                     $3,057            $3,777$3,057   
          Bond***/
                                                                          
          General****











          Cal ISO planning and                Unknown costs ongoing         
                         Special*****
          oversight

          State energy costs                          Unknown cumulative  
          increase potentially    General/
                                                            $279,000  
          annually statewide beginning       Special******
                                           2010 to 2013 to meet new RPS  
          threshold.
                                           See Staff Comments

          * PUC Utilities Reimbursement Account
          ** Energy Resources Programs Account (revenue in this fund is  
          available for General Fund purposes)
          *** Proposition 84 general obligation bond funds in 2009-10 and  
          2010-11 (approximately $1,500 in each year)
          **** Various.  Reimbursements, intent to appropriate $3,700 from  
          the Public Interest Research, Development, and Demonstration  
          Fund (PIER) to the CEC for contracts and interagency agreements  
          to prepare natural communities conversation plans (revenue in  
          this fund is available for General Fund purposes), and,  
          potentially, future permit fees.
          ***** The ISO is a private, non profit public benefit  
          corporation regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory  
          Commission
          ****** Service Revolving Fund, other special funds (total  
          estimated on IOU usage)
          _________________________________________________________________ 
          ____

          STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.  AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED.
          
          Chapter 516/2002 (SB 1078, Sher) and Chapter 464/2006 (SB 107,  
          Simitian) established and revised the RPS program which requires  
          IOUs to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy  
          resources by at least one percent of retail sales annually,  
          until they reach 20 percent by 2010.  The 20 percent threshold  
          in Chapter 516 was accelerated from 2017 to 2010 by Chapter 464.

          Executive Order S-14-08 ordered that all retail sellers of  
          electricity shall serve 33 percent of their load with renewable  
          energy by 2020.  The order directed state agencies 
          Page 3
          SB 14 (Simitian)











          to take all appropriate actions to implement this target in all  
          regulatory proceedings, inlcuding siting, permitting, and  
          procurement for renewable energy power plants and transmission  
          lines.
          
          PUC 
          The PUC's RPS program responsibilities include:
          - Determining annual procurement targets and enforcing  
          compliance. 
          - Reviewing and approving IOU renewable energy procurement  
          plans. 
          - Reviewing IOU contracts for RPS-eligible energy. 
          - Establishing the standard terms and conditions used by IOUs in  
          their contracts for    eligible renewable energy. 
          - Calculating market price referents for non-renewable energy  
          that serve as benchmarks for the price of renewable energy.

          Under this bill, PUC responsibilities would be increased in  
          order to:
          - Facilitate the identification, review, and approval of  
          transmission projects needed to deliver 33 percent RPS energy by  
          2020.
          - Identify additional renewable transmission interconnection  
          projects needed to deliver 33 percent RPS energy by 2020.
          - Decrease the time needed to perform environmental review and  
          project need analysis in order to meet permit streamlining  
          requirements, improve implementation of the PUC's streamlining  
          practices, and improve coordination with federal agencies.

          RPS Program
          The PUC has identified the need for two regulatory analyst  
          positions ongoing to meet the above requirements.  Since current  
          RPS staff is still implementing the 20 percent 2010 threshold,  
          the new staff will concurrently address expanded design and  
          implementation issues.  

          Transmission
          The PUC's average time for permitting transmission lines is 18  
          months and was 16 months before the Sunrise Powerlink case.  A  
          12 month timeframe may be difficult as CEQA review typically  
          takes 12 months in order to account for the four seasons.  After  
          the EIR/EIS is released, the PUC generally needs two to four  
          months to complete the permitting process - a 30 day period for  
          public review and comment, including public hearings in select  
          communities impacted by the transmission line, drafting of the  










          proposed decision on whether to approve the line, a 30 day  
          period for public review and comment on the proposed decision,  
          and adoption of the decision by a PUC vote. 

          The PUC has identified the need for one regulatory analyst to  
          assist with permitting and rate recovery, one engineer to  
          process applications more quickly, and one administrative law  
          judge to handle the increased proceeding workload on an  
          expedited basis.

          CEC
          Under this bill, the CEC will have oversight of POU efforts to  
          meet the same 33 percent 2020 RPS threshold required of IOUs.  
          Page 4
          SB 14 (Simitian)

          Preliminary information indicates the CEC will require five  
          staff and $300,000 in contract services annually to provide the  
          required oversight of POUs, two staff and $400,000 in contract  
          services annually for transmission siting, permitting, and  
          review activities and one staff attorney to assist with POU  
          oversight and transmission activities.  The CEC will utilize the  
          Energy Resources Programs Account to fund the oversight  
          functions.  It is unknown at this time whether this will  
          necessitate an increase in the surcharge.

          DFG 
          DFG has identified costs of $3,057,000 in 2009-10, $3,777,000 in  
          2010-11, and $3,057,000 in 2011-12 and ongoing.  Of these  
          amounts, personal services are consistent at $2,045,000 (22 two  
          year limited term positions of which 17 are a scientist  
          classification) with one time equipment costs in 2009-10 and  
          consultant contracts in 2010-11 accounting for the biggest  
          changes in operating expenses and equipment.

          2009-10 and 2010-11 costs would be paid from a combination of  
          CEC funds and a Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) Prop 84  
          Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) planning grant of  
          $1,558,103 in 2009-10 and $1,498,897 in 2010-11.  For 2011-12  
          and ongoing reimbursements would come from energy generators.   
          According to a DFG Budget Change Proposal, a fund source is  
          under development with the Resources Agency and a funding  
          commitment will be in place prior to July 10, 2019.  Staff notes  
          a fee on permits for transmission projects, as well as energy  
          generators, would more equitably spread these costs.  Absent  
          adoption of the funding source under development, these costs  










          may be a General Fund obligation.

          DFG would establish a Renewable Energy Action Team and a  
          Renewable Energy Conservation Planning Program.  The action team  
          would:
          - Develop multi-species regional conservation strategies while  
          facilitating the development of renewable energy to meet RPS  
          goals.
          - Provide permit and technical assistance to expedite siting and  
          construction of renewable energy projects.
          - Develop multiple coordinated processes with state and federal  
          agencies to ensure renewable energy development is timely and  
          achieves environmental policy goals.

          Chapter 6 of Prop 84 authorized $450 million for the protection  
          and conservation of forests and wildlife habitat.  Of that  
          amount, $90 million is available to the WCB for grants to  
          implement NCCP plans.  As of 3/15/2009, this chapter has a  
          balance of $28,542,000.  As noted above, DFG is proposing the  
          use of these funds.

          Staff notes that the use of bond funds, which are retired over  
          30 years, for a non capital outlay expenditure is not cost  
          effective.  As part of the budget process, an appropriation of  
          PIER funds, or a loan from another funding source, would result  
          in a General Fund savings of $6,365,000 over 30 years by  
          eliminating the principal and interest cost on the repayment of  
          $3,057,000.  

          PIER revenues are approximately $70,000,000 annually.  The fund  
          balance is estimated at $48,100,000 on 6/30/2009.

          Page 5
          SB 14 (Simitian)
          
          Cal ISO
          The ISO is a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation charged  
          with operating the majority of the state's high-voltage  
          wholesale power grid and serves as an impartial link between  
          generators and utilities, providing equal access to the grid for  
          all qualified users and planning for transmission infrastructure  
          needs.

          Utilities and other generators use their own power plants or  
          negotiate short- and long-term contracts for power deliveries.  
          Most of the state's electricity is traded through these










          contracts prior to being scheduled on the ISO grid.   Generators  
          schedule their
          electricity deliveries through the ISO.   While some POU's  
          operate their own transmission lines, the ISO routes electricity  
          from generators to substations using the wholesale grid.    

          The ISO is funded through a grid management charge which is  
          essentially a toll for wholesale users of the grid.  Since 2005,  
          the charge has dropped from a high of $0.83 per MWh to $0.77 per  
          MWh which amounts to about $1 on a monthly utility bill of about  
          $80.  The charge is designed to recover operating costs and debt  
          service, fund approved capital requirements, and provide for an  
          operating reserve.  The charge is earned from six transaction  
          categories:  core reliability services; energy transmission  
          services; forward scheduling; congestion management; market  
          usage and settlements, metering and client relations. 

          Managing six to seven new transmission lines and many widely  
          disbursed generation facilities is likely to increase ISO  
          operating costs though no estimate of those costs is available  
          at this time.
          
          RETI is a statewide initiative to help identify the transmission  
          projects needed to accommodate renewable energy goals, support  
          future energy policy, and facilitate transmission corridor  
          designation, transmission and generation siting and permitting.  
          RETI is a collaborative process in which all interested parties  
          are encouraged to participate.  RETI will assess all competitive  
          renewable energy zones in California and possibly also in  
          neighboring states that can provide significant electricity to  
          California consumers by the year 2020.  RETI also will identify  
          those zones that can be developed in the most cost effective and  
          environmentally benign manner and will prepare detailed  
          transmission plans for those zones identified for development. 


          The PUC estimates that Tehachapi, Sunrise, and Devers-Palo Verde  
          account for half of the estimated need transmission, and will  
          get the state to the 20 percent RPS threshold and beyond.  To  
          meet the 33 percent RPS threshold, the PUC will need to permit  
          at least three more major transmission lines in the next few  
          years.  

          Preliminary generation and transmission cost information
          A joint PUC/CEC greenhouse gas proceeding estimated statewide  
          RPS revenue requirements in 2020 depending on one of three  










          scenarios.  These scenarios also provide an estimate of energy  
          costs on an average rate per kiloWatt hour (kWh).  The  
          proceeding identified an average rate in 2008 of $0.13 per kWh.   
          The scenarios are:

          Page 6
          SB 14 (Simitian)

          - Natural Gas Only Case.  This is essentially the Air Resources  
          Board's (ARB) business as usual case and envisions no further  
          investments in either energy efficiency or RPS energy.  
          - Reference Case.  This case projects continuation of current  
          levels of energy efficiency programs and the 20 percent RPS  
          through 2020, or current law.
          - Accelerated Policy Case.  This case implements the policies  
          recommended in the joint decision and adopted in the ARB's  
          Proposed Scoping Plan-33 percent RPS threshold and significantly  
          expanded energy efficiency programs. 

          The average rate per kWh increase to reach the Reference Case  
          (reflects current law) is estimated at $0.15.  The average rate  
          per KWh to reach the Accelerated Policy Case (changes to current  
          law proposed by this bill plus high goals energy efficiency  
          inputs) is estimated at $0.17.  

          (The energy efficiency inputs are:
          - Energy efficiency: High goals energy efficiency scenario based  
          on PUC Goals Update Study and POU AB 2021 (Chapter 734/2006)  
          filings: 36,559 gigawatt hour (GWh).
          - Rooftop solar photo voltaic (PV): 3,000 MW nameplate (100  
          percent efficiency) of rooftop PV installed.
          - Demand response: five percent of demand response.
          - Combined heat and power (CHP): 1,574 MegaWatt (MW) small CHP <  
          5 MW and 2,804 MW larger CHP > 5 MW.)

          The PUC analysis estimates achieving a 33 percent RPS threshold  
          in 2020 will cost $8.9 billion in generation and transmission  
          costs but will save $6.3 billion in avoided costs (the cost of  
          building and operating conventional fossil fueled generation)  
          resulting in a net cost to ratepayers of $2.6 billion annually.   
          The key drivers in the analysis include natural gas prices, the  
          level of energy efficiency achieved, and renewable technology  
          development.  

          On a net cost basis, the difference between current rates to the  
          Accelerated Policy Case and the Reference Case is $2.6 billion  










          and $1.8 billion.  Those annual costs to ratepayers (minus the  
          high goals efficiency program, which is not a provision of this  
          bill) are noted in the following chart in 2008 dollars.

           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                |Existing to 20  |Existing to 33  |Difference      |
          |                |percent RPS     |percent RPS     |between 20      |
          |                |                |                |percent and 33  |
          |                |                |                |percent RPS     |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |Annual Cost in  |$3,400,000,000  |$8,900,000,000  |$5,500,000,000  |
          |2020            |                |                |                |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |Annual Benefits |$2,600,000,000  |$6,300,000,000  |$3,700,000,000  |
          |in 2020         |                |                |                |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |Net Cost in     |  $800,000,000  |$2,600,000,000  |$1,800,000,000  |
          |2020            |                |                |                |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 

          Dividing $1.8 billion (the net cost difference between the  
          current 20 percent RPS threshold and the proposed 33 percent RPS  
          threshold) by estimated 2020 total system power of 330,000 GWh  
          results in a $0.00545 per kWh increase.  That is, the cost to  
          the 
          Page 7
          SB 14 (Simitian)

          ratepayer when the RPS threshold is increased from 20 percent to  
          33 percent is slightly more than one half cent per kWh.

          Staff notes the PUC is finalizing a more thorough estimate of  
          total costs and net costs.

          According to the PUC analysis, the 33 percent RPS threshold  
          combined with energy efficiency will increase costs by four  
          percent annually compared to the Natural Gas Only Case scenario.  
           The PUC's Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) estimates a  
          $0.04 or 25 percent increase per kWh to achieve a 33 percent RPS  
          threshold.  The DRA uses current rates ($0.13/kWh in 2008) as  
          the base to compare the 2020 Accelerated Policy Case rate.  (The  
          current kWh rate increases to the 2020 Natural Gas Only Case  
          even if all other RPS costs are held constant as a result of  
          increased investment and fuel costs.)

          State Energy Costs










          The state is a retail energy customer appropriating General  
          Funds for entities like the University of California, the  
          California State University, and the California Department of  
          Corrections and Rehabilitation, and K-14 education in a less  
          direct manner.  The Department of General Services allocates  
          Service Revolving Funds, a fund used for the purchase and sale  
          of materials, supplies and equipment and the rendering of  
          services, including energy used by special fund entities.  

          California is served by about 75 load-serving entities (LSEs).  
          There are: 
                 IOUs - 6 
                 POU - 48 
                 Rural Electricity Cooperatives - 4 
                 Native American Utilities - 3 
                 Other Electricity Service Providers - 14 

          The five largest utilities and total electricity consumption  
          (2007) are: 
             1.   Southern California Edison Company (SCE) - 88,208  
               million kWh 
             2.   Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) - 85,057 million  
               kWh 
             3.   Los Angeles Department of Water and Power - 24,317  
               million kWh 
             4.   San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) - 20,300 million kWh 
             5.   Sacramento Municipal Utility District  - 10,917 million  
               kWh 

          In 2008, within the SCE and SDG&E service territories, state  
          entities consume 739,651,000 (state), 428,876,000 (colleges and  
          universitites) and 1,930,848,000 (K-12) and 62,650,000 (state),  
          244,836,000 (colleges and universities) and 375,976,000 (K-12)  
          kWh, respectively.  Per kWH rates range from $0.096 for colleges  
          and universities to $0.16 for K-12 and from $0.07 for colleges  
          and universitites to nearly $0.17 for K-12, respectively.   
          Within the PG&E service terrritory, state entities consume  
          1,169,420 megaWatt hours (MWh) (16 percent of use by all  
          governmental activity (federal, state, county, city, district,  
          city/county, and foreign).  (At this time, K-12 consumption  
          within the PG&E service territory is an estimate of 50 percent  
          of total "district" govermental activity or 1,362,520 MWh.  This  
          varies total state PG&E consumption between 3 and 4.5 percent.)   

          Page 8
          SB 14 (Simitian)











          Total state entity consumption within these IOU service  
          territories is estimated at approximately 6,315,000,000 kWh (10  
          to 11 percent of all consumption within these service  
          territoires).  IOUs deliver approximately two thirds (64.3  
          percent in 2007) of state systemwide electricity.  Adding POUs,  
          total state entity consumption is estimated at 15 to 16 percent  
          of all consumption in the state.  If the cost in 2020 to achieve  
          a 33 percent RPS threshold is $1.8 billion to all ratepayers,  
          state costs would increase by an estimated $279 million annually  
          (15.5 percent of $1,800,000,000) based on 2007 and 2008  
          electricity consumption data.
                                                                   
          Other non General Fund entities may be affected.  For example,  
          though the provisions of the bill relate to retail rates, and  
          the State Water Project (SWP) is a wholesale purchaser, to the  
          extent that there are new costs associated with new transmission  
          lines, SWP costs may increase.  Currently, SWP  
          transmission-related costs are several million dollars annually.  
           

          The Department of Water Resources, which has oversight of the  
          SWP, has a Budget Change Proposal requesting 9 PYs and $1.7  
          million (California Water Fund) to support a new effort to  
          increase the use of renewables in the SWP power portfolio. 

          Changes in energy usage, climate changes including changes in  
          rainfall, regulatory changes, efficiencies in renewable energy  
          production, and changes in the cost and availability of fossil  
          fuels will impact these costs.

          Staff notes the proposed amendments do the following:
          - Clarify that a public utility district receiving 100 percent  
          of its electricity pursuant to a preference right pursuant to  
          the federal Trinity River Diversion Act of August 12, 1955 is in  
          compliance with the renewable energy procurement requirements of  
          the RPS Program. 
          - Require the PUC to prepare, on an annual basis, a report  
          summarizing IOU revenue requirements associated with meeting the  
          RPS, including procurement costs, expenses incurred to ensure a  
          reliable supply of electricity, and expenses to upgrade the  
          transmission grid; all cost savings experienced, or costs  
          avoided, as a result of meeting the RPS; costs incurred for  
          incentives for distributed and renewable generation; cost  
          savings experienced, or costs avoided, as a result of these  
          incentives; all renewable, fossil fuel, and nuclear procurement  










          costs, research, study, or pilot program costs for which an IOU  
          is seeking recovery in rates; and any change in the electrical  
          load serviced by the IOU since the preceding report.  The  
          information contained in this report is similar to, and may be  
          combined with, report information required by Public Utilities  
          Code Section 747 (renumbered by this bill as Section 910).