BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS
Senator Ben Hueso, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 2861 Hearing Date: 6/27/2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Ting |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |4/27/2016 As Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Jay Dickenson |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Electricity: distribution grid interconnection dispute
resolution process
DIGEST: This bill establishes authorizes the creation of an
expedited dispute resolution process for distributed generation
energy resources attempting to establish a connection to an
investor-owned utility's (IOU's) electricity transmission and
distribution network.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Defines "distributed resources" to means distributed renewable
generation resources, energy efficiency, energy storage,
electric vehicles, and demand response technologies.
2)Requires each IOU to submit to the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) for it approval or modification a
distribution resources plan proposal to identify optimal
locations for the deployment of distributed resources.
(Public Utilities Code §769)
This bill:
1)Authorizes the CPUC to establish an expedited dispute
resolution process with the goal of resolving disputes over
AB 2861 (Ting) Page 2 of ?
interconnection applications in no more than 60 days from the
time the dispute is formally brought to the CPUC.
2)Requires the dispute resolution process to have the certain
elements, including a distribution grid interconnection
technical advisory panel (TAP) of at least eight members
selected by the CPUC, four of whom are from IOUs and four of
whom are not, and are restricted from participating in the
dispute resolution process for an interconnection application
for which the member has certain defined conflicts.
3)Specifies that a review panel of four members shall be
selected from the TAP for each dispute.
4)Directs CPUC to establish a public process in which interested
parties to the dispute may file comments with the TAP.
5)Directs each technical advisory panel to a dispute to make
recommendations to the Executive Director of the CPUC, who has
30 days to review the recommendation and issue an order to the
IOU.
6)Establishes a process for an interested person to appeal a
decision by the dispute resolution panel to the commission of
the CPUC for resolution.
7)Directs the CPUC to provide TAP members that are not from IOUs
with an appropriate per diem compensation.
Background
Fighting to get on: CPUC's Rule 21 and the Alternative Dispute
Resolution Process. Electric Rule 21 is a tariff that describes
the interconnection, operating and metering requirements for
generation facilities to be connected to an IOU's distribution
system, over which the CPUC has jurisdiction. Section K of Rule
21 establishes a dispute resolution process that first provides
a structure for bilateral negotiations between representatives
of a generation facility and the IOU, and then directs
unresolved disputes to the CPUC's Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) process.
According to the CPUC, the ADR process is administered by the
CPUC's Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Division. The CPUC does
not have data on how many interconnection disputes have gone
through the ADR process. However, the CPUC describes the
AB 2861 (Ting) Page 3 of ?
process as rarely, if ever, having been used by interconnection
applicants. The CPUC attribute this lack to the time and cost
of the ADR process. The CPUC reports that, instead of the ADR
process, developers often raise complaints with CPUC's Energy
Division staff, who lack the engineering expertise and
decision-making authority to effectively intervene in
interconnection disputes.
Bill would create an expedited distribution grid interconnection
dispute resolution process. This bill seeks to create a forum
by which interconnection disputes between a generator and an IOU
can be resolved quickly and fairly. To that end, this bill
authorizes the CPUC to establish an expedited distribution grid
interconnection dispute resolution process with the goal of
resolving disputes over interconnection applications that are
within the jurisdiction of the CPUC in no more than 60 days from
the time the dispute is formally brought to the commission. The
idea was proposed as part of last year's budget act but did not
appear in the final version of the act.
If the CPUC chooses to adopt the process, this bill prescribes
certain feature and procedures that must be part of the process.
Generally, the process would function as follows:
This bill requires the process that CPUC might adopt to have the
following features:
The CPUC would establish a distribution grid
interconnection technical advisory panel of at least eight
members, four of whom work for and IOU and four of whom do
not.
An applicant for interconnection who is unable to
resolve a dispute with an IOU may file with the CPUC for
expedited dispute resolution.
The CPUC would ensure that a technical advisory panel -
a four-member body chosen from the distribution grid
interconnection technical advisory panel, reviews the
dispute via a public process and makes a recommendation to
the executive director of the commission within 30 days of
receiving the dispute.
The CPUC executive director would have 30 days to review
the recommendation and to prepare an order to the IOU
AB 2861 (Ting) Page 4 of ?
resolving the dispute.
The process would provide for alternate decisions by each member
of a dispute resolution panel, appeal to the full commission of
decisions by the executive director, and per diem for the member
of a panel who do not work for an IOU.
The CPUC reports that, if this bill becomes law, the expedited
interconnection dispute resolution process would likely replace
the dormant ADR Process.
It is unknown whether the process this bill would allow to be
established would allow disputes between generators and IOUs to
be resolved more quickly or to a greater degree of general
satisfaction. Many details of implementation are left to the
CPUC. However, stakeholders seem to believe it might help:
this bill is supported by many generators and the CPUC and is
not opposed by any party, including any IOU. Seems worth a try.
Prior/Related Legislation
SB 106 (Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, 2015) includes a
proposal to create a similar dispute resolution process. The
bill is pending on the Senate Inactive File.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.: Yes Local: No
SUPPORT:
California Public Utilities Commission (Source)
California Energy Storage Alliance
California Solar Energy Industries Association
OutBack Power Technologies
Powertree Services Inc.
Solar Energy Industries Association
SolarCity
OPPOSITION:
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:
AB 2861 (Ting) Page 5 of ?
Interconnection requests have grown dramatically in
California. Electrical corporations and the CPUC have
worked to ensure timely processing of interconnection
applications. However, when a dispute arises between an
existing electricity provider (which owns the distribution
grid) and a renewable energy or energy storage developer
attempting to connect to the grid, projects are
unnecessarily delayed or come to a halt.
Examples of disputes include wildly differing fee estimates
for interconnection upgrades, unreasonable response
timeframes from utilities, excessive needs for meetings and
re-submittals of materials.
Just as the electrical corporation oversees the
interconnection processes, the same corporation handles the
disputes. This structure has unduly limited the ability to
get an independent review of disputes.
The technical nature of interconnections - dealing with
electrical engineering, circuitry protection 'schemes',
metering configurations, and system upgrades (such as new
electrical equipment costs) - render the decision-making of
the electrical corporation incoherent to most
interconnection applicants. Additionally, the lack of
independence in the current process, where disputes are
escalated within the electrical corporation, may not
provide sufficient independence in the review of disputes.
AB 2861 establishes a technical advisory panel to review
disputes and to provide recommendations to the CPUC on
dispute resolution. Ultimately, the CPUC has the final
decision-making authority to determine the appropriate
resolution.
-- END --