BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1348
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1348 (Blakeslee)
As Amended May 4, 2009
Majority vote
UTILITIES & COMMERCE 12-0 NATURAL
RESOURCES 9-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fuentes, Duvall, Tom |Ayes:|Skinner, Gilmore, |
| |Berryhill, Blakeslee, | |Brownley, Chesbro, De |
| |Carter, Fuller, Furutani, | |Leon, Hill, Huffman, |
| |Huffman, Krekorian, | |Knight, Logue |
| |Smyth, Swanson, Torrico | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|De Leon, Nielsen, | | |
| |Ammiano, | | |
| |Charles Calderon, Davis, | | |
| |Duvall, Fuentes, Hall, | | |
| |Harkey, Miller, | | |
| |John A. Perez, Price, | | |
| |Skinner, Solorio, Audra | | |
| |Strickland, | | |
| |Torlakson, Krekorian | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the investor-owned electrical utilities
(electrical corporations) to submit fossil fuel procurement
plans to the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires each electrical corporation to file with the PUC a
fossil fuel procurement plan complying with the greenhouse gas
(GHG) emission requirements of AB 32, as adopted by the Air
Resources Board.
2)Requires, to the extent feasible, that the above be part of
the electrical corporations' procurement plans submitted
pursuant to current law.
AB 1348
Page 2
3)Requires the PUC to:
a) Review and accept, modify, or reject the fossil fuel
procurement plans; and,
b) Adopt criteria for lease-cost and best-fit fossil fuel
generation resources to facilitate compliance with
GHG-emission reduction requirements, considering the
indirect costs of transmission investments and the ongoing
costs of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel
generating resources.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, one-time costs of about $190,000 for one full-time
regulatory analyst, a part-time administrative law judge and a
counsel to conduct the proceeding establishing the least-cost
and best-fit criteria for fossil fuel generation, and ongoing
costs of about $105,000 for one regulatory analyst to review the
fossil fuel procurement plans. [Public Utilities Reimbursement
Account]
AB 1348
Page 3
COMMENTS : The State's energy policy is transitioning away from
reliance on natural gas toward more diverse sources of energy.
SB 107 (Simitian), Chapter 464, Statutes of 2006, requires the
investor-owned utilities to purchase at least 20% of their
electricity from clean in-state renewable sources by 2010. SB
1368 (Perata), Chapter 598, Statutes of 2006, requires all
electric utilities to purchase only clean electricity from
sources that meet or exceed the emission levels of a natural
gas-fired combined-cycle power plant, even if it's imported. SB
1 (Murray), Chapter 132, Statutes of 2006, requires $3.3 billion
dollars in solar energy investments over the next 10 years.
Also, SB 1037 (Kehoe), Chapter 366, Statutes of 2005, requires
the utilities to use energy efficiency measures to meet its
load, prior to any other means of generation.
Efforts are underway to increase RPS to 33% by 2020 (AB 64,
Krekorian; SB 14, Simitian; SB 805, Wright). This bill seems to
focus on the other 67%. Many "baseload" or reliable and often
fossil-fueled generators are needed to firm the intermittency of
renewable generators. This bill is intended to ensure that
these firming resources, as well as the other 67% of the
utilities' portfolios, do not counteract or contradict GHG
reduction goals. In doing so, this bill intends to have PUC and
ARB apply a "least-emissions, best-fit" evaluation for the
non-renewable generation.
Analysis Prepared by : Gina Adams / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083
FN: 0001194