BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                              1
          1





                SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
                                 ALEX PADILLA, CHAIR
          


          AB 1947 -  Fong                         Hearing Date:  June 29,  
          2010                       A
          As Amended:         June 17, 2010            FISCAL       B

                                                                        2
                                                                        2
                                                                        0
                                                                        7

                                      DESCRIPTION
           
           Current law  establishes the California Solar Initiative (CSI), a  
          $3.3 billion program to subsidize the installation of  
          photovoltaic (PV) systems for customers of the state's  
          investor-owned utilities (IOUs) and publicly owned utilities  
          (POUs).

           Current law  requires that the CSI solar system offset part or  
          all of the consumer's own electricity demand and that the system  
          be located on the same premises of the end-use consumer where  
          the consumer's own electricity demand is located.

           This bill  eliminates those requirements for systems in the  
          territories of the POUs under specified conditions. 


                                      BACKGROUND
           
          California Solar Initiative (CSI) - Effective in 2007, the CSI  
          calls for the installation of 3,000 megawatts (MW) of new,  
          solar-produced electricity by 2016. Targeted expenditures under  
          the CSI, funded by ratepayers, are $3.3 billion over ten years,  
          distributed among three distinct program components: IOUs,  
          $2.167 million/1940 MW; New Solar Homes Partnership, $400  
          million/360 MW; and POUs $784 million/700 MW.

          California now has over 736 MW of solar PV in the IOU  
          territories at over 43,000 residential, commercial and  
          governmental sites.  This includes installed generation and  











          pending applications.  The POUs have installed 26 MW of  
          generation at 7,712 sites and the NHSP reports 7.8 MW of solar  
          PV at 3,002 sites.  

          All CSI programs combined, California has approximately  
          installed 770 MW of solar generation on the customer's side of  
          the meter - 27% of goal.

          SolarShares - Marketed as an alternative to the installation of  
          solar on a customer's roof, the SolarShares program is offered  
          to customers in the territory of the Sacramento Municipal  
          Utility District (SMUD).  For a fixed monthly price over 20  
          years, the participating SMUD customer pays a fee of $258 to  
          $396 per year to the utility and in turn receives a bill credit  
          for the production of solar at a SMUD-owned site.  The bill  
          credit ranges from $174 to $313 in the first year of  
          participation depending on the level of participation chosen by  
          the customer and the energy produced by the central solar farm.   
          Over the course of 20 years, the customer's fee remains the same  
          but the bill credit is scheduled to increase.   

          The central solar facility is located within the SMUD territory  
          and the power generated at the local solar farm is like any  
          utility-owned generation and generally provides service to all  
          customers except for purposes of customer billing for  
          participants.  This program does however make the participating  
          customer feel like they are paying for and receiving green  
          power.  In reality this power is just like any other green power  
          on the grid under the Renewable Portfolio Standard.
           

                                       COMMENTS
           
              1)   Author's Purpose  .  Most utilities are making progress  
               towards meeting their share of the CSI's 3000 megawatt  
               goal.  However, after four years of CSI experience and data  
               collection it has become clear that many ratepayers who are  
               paying the solar surcharge remain unable or unwilling to  
               install solar on their rooftop for the following reasons:   
               Renters - ratepayers who rent and businesses who lease  
               commercial space are all paying the solar surcharge but do  
               not own any roof space to install solar;  Incompatible  
               roofs - ratepayers with tile roofs, steeply pitched roofs,  
               north or east facing roofs are paying the solar surcharge  










               but may not have the right orientation for installing  
               solar;  Shading - ratepayers with rooftops that are shaded  
               by trees or other adjacent buildings are paying the solar  
               surcharge but may be prohibited from installing solar;   
               Cost - the upfront cost of purchasing a solar system may be  
               cost prohibitive for some ratepayers who nonetheless are  
               paying the solar surcharge;  Payback - Ratepayers who pay  
               relatively low rates for electricity and/or use less  
               electricity have a harder time justifying the cost of solar  
               yet they too must pay the solar surcharge.

               AB 1947 places downward pressure on rates by allowing POUs  
               to reach their SB 1 goal using larger solar systems that  
               cost less to build on a per kilowatt basis.  Participating  
               solar customers likewise will benefit under AB 1947 through  
               their ability to subscribe to a larger solar energy system  
               that in many instances provides a shorter payback period  
               than traditional rooftop solar.  The participating customer  
               also benefits by receiving all the solar attributes without  
               the maintenance requirements of a rooftop system.  The  
               sponsors of the bill have provided the committee with a  
               cost/benefit comparison spreadsheet of their SolarShares  
               pilot project. 

              2)   Basic Premise of CSI  .  This bill would allow SMUD, and  
               any other POU, to use ratepayer money collected for the CSI  
               program toward the costs of central-station solar located  
               in their service territory and sized up to 5 MW.  That  
               generation could then be counted toward their CSI  
               obligation.  SMUD's CSI obligation is 125 MW.
           
                The fundamental premise of the CSI program is that the  
               solar system funded with CSI funds be sized and sited so  
               that the amount of electricity produced by the system  
               primarily offsets part or all of the customer's electrical  
               needs at the project site thereby displacing electric load  
               on the grid.  This bill will eliminate that requirement for  
               a portion of the obligation of the POUs.

               This bill authorizes the use of CSI ratepayer funds to fund  
               centralized generation owned and operated by the utility.   
               The immediate result is that the reduction of peak demand  
               as intended by the CSI is not achieved.  In the long-term  
               the goals of zero net energy homes will be undermined and,  










               at a future time when energy storage technologies are  
               affordable and commercially available, the CSI generation  
               intended to be installed on the customer's side of the  
               meter will not exist to take advantage of the storage  
               technologies which would truly achieve the goal of zero net  
               energy homes.

              3)   POUs Challenge in Meeting CSI  .  There is a significant  
               chance that many if not all of the POUs will have  
               difficulty meeting their CSI goals primarily because  
               electricity rates in those territories are substantially  
               lower than those of the IOUs making the payback of a solar  
               investment out of reach for many customers.  As an example,  
               the highest SMUD residential rate is $0.18 per kilowatt  
               hour (kWh).   The highest residential rate for a PG&E  
               residential customer was at $.0.49 per kWh which was  
               adjusted last month to $0.40.

              4)   Solar & the CSI Have Limitations  .  The CSI program will  
               not bring solar to all which has frustrated many policy  
               makers and customers.  For most customers solar will not be  
               an option in the near future simply due to its costs.   
               Customers who live in high-density housing will also be  
               challenged due to the space required for solar  
               installations; for many customers the pitch of their roof  
               is not suitable or the home is shaded too much.  Rental  
               customers are also not likely to benefit from solar simply  
               because the property owner would carry the expense while  
               the renter would reap the power.  Agricultural customers  
               with centralized load can benefit but load demand at the  
               far reaches of their property will remain separately  
               metered due to the cost and size of solar installations in  
               remote areas.  These limitations were well known when the  
               program was adopted.  The CSI program was not funded nor  
               were the authorized facilities sized to a level that will  
               serve all customer's needs.  The program was provided with  
               a limited amount of funding, for a limited time, with a  
               limit on capacity to jump-start the solar industry and  
               start to introduce customers to self-generation.

               The intent of the CSI program was that the industry would  
               be stimulated and the price of solar would come down making  
               the application more affordable.  For high density housing  
               the CPUC is piloting a "virtual net metering" program as  










               part of its Multifamily Affordable Solar Housing program.   
               This pilot enables a multifamily housing owner to allocate  
               a solar system's benefits to tenants across multiple units.  
                If it is successful, the CPUC may consider making it  
               available to a broader range of CSI participants.

              5)   Ratepayer Impact  .  The funds collected from POU  
               customers to fund CSI installations would be redirected to  
               central, utility-owned power and unavailable to POU  
               customers for roof-top installations.

              6)   Related Legislation  .  AB 2296 (Saldana) permits CSI  
               systems to be installed anywhere near the customer's load  
               rather than the customer's side of the meter.  Status: Set  
               for hearing in the Senate Energy, Utilities &  
               Communications Committee June 29, 2010.


                                    ASSEMBLY VOTES

           Assembly Utilities & Commerce          8-6
          Assembly Floor                     50-24


                                       POSITIONS
           
           Sponsor:
           
          Sacramento Municipal Utility District

           Support:
           
          Sierra Club

           Oppose:
           
          None on file

          Kellie Smith 
          AB 1947 Analysis
          Hearing Date:  June 29, 2010