BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 23
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 20, 2011

                    ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND COMMERCE
                               Steven Bradford, Chair
                    SB 23 (Simitian) - As Amended:  April 26, 2011

           SENATE VOTE  :   31-4
           
          SUBJECT  :   Energy: renewable energy resources.

           SUMMARY  :   Makes a number of technical changes to the recently 
          signed SB 2 in the first extraordinary session, which increased 
          California's renewable portfolio standard from 20% by 2010 to 
          33% by 2020.  Specifically,  this bill  :   

          1)Extends the deadline for the California Energy Commission 
            (CEC) to study and report to the Legislature on run-of-river 
            hydroelectric generating facilities in British Columbia for 
            one year to June 30, 2012.

          2)Extends the deadline for the California Public Utilities 
            Commission (PUC) to determine resource adequacy standards for 
            wind and solar energy resources for one year to no later than 
            July 1, 2012.

          3)Extends the deadline for the CEC to adopt regulations for 
            enforcement of the RPS requirements of the publicly owned 
            utilities (POUs) for one year to July 1, 2012.

           EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Creates the California RPS program and the Renewable Energy 
            Resources Program to increase the amount of electricity 
            generated per year from eligible renewable energy resources.

          2)Effective 90 days after the adjournment of the first 
            extraordinary session, increases California's renewable 
            portfolio standard from 20% by 2010 to 33% by 2020.

          3)Effective 90 days after the adjournment of the first 
            extraordinary session, requires the CEC to study and provide a 
            report to the Legislature that analyzes run-of-river 
            hydroelectric generating facilities by June 30, 2011.

          4)Effective 90 days after the adjournment of the first 








                                                                  SB 23
                                                                  Page  2

            extraordinary session, requires the CEC to adopt regulations, 
            on or before July 1, 2011, for enforcement of the RPS 
            requirements of POUs.

          5)Effective upon the adjournment of the first extraordinary 
            session, requires the PUC to determine resource adequacy 
            standards for wind and solar energy resources no later than 
            July 1, 2011.

           FISCAL EFFECT :   Unknown.

           COMMENTS  :   The Governor signed SB x1 2 (Simitian) on April 12, 
          2011.  The bill will take effect 90 days after the adjournment 
          of the first extraordinary session which has not yet occurred.  
          Thus, various state agencies providing reports or promulgating 
          regulations in 2011.  The delay in enactment of SB x1 2 and the 
          delay in adjournment of the special session require that the 
          deadlines be extended by one year for these agencies to complete 
          their work.

          The author seeks to extend deadlines for specified rules and 
          reports to provide sufficient time for the CEC and CPUC.

          During the Legislature's deliberation on SB x1 2, a number of 
          other issues and concerns were raised, including but not limited 
          to, the following (not in priority order):

          1.Energy Service Providers have expressed concern that contracts 
            signed between June 2010 and January 13, 2011, which were 
            valid under the prior RPS statute have been invalidated 
            because they were signed prior to the date when SB x1 2 
            becomes take effect. The ESPs have requested a technical fix 
            to ensure contracts signed between June 2010 and January 13, 
            2011 are considered valid RPS contracts.
          2.An investor owned utility had requested an amendment to allow 
            excess generation to be carried forward in one compliance 
            period if the contract has a term greater than 5 years (as 
            enacted, SB 1x2 requires a term of 10 years or greater).
          3.Another request was to merge compliance buckets 2 and 3.
          4.The method prescribed which requires the PUC to set 
            procurement goals within each of three compliance periods was 
            argued to be onerous. As the bill specifies that utilities 
            must show progress during the compliance periods, the need for 
            the PUC to set interim goals is not necessary.
          5.Municipal utilities have requested that the mandate in the 








                                                                  SB 23
                                                                  Page  3

            first compliance period (an average of 20% renewables between 
            2011 and 2013) is too onerous. They have requested an 
            extension to a prescriptive 20% by 2014 in lieu of the first 
            compliance period.
          6.Municipal utilities have also requested allowance to 
            carry-forward their generation from prior years to meet the 
            goals of future years (banking). They would like to include 
            banking of generation prior to January 1, 2011.
          7.Rate calculation for feed-in-tariff (FIT).  In 2009, the 
            Legislature adopted SB 32 (Negrete-McLeod) which required the 
            CPUC to increase the 1.5 megawatt FIT to three megawatts and 
            also modified the contract payment calculation which was the 
            Market Price Referent (MPR).  SB 1x2 deleted the code sections 
            which specify how the MPR is calculated.  The author has 
            attempted to incorporate a new definition of the MPR into this 
            bill but in doing so has inadvertently changed the basis of 
            the calculation of the contract payment.

          PG&E has submitted recommendations to simplify procurement and 
          ensure that RPS purchases are counted toward compliance.

          At this time, SB 23 does not address these concerns.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) (if amended)
           
            Opposition 
           
          None on file.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    DaVina Flemings / U. & C. / (916) 
          319-2083