BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       


           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  AB 1685|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 1685
          Author:   Leno (D), et al
          Amended:  9/4/03 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE ENERGY, U.&C. COMMITTEE  :  5-1, 7/8/03
          AYES:  Bowen, Alarcon, Dunn, Murray, Vasconcellos
          NOES:  McClintock
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Morrow, Battin, Sher

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  8-4, 8/29/03
          AYES: Alpert, Ashburn, Bowen, Burton, Escutia, Karnette,  
            Machado, Murray
          NOES:  Battin, Aanestad, Johnson, Poochigian
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Speier

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  54-25, 6/2/03 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Energy:  self-generation incentive program

           SOURCE  :     The Planning and Conservation League


           DIGEST  :    The bill extends the Self-Generation Incentive  
          program until January 1, 2008 and requires that  
          combustion-operated distributed generation projects meet  
          specific emissions targets in order to qualify for  
          Self-Generation Incentive Program rebates.

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law requires the State Public  
          Utilities Commission (PUC) to offer differential incentives  
          for renewable and super clean distributed generation (AB  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 1685
                                                                Page  
          2

          970 [Ducheny], Chapter 329, Statutes of 2000).

          Pursuant to AB 970, the PUC established the Self-Generation  
          Incentive Program (SGIP).  

          This bill extends the SGIP until January 1, 2008 by  
          requiring the PUC, in consultation with the California  
          Energy Commission, to administer, until January 1, 2008,  
          the incentive program in the same form that exists on  
          January 1, 2004.

          The bill, beginning January 1, 2005, requires  
          combustion-operated distributed generation project using  
          fossil fuels to meet certain NOx emission standards, and  
          beginning January 1, 2007, requires them to meet  
          ultra-clean and low-emission standards. 

          The bill revises the definition of "ultra-clean" and  
          "low-emission distributed generation" to include electric  
          generation technologies that commence operation prior to  
          December 31, 2008.

          The bill gives the PUC flexibility to include other  
          technologies, and to consider public policy interests, such  
          as environmental impacts.

           Background
           
          Pursuant to AB 970's direction to offer incentives for  
          renewable and super clean distributed generation resources,  
          the PUC established the SGIP in March 2001.  The SGIP  
          offers $125 million of financial assistance per year  
          through 2004 for installation of photo-voltaics, fuel  
          cells, and certain gas-fired resources up to one megawatt  
          in size.  The SGIP offers incentives of $4.50 per watt of  
          installed on-site renewable generation capacity, up to a  
          maximum of 50% of total installation costs (Level 1).   
          Certain non-renewable self-generation is also eligible  
          under the category of "super clean," but with lower  
          incentives.  Fuel cells using non-renewable fuel and waste  
          heat recovery are eligible for $2.50 per watt, up to 40% of  
          total costs (Level 2).  Internal combustion engines and  
          micro-turbines using waste heat recovery (i.e.  
          co-generation) are eligible for $1.00 per watt, up to 30%  







                                                               AB 1685
                                                                Page  
          3

          of total costs (Level 3).  "Super clean" is not defined in  
          statute.  The SGIP doesn't require projects to meet any  
          exceptional environmental standards.

          Last year, SB 1038 (Sher), Chapter 515, Statutes of 2002,  
          authorized the PUC to offer special rate treatment to  
          "ultra-clean and low-emission" distributed generation in  
          order to encourage early compliance with emissions  
          standards established by the ARB pursuant to SB 1298  
          (Bowen), Chapter 741, Statutes of 2000.  SB 1038 defined  
          "ultra-clean and low-emission" as distributed generation  
          meeting 2007 ARB emission limits, plus an efficiency  
          standard, and commencing operation by December 31, 2005.

          In March 2003, the PUC issued Decision 03-04-030, which  
          defined distributed generation customers' responsibility  
          for unrecovered electricity procurement costs incurred by  
          the investor-owned utilities and the Department of Water  
          Resources.  Among other things, the decision grants a  
          complete exemption from any such charges for distributed  
          generation that's eligible for financial incentives under  
          the SGIP, and only requires projects to meet existing  
          emissions standards.  The same decision grants a lesser  
          exemption for self-generation that meets the more stringent  
          "ultra-clean and low-emission" criteria.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

                          Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions             2003-04             2004-05          
              2005-06            Fund

           State projects                     ---              -- See  
          comments below --       General/
                                                                       
                                                           Various

          PUC program admin.        ---             Probably $300-350  
          annually    Special*
                                                                      
          should be offset by fee 
                                                                      







                                                               AB 1685
                                                                Page  
          4

          revenues

          *Public Utilities' Reimbursement Account (PURA)  

           The program is funded by a distribution charge imposed on  
          utility bills, which generates about $125 million annually.  
           According to Southern California Edison, only $33.6  
          million in incentives has been paid to date.  Although  
          there is no statutory sunset, the PUC established a  
          December 31, 2004 administrative sunset; their positions  
          and associated funding expire on June 30, 2004.  PUC staff  
          anticipate renewing the program.

          The PUC's costs to continue the program are approximately  
          $300,00 - $500,000 annually, for five positions.

          This bill reduces the pool of applicants eligible to  
          receive incentives.  State DG projects, mainly  
          combustion-operated, have received $2 million in  
          incentives.  As proposed to be amended, at least three of  
          these projects would meet the new standards in this bill.   
          Any future state combustion-operated DG projects would be  
          required to meet the new standards, or would no longer be  
          eligible for the incentive.  
           
           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/5/03)

          The Planning and Conservation League (source)
          State Public Utilities Commission (support, if amended -  
            position reflects 7/16/03 version)
          City and County of San Francisco
          Pacific Gas and Electric Company
          AMECO
          Bay Solar Power Design
          Borrego Solar Systems, Inc.
          California Solar Energy Industries Association
          City of San Diego
          East Bay Municipal Utility District
          EcoEnergies
          International Energy Systems Corporation
          Light Energy Systems
          Ocean Beach Organic Food Co-op
          Owens Electric Inc.
          Pacific Energy Company







                                                               AB 1685
                                                                Page  
          5

          Performance Solar Inc.
          POCO Solar Energy
          R.A. Energy International, Inc.
          Sacramento Municipal Utility District
          San Diego Regional Energy Office
          Shell Solar Industries
          Short Electric
          Six Rivers Solar, Inc.
          SoCal Solar Energy
          Solar Integrated Technologies
          SOLutions in Solar Electricity
          Solar Wind Works
          SUN Utility Network, Inc.
          Tri-Power Group
          Numerous individuals

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  9/5/03)

          Southern California Edison Company (prior version)


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Berg, Bermudez, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan, Chavez,  
            Chu, Cohn, Corbett, Correa, Daucher, Diaz, Dutra,  
            Dymally, Firebaugh, Frommer, Goldberg, Hancock, Harman,  
            Jerome Horton, Jackson, Kehoe, Koretz, La Malfa, Laird,  
            Leno, Levine, Lieber, Liu, Longville, Lowenthal,  
            Maldonado, Matthews, Montanez, Mullin, Nakanishi, Nakano,  
            Nation, Negrete McLeod, Nunez, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley,  
            Reyes, Richman, Ridley-Thomas, Salinas, Simitian,  
            Steinberg, Vargas, Wiggins, Wolk, Yee, Wesson
          NOES:  Aghazarian, Bates, Benoit, Bogh, Campbell, Cogdill,  
            Cox, Dutton, Garcia, Haynes, Shirley Horton, Houston,  
            Keene, La Suer, Leslie, Maddox, Maze, McCarthy, Mountjoy,  
            Pacheco, Plescia, Runner, Samuelian, Strickland, Wyland


          NC:cm  9/9/03   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****