BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 919 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 15, 2016 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND COMMERCE Mike Gatto, Chair SB 919 (Hertzberg) - As Amended May 31, 2016 SENATE VOTE: 35-0 SUBJECT: Water supply: creation or augmentation of local water supplies SUMMARY: Requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to address the oversupply of renewable energy resources through development of a tariff or other economic incentive available to facilities that create or augment local water supplies. Specifically, this bill: 1)Requires the CPUC, before January 1, 2018, to approve a tariff or other economic incentive for electricity purchased by customers operating facilities that create or augment local water supplies to reduce the cost of electricity to those facilities. 2)Defines "facilities that create or augment local water supplies" to include desalination, brackish water desalting, water recycling, water reuse, stormwater and dry weather runoff capture and use, and groundwater recharge facilities. SB 919 Page 2 EXISTING LAW: 1)Authorizes the CPUC to fix rates, establish rules, examine records, issue subpoenas, administer oaths, take testimony, punish for contempt, and prescribe a uniform system of accounts for all public utilities, including electrical and gas corporations, subject to its jurisdiction. (Article 12 of the California Constitution) 2)Requires that all charges demanded or received by any public utility for any product, commodity or service be just and reasonable, and that every unjust or unreasonable charge is unlawful. (Public Utilities Code Section 451) 3)Requires retail sellers of electricity - investor-owned utilities (IOU), community choice aggregators (CCAs), and energy service providers (ESPs) - and publicly-owned utilities (POU) to increase purchases of renewable energy such that at least 50% of retail sales are procured from renewable energy resources by December 31, 2030. This is known as the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). (Public Utilities Code Section 399.11 et seq.) 4)Requires the CPUC to adopt a process for each IOU to file an integrated resource plan to ensure the IOUs meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets for the electricity sector; procure at least 50% eligible renewable energy resources by December 31, 2030; enable each IOU to fulfill its obligation to serve its customers at just and reasonable rates; minimize impacts on ratepayers' bills; ensure system and local reliability; strengthen the diversity, sustainability, and resilience of the bulk transmission and distribution systems, and local communities; enhance distribution systems and demand-side energy management; and SB 919 Page 3 minimize localized air pollutants and other GHG emissions, with early priority on disadvantaged communities. (Public Resources Code Section 454.52) FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. COMMENTS: 1)Author's Statement: "Senate Bill 919 encourages the development and diversification of local water supplies through water recycling, reclamation, and desalination by directing renewable energy 'oversupply' to those water suppliers. An ancillary benefit is that the bill requires better coordination of California's renewable energy resources and demand for power and enables better, more cost-effective utilization of renewable power as it is generated." 2)Background: California remains in a historic drought. Scientists predict our changing climate will increase the frequency, length, and severity of droughts. The solution will require new sustainable, local water supplies, such as water recycling, ocean desalination, storm water capture, and brackish desalting (i.e., cleaning up water that is too salty to drink, but not as salty as seawater). According to wastewater agencies, most of the demand for recycled water is for irrigation, and due to nighttime watering rules, there is no way to avoid daytime production when retail costs are highest. The author opines that there is a solution to this mismatch in demand for power at water facilities in the daytime and cost of electricity. Due to California's successful renewable SB 919 Page 4 energy programs, regulators have identified an "oversupply" of power during the day. The result is low (or negative) wholesale prices for renewable energy, a trend that is increasing in frequency but is not reflected in retail prices. Oversupply increases costs to ratepayers and represents a failure of the regulatory system to send proper price signals. 3)Renewable Energy Oversupply: In 2013, the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) published the "duck chart," which shows a significant drop in mid-day net load on a spring day as solar photovoltaics (PV) are added to the state's electric grid. The chart raised concerns that the state's electric grid will not be able to maintain reliability, particularly on days characterized by the duck shape. This could result in "overgeneration" and curtailed renewable energy, increasing its costs and reducing its environmental benefits. In March 2015, the Union of Concerned Scientists pointed out in its study of California grid reliability stated that: "The CAISO currently handles overgeneration situations by reducing or 'curtailing' the generation from renewable energy facilities. This is a missed opportunity because it wastes electricity from clean sources while natural gas plants are kept online. Primarily relying on natural gas plants to meet energy needs and grid reliability services will prevent California from achieving its long-term emission reduction goals. " In other words, gas plants are running at the same time that "renewable oversupply" in the duck chart. Other generation facilities that are running include nuclear (Diablo Canyon) and hydroelectric facilities. In addition, at the same time there is a renewable oversupply California is usually importing electricity from out-of-state. Efforts to absorb "renewable oversupply" do not address the underlying use of SB 919 Page 5 natural gas, as well as out-of-state coal, to meet California's electricity needs. This bill will increase demand for electricity and provides for use of such mechanisms as time-of-use rates, demand response, or dynamic pricing, thus providing a means to help create demand for electricity at times when it would be helpful for electric grid management. 4)State Desalination Policies: On May 6, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) approved an amendment to the state's Water Quality Control Plan for the Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan) to address effects associated with the construction and operation of seawater desalination facilities to support the use of ocean water as a reliable supplement to traditional water supplies while protecting marine life and water quality. This amendment provides a uniform, consistent process for permitting of seawater desalination facilities statewide, provides direction for regional water boards when permitting new or expanded facilities, and provides specific implementation and monitoring and reporting requirements. The amendment received final approval from the California Office of Administrative Law in January 2016. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) provides grants for the planning, design, and construction of water desalination facilities for both brackish and ocean water. It also provides grants for pilot, demonstration, and research projects. DWR conducted three rounds of funding since 2005. In November 2014, California voters passed Proposition 1, a part of which is the Water Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (California Water Code, Division 26.7, Section 79700, et seq). Chapter 9 of Proposition 1 provides $725 million for grants/loans for water recycling and advanced treatment, including desalination projects. DWR's Water Desalination Grant Program will incorporate the Proposition 1 SB 919 Page 6 desalination elements. Water Boards draw authority for storm water regulation from the federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) and from direction within the Clean Water Act which puts the framework for regulating storm water discharges under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit system. Cities and other jurisdictions that operate large and medium and small storm water systems as well as specific industrial activity sites, including constructions sites that disturb more than an acre of land, must apply for storm water permits. The SWRCB provides policy and regulatory oversight, on behalf of the federal government. 5)Existing Desalination Facilities. According to information available from the SWRCB there are 15 proposed desalination facilities and 12 existing desalination facilities in California. Proposed plants include the Bay Area Regional Desalination Project, California Water Service Company, Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek, Central Coast Regional Water Project, Regional Desalination Project (CalAm), Ocean View Plaza, Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Cambria Community Services District, Oceano Community Services District, West Basin Municipal Water District, City of Oceanside, and the San Diego County Water Authority. Other facilities may also be in the planning process, but not included in the SWRCB list, such as the People's Moss Landing Water Desal Project. Table 1: Existing desalination facilities SB 919 Page 7 -------------------------------------------------------------- | | Operator/ Location | Production Capacity | Status | | | |(Millions of Gallons | | | | | per Day) | | | | | | | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |1. |Monterey Bay |0.04 |Active | | |Aquarium | | | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |2. |Marina Coast Water |0.3 |Temporarily| | |District | | idle | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |3. |Duke Energy, Moss |0.5 |Active | | |Landing | | | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |4. |Sand City |0.3 |Active | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |5. |City of Morro Bay |0.6 |Intermitten| | | | |t use | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |6. |Duke Energy |0.4 |Not known | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |7. |Pacific Gas & |0.6 |Not known | | |Electric (PG&E) | | | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |8. |Chevron USA |0.4 |Active | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |9. |City of Santa |2.8-8.9 |Temporarily| | |Barbara | | idle | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |10. |U.S. Navy |0.02 |Not known | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |11. |Southern California |0.12 |Inactive | | |Edison (SCE) | | | |-------+--------------------+---------------------+-----------| |12. |Carlsbad |50 |Active | | |Desalination Plant | | | SB 919 Page 8 -------------------------------------------------------------- A May 2016 report on marine and coastal impacts of desalination in California was published by Water in the West (a partnership of the faculty, staff and students of the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment and the Bill Lane Center for the American West) the Monterey Bay Aquarium, the Nature Conservancy and the Center for Ocean Solutions. This report found, among other things, that the role of ocean desalination will be minor in the context of California's overall water budget, although it may be very important in some local areas and that communities should compare all costs and benefits (social, environmental and economic) of desalination with the true costs and benefits of other water supply sources. 6)Brackish water desalination: According to California desalination advocacy group, CalDesal, there are a number of brackish water desalination projects currently in operation in California. According to CalDesal, most projects produce less than 5 million gallons per day (or 5,600 acre-feet per year) but there are some larger-scale plants, with more expected in the coming years. Examples of currently operating brackish water desalination projects are: a) West Basin Municipal Water Distric produces 5 million gallons per day of high quality water to consumers. b) Chino Basin Desalter Authority operates a desalination project that produces 14 million gallons a day of fresh water from brackish water pumped from wells throughout the Chino area. Brine left over from the process is transported by a regional brine line and subsequently discharged to the ocean. SB 919 Page 9 c) Alameda County Water District operates a series of wells that remove brackish water from groundwater. 7)Coordination with the SWRCB: Given that the CPUC has little expertise in the areas of brackish water desalting, water recycling, water reuse, stormwater and dry weather runoff capture and use, and groundwater recharge facilities, the CPUC should consult with the SWRCB in the development of the tariff to ensure that the projects create or augment local water supplies and to ensure consistency with the federal Water Pollution Control Act. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Association of California Water Agencies, If Amended California Association of Sanitation Agencies California Municipal Utilities Association, If Amended Independent Energy Producers Association San Diego County Water Authority Opposition None on file SB 919 Page 10 Analysis Prepared by:Sue Kateley / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083