CCA Digest
CALIFORNIA Roundup, September 2015
A Message from LEAN's Executive Director
Last-minute shenanigans at the CA Legislature kicked off the month of September!
Most of the excitement revolved around SB 350, the Governor's landmark renewables bill -- and one that CCAs and local government supported until the final weeks of the session, when SDG&E presented amendments that were untenable and moved us into oppose position. California CCAs, local governments and environmental groups rallied to fend-off the worst amendments and CCA came out okay. Thanks to everyone who wrote letters, made phone calls, and sent e-mails... it made a difference. And kudos to the State of California for another forward-thinking piece of environmental legislation.
AB 1110 was another great-in-concept bill with language that would've put CCAs at a competitive disadvantage with regard to how greenhouse gas reductions are calculated and reported. Sonoma Clean Power worked closely with sponsors and the author to draft CCA-neutral amendments. Because of remaining concerns over language, the author agreed to make AB 1110 a two-year bill. Time to go back to the drawing board on this one... hopefully with a more collaborative, well researched approach.
The 2015 legislative season was another reminder that CCAs and communities interested in pursuing CCA need to stay vigilant and engaged. The same goes for the CPUC where several issues, including a 72% increase in the 2016 PCIA/exit fee, is on the table.
Please see the PCIA call to action below!
Happy Fall Everyone.
________________________________________________
|
|
|
Update of CCA Program Developments in California
Lots going on around the State. The Counties of Mendocino, Lake and Humboldt are joining forces on a master request for proposal (RFP) that would give each county a variety of CCA program development and management options. Santa Barbara County is leading an effort to identify interested jurisdictions in a tri-county area and the City of San Francisco, which earlier this month was moving forward, is now delayed again...
Other updates ...
|
Butte County
|
County Supervisors directed staff to study CCA concept and potentially conduct feasibility analysis
|
| Los Angeles County |
BKi won contract for feasibility study; Board of Supervisors authorized $300,000 for initial phase
|
| City of Morro Bay |
Plans to explore CCA options. CCP provided a briefing to City Council 9/8
|
| City of Davis/ Yolo County |
The Energy Authority won contract for technical study; Phase 1 analysis to be complete by December with decision to form their own program or join MCE.
|
| Santa Cruz County / Monterey & San Benito Counties |
PG&E data forthcoming. Technical team selected and study is expected by end of December
|
| City/County of San Francisco |
Bids submitted 9/3 for power supply services. Over 50 responses; date for contract announcements unknown; program delayed to allow time for review.
|
| Mendocino County |
Analyzing program options; participating in joint RFP development with Lake and Humboldt Counties; community education up next
|
| Lake County |
BoS voted to engage Ellison, Schneider & Harris to support RFP process for CCA services joint effort with Mendocino and Humboldt Counties
|
| Humboldt County |
BoS authorized Redwood Coast Energy Authority to take lead on CCA assessment; participating in joint RFP with Lake and Mendocino Counties
|
| Santa Barbara County / Ventura & San Luis Obispo |
Working with Ventura and (potentially) San Luis Obispo Counties on tech study; load data authorizations and CCE advisory committee development underway
|
_______________________________________________________
|
The Latest from California CCAs
MCE's Power Procurement Planning -- MCE's Director of Power Resources, Greg Brehm, reports that MCE is planning its post-2018 supply strategy as its main contract with Shell expires at the end of 2017. MCE is hoping to focus its supply strategy on hydro and in-state wind resources and will also be able to rely on the 180MW of local power projects MCE currently has under development. Greg reports that MCE's 2015 portfolio includes only 15% unbundled "RECs," which will fall to less than 3% in 2016. Greg added that MCE's demand response program has focused on residential customers to date, and includes a pilot program for on-site storage at selected customer sites.
LCE's Regulatory Successes --
Cathy DeFalco, Director of Programs at LCE, reports that LCE negotiated a settlement with SCE to reduce monthly service account charges. This charge reimburses the utility for data management about customer usage and rates. The LCE-SCE settlement would reduce SCE's proposed charge of $1.50 per account to $.37 per account -- quite an accomplishment since LCE has been paying $1.13. For comparison, PG&E charges between $.44 and $1.11 per account depending on the level of service the CCA chooses. The LCE-SCE settlement has been submitted to the CPUC for approval. Also in the pipeline -- a joint proposal by LCE and SCE for the City of Lancaster to purchase street lights SCE owns within city limits. Cathy reports that the purchase would reduce the City's costs by giving it the option to provide its own maintenance. The CPUC will need to approve this agreement as well.
_______________________________________________________
|
|
Regulatory and Legislative Happenings
A few CPUC updates this month...
- PG&E 2016 ERRA Application (A. 15-06-001) -- PG&E proposes to increase the 2016 PCIA (customer exit fee) by an average of 72% and as high as 127% for certain customer classes! This is anti-competitive in effect and an increase that is unprecedented for any type of rate. MCE filed a brief proposing the Commission mitigate the increase by applying some of the "negative" balances in the account that tracks costs related to pre-2009 departing load. LEAN filed a brief proposing a backup mitigation that would amortize revenue collection in a "balancing account." In sharp contrast, SCE is expected to propose a zero PCIA for 2016.
Fight the 2016 PCIA Rate Hike!
As noted above, the PCIA/customer exit fee in PG&E territory is slated to increase by a whopping 72% in 2016, with heavy impacts on new CCA programs and low income customers. Please see MCE's
press release and
overview sheet for a plain english expanation of the issue. The CPUC will be making its decision in December and we need your help in opposing this anti-competiive and oppressive rate increase. Here's how:
2)
Write a letter or send an e-mail
registering your strong objection to CPUC Commissioners Michael Picker and Michael Florio at:
CA Public Utilities Commission, 505 VanNess Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102
-
PG&E Annual Advice Letter Rate True-up --
PG&E has just filed its annual advice letter proposing rates for January 1, 2016 that consolidates the effect of various CPUC rate decisions in 2015. Its residential rate would fall from $.097 to $.09292 with a "minimum bill" charge of $4.50 (which would apply notwithstanding usage so in that way it is like a "standby" charge).
- PG&E 2017 General Rate Case (A.15-009-001) -- PG&E is proposing a rate increase of $1.34 billion over three years, most of which would be allocated to electricity rates. The average increase over all rates would be about 3% a year for three years beginning January 1, 2017. In the first year, the average increase to generation rates would be 2.9% and the average increase to distribution rates would be 4.1%. Normally, the rate design proposal is in a second phase of the rate case -- a ways off. The Commission has not issued a schedule for this proceeding yet.
- Green Tariffs (Resolution E-4734) -- CPUC staff has issued a proposed resolution that would implement green tariffs for PG&E, SCE and SDG&E. The resolution adopts MCE's proposal to require that utility bills separately identify the PCIA and would limit third party marketing.
At the California Legislature:
- AB 1110 (Ting) -- Would have adopted certain guidelines for reporting energy-related greenhouse gas reductions. After a lot of work by SCP and others on amendments, this is now a two year bill. Remaining concerns include treatment of "Bucket 2" resources for reporting purposes.
- AB 350 (DeLeon)-- Increased the renewable portfolio standard to 50% by 2030 and doubled down on energy efficiency. After a last-mintue slog to mitigate harmful SDG&E amendments, the bill was passed with the following CCA-related provisions:
- Requires that by 2021, 65% of supply portfolios include renewable purchase commitments of 10 years or longer; will require clarification as to whether the provision applies to all resources or just those that are incremental toward the 50% RPS goal; does not provide any ramp up period for new CCAs or other load serving entities although expect to address this in implementation at the CPUC.
- CCA procurement plans must be submitted to CPUC for certification commencing in 2017.
- Reaffirms that CCAs have authority to provide and manage energy efficiency programs, and that reductions count toward State EE goals.
- Excuses CCA customers from paying for utility customer renewable integration costs under CAM if CPUC certifies resource reliability plans; CAM for existing 15% resource adequacy requirement unchanged; unclear when compliance period commences.
Here is what three SiliconValley mayors had to say about these bills (before they were amended). Thank you to Mayors Pepper, Sinks and Griffith!
- SB 660 (Leno) -- With overwhelming support, the Legislature took steps to reform CPUC procedures following revelations of a culture of backroom deals and utility influence. SB 660 further restricts ex parte communications by prohibiting them in "rate setting" proceedings and on procedural matters, and adopting reporting requirements in quasi-legislative (rulemaking) proceedings. The bill specifies civil penalties for infractions, provides that the Chief ALJ would serve at the pleasure of the full Commission and sets forth criteria for decision-maker recusal. The bill clarifies that any person or organization with an interest in the outcome of a proceeding, or any representative of such a person or organization, is subject to ex parte provisions. Effective date: January 1, 2016.
If you would like more information or have ideas for collaboration, please contact Kim Malcolm
[email protected]
|
|
| |
|
|
We'd like to extend an enthusiastic thanks to all our members, whether you're new on the scene or renewing your membership. Your support is critical to our success, and to the success of CCA everywhere.
Thanks to our newest members!
Solana Energy
First Solar
BKi Engineering
What?
You say you're not a member yet?! You can join through our website
Click
here for our membership flyer information.
You can see logos of all our current members on our website HOME page. Please take the time to peruse their websites--you may find some important contacts there.
____________________
|
Our Consulting Clients
In addition to providing information resources to all interested parties, LEAN Energy also provides consulting services to communities involved in CCA investigation and development. Whether you're just considering formation or further along, LEAN can help flatten your learning curve, provide critical guidance, and prep you for launch in record time. You'll learn from those who've already done it successfully and from those who are well along the path.
Here are some of LEAN's current CCA consulting clients:
San Mateo County
City of Lancaster
Silicon Valley CCE Partnership
Santa Cruz County/Monterey Bay Community Power
City of Davis
Santa Barbara County
Looking for help with CCA Formation? Call Us!
__________________
|
Odds and Ends
Westchester County, NY Poised for CCA Launch
Sustainable Westchester has been collecting bids for work on their CCA web portal. They're the first in the state to push ahead with CCA.
Educational Workshops Available
Would a workshop on CPUC regulation or an informational CCA webinar be useful for your community or working group? LEAN Energy can help!
Next Monthly Market Call
Friday, Oct. 9th, 10-11 am
Help Design our Market Calls
We're asking for input and suggestions about what's most important to YOU.
Please
click here
to take our very brief survey and make sure your voice is heard!
__________________
|
of the Latest News!
Remember to follow us on facebook and Twitter for up-to-the-minute news flashes on the CCA marketplace.
___________________
|
Acronym Cheat Sheet
Are the acronyms and abbreviations stumping you? Here's a quick glossary of some frequently used terms:
ALJ - Administrative Law Judge
BoS - Board of Supervisors
CAM - Cost Allocation Mechanism
CPUC - California Public Utility Commission
ERRA - Energy Resource Recovery Account
iBank - California Infrastructure & Economic Development Bank
IBEW - Int'l Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
JPA - Joint Powers Authority
PCIA - Power Charge Indifference Adjustment
PPA - Power Purchase Agreement
REC - Renewable Energy Credit
T & D Rates - Transmission and Distribution Rates
TOU Rates - Time of Use Rates
CCA vs. CCE - What's the difference? Nothing!
Community Choice Aggregation is sometimes called Community Choice Energy. The first is a legal term; the second is more descriptive and consumer-friendly.
|
|
