BACKGROUND
Staff has been reviewing key energy-related legislation to determine potential impacts to the Electric Department. Several energy-related bills could have ramifications on the operations of the City’s electric department. Below is a list of key bills that staff has been monitoring:
Procurement Mandates:
AB 56 (E. Garcia) Statewide Central Procurement Entity (Oppose) This bill evaluates establishing a statewide central procurement entity to procure resources on behalf of electricity customers in the state for various purposes. Roseville is opposed to this bill because this proposal takes away local control and the ability for Publicly Owned Utilities (POU) to map out their own procurement needs and resource decisions. This bill will result in unnecessary procurement costs allocated to publicly owned utilities. In addition, this bill disregards the fact that POUs, like Roseville Electric, are participating members of the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA), which serves as a central procurement entity of sorts for its members.
SB 288 (Wiener) Self-Generation and Storage (Oppose) Requires, by January 1, 2021, the local governing boards of publicly owned utilities to create tariffs that offer “fair” compensation for customer-sited energy storage systems that export electricity to the grid; and to consider additional tariff(s) for customer-sited energy storage and renewable energy systems that provide other benefits to the grid. This bill will also create additional reporting requirements to the California Energy Commission (CEC) regarding the amount of time for processing interconnection requests. Roseville Electric is opposed to the bill because it will conflict with Roseville’s implementation of the Solar 2.0 program and may result in customers without customer-sited renewable energy and/or storage subsidizing customers with customer-sited renewable energy and/or storage. This bill will also require increased staff time for reporting to the CEC on these issues, without providing funding for this increased regulation.
AB 915 (Mayes) California Renewable Portfolio Standard (Oppose) This bill requires publicly owned utilities to meet a 68% Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) by 2033, 76% by 2036, and 80% by 2038. This bill redefines what an eligible resource is to include large hydro beginning in 2030 and attempts to define a “zero carbon” resource. Roseville is opposed to this bill because it adds additional RPS targets from 2030 through 2045 and in doing so may reduce some of the current flexibility that exists in that timeframe. However, the City does appreciate large hydro being included as an eligible renewable energy resource under the RPS program.
AB 1347 (Boerner Horvath) Renewable and zero-carbon resources for state and local government buildings (Oppose) Requires all retail sales of electricity to state and local government buildings to be from renewable and zero-carbon energy resources by December 31, 2030. The City is opposed to this bill because it decreases the amount of time to transition state and local government buildings to 100% clean energy and will create significant cost increases.
Climate Change:
AB 1445 (Gloria) Phase out of Fossil Fuels (Watch) Intends to convert the state economy to zero greenhouse gas emissions no later than 2030, which requires an immediate phase out of fossil fuels. This bill has ambitious targets without any parameters or recommendations on how the energy sector will reach these goals in a cost-effective manner. The City is watching this bill to see if it gains any momentum and to monitor potential impacts on the Roseville Energy Park.
Wildfire Related:
AB 1609 (Chen) Fireproofing Programs (Watch) Requires publicly owned utilities to provide financial assistance or rebates to residential property owners in fire-prone areas to reduce the impacts of wildfire or to purchase emergency equipment in case of deenergization. The program will be funded through voluntary customer contributions. The City is watching this bill to ensure that “fire prone” areas does not include any area in Roseville, as the term is currently undefined.
Federal Issues:
H.R. 530 (Eshoo) Accelerating Broadband Development by Empowering Local Communities Act of 2019 (Support) This bill makes a recent Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Order, which authorizes communications attachments on publicly-owned infrastructure, have no effect. Roseville supports this bill because the existing FCC Order sets a new precedent that diminishes local control and is in conflict with exemptions granted to public providers under the Communications Act. In addition, the Order may have negative impacts on revenue recovery, aesthetics and most importantly, safety. Roseville Electric has supported this effort through an American Public Power Association (APPA) coalition letter. In addition, the City of Roseville has supported this legislation through a letter from the mayor on behalf of the City.
Privatization of the Power Marketing Administration Assets (PMA). The President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 proposed budget seeks to privatize transmission assets of the Power Marketing Administration (PMA). The proposed PMA assets that would be affected include the Bonneville Power Administration, Southwestern Power Administration, and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA). Roseville accesses the electric grid through WAPA. PMAs, like WAPA, deliver services at cost and offer electric services at more competitive rates than privatized assets. In addition, PMAs serve an important role in delivering carbon free power, maintaining grid reliability, and supporting the nation’s federal multipurpose water projects. The City is concerned that privatizing these assets will increase costs to customers. The City plans to voice concerns regarding the President’s proposed FY 2020 budget to our delegation in congress.
Conclusion
Staff is aggressively advocating on key legislation with its coalition partners. Staff will continue to apprise the committee on these important legislative proposals and request any direction as needed.