RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Discuss and provide input on any state or federal legislation presented to the committee.
| BACKGROUND
Staff has been reviewing key energy-related legislation to determine potential impacts to the Electric Utility (REU) 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:
Self-Generation:
SB 288 (Wiener, Nielsen) Renewable Resource Self-Generation and Storage (Oppose) This bill requires, by January 1, 2021, the governing board of local publicly owned electric utilities with an annual electrical demand exceeding 700 gigawatthours to consider creating tariffs for customer-sited energy storage systems that export electricity to the grid; and to consider creating additional tariff(s) and potentially modifying existing tariffs for customer-sited renewable-energy and energy-storage systems that have certain characteristics. This bill will also create additional reporting requirements to the California Energy Commission (CEC) regarding the amount of time for processing interconnection requests. Roseville is opposed to this bill because we are concerned with any proposal to create tariffs that may result in a cost shift among our customers. REU recently established our Roseville Solar 2.0 program, which provides value to customers with onsite generation based on the costs of the services they receive, without significantly shifting costs to other customers. While SB 288 provides some language against cost shifts, the language is not consistent throughout the bill in its entirety. In addition, REU is opposed to SB 288 because the bill requires the California Energy Commission (CEC) to provide a report on the amount of time spent in each step of the utility interconnection process, along with other required information. REU supports a transparent interconnection process where customers know ahead of time what to expect; however, REU is concerned that this requirement will result in additional staff reporting to the CEC without commensurate funding.
Transportation Electrification:
SB 676 (Bradford) Transportation Electrification: Electric Vehicles: Grid Integration (Oppose Unless Amended) Requires the California Energy Commission (CEC), with the assistance of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), to establish electric-vehicle grid-integration strategies for publicly owned utilities. Roseville is concerned that the strategies may be similar to those required in this bill by the CPUC, which would shift, by 2030, at least 25% of the estimated electrical demand by customers for electric-vehicle charging from peak-demand periods to other periods. Roseville currently has an oppose-unless-amended position on this bill. Roseville is seeking amendments that will allow publicly owned utilities (POUs) the ability to consider electric-vehicle grid-integration more broadly, as part of the transportation-electrification portion of our Integrated Resource Plans. This will give Roseville the flexibility to consider electric-vehicle grid-integration in a way that makes the most sense for our utility without imposing exclusive strategies or targets for charging electric vehicles during off-peak hours.
Provider of Last Resort:
SB 520 (Hertzberg) Electrical Service: Provider of Last Resort (Watch) Provides that an incumbent electrical corporation is the provider of last resort, unless provided otherwise in a service-territory boundary agreement approved by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) pursuant to existing law or as designated by the PUC pursuant to the bill. The provider of last resort is a load-serving entity that will provide electrical service without disruption if another load-serving entity fails, or denies, to provide service to any retail end-use customer in California. The PUC could designate a provider of last resort other than the incumbent for all or a portion of the service territory by approving an application jointly filed by the incumbent electrical corporation and the load-serving entity that proposes to become the provider of last resort. The provider of last resort provides certainty that all retail end-use customers will be provided electricity service regardless of the growing number of electricity providers in state. The City is watching this bill to better understand the overall impacts to reliability, affordability and market certainty in the electric sector.
Wildfire Related:
AB 740 (Burke) Climate Change Catastrophe Compensation Fund (Watch) Establishes the Climate Change Catastrophe Compensation Commission and Fund to ensure that victims of wildfires caused by climate change are compensated in a timely manner, to provide reimbursements to insurers for a portion of wildfire losses, and to avoid lengthy legal proceedings. Funding will come from the State of California, electrical corporation shareholders, insurance company shareholders and ratepayers. An electrical corporation and its shareholders will be required to annually set aside funding that would be used to reimburse the fund if the electrical corporation is determined to be responsible for a wildfire by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and that determination is sustained by a final judgment. Roseville is monitoring this bill for any financial implications on publicly owned utilities, which are currently not contemplated in this bill. There are various models being considered regarding the state’s wildfire/climate change issues, but it is not clear that a state agency fund, as provided in AB 740 is the final solution. Staff will continue to monitor this bill in addition to the wildfire/utility infrastructure discussion in general.
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.
| FISCAL IMPACT
The costs of these activities are contained within the City’s current budget.
|
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT / JOBS CREATED
The activities detailed in this report will not result in job development or creation.
|
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonable foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment (CEQA) Guidelines Section 1506(b)(3). The action of reviewing proposed CEQA legislation does not include the potential for a significant environmental effect, therefore is not subject to CEQA.
| Respectfully Submitted,
Amber Blixt, Government Relations Supervisor
Michelle Bertolino, Electric Utility Director | | | 
_____________________________
Dominick Casey, City Manager
|
|